"Nude" Skater Hits Rockefeller Ice
Straphanger Who Pulled Emergency Brake Comes Forward
Should MTV's Jersey Shore Be Cancelled?
Would You Be Comfortable Locked On A Train With A Murderer?
Adam Lambert Says He's A Performer, Not A Babysitter
Oh, yes, it's on. After 3AM this morning, the Transport Workers Union announced they would strike a couple hours after rejecting the MTA's latest offer. Thousands of subway and bus workers walked off the job, leaving millions of New Yorkers to find new ways to go to work (sneakers, meet 60 blocks of walking). Now, New York City is in a state of emergency, in its special "contingency plan," with restrictions on vehicles (only cars with at least four people inside) for most of the morning, people trying to hail cabs, and Fifth and Madison Avenues closed to traffic. Transit workers, though, did finish their routes and close up stations carefully, at the union instructed; one station's sign read, "Strike in Effect. Station Closed. Happy Holidays!!!!" The city is trying to convene an emergency court session to stop the strike, but who know, this could go on for days.
The TWU rejected the MTA's last offer, which was 1.5% better than its earlier one - plus kept the retirement age at 55, but asked for employee pension contributions and less sick days - at around 11PM last night, and the MTA was quick to point out that a strike is illegal. The union's website is totally bogged down, as they are now redirecting people to visit their blog, twulocal100.blogspot.com.
The NYPD will be clocking in about $10 million of overtime, as they redirect traffic and watch subway stations. The Daily News has an editorial demanding Governor Pataki and Mayor Bloomberg to asked a judge for "severe" actions against TWU President Roger Toussaint and the union members. We're listening to WNYC, which says that there is such a strong electrical current in the subway system that trains need to keep running, or else it will "arch" (we don't know what that means, but it doesn't sound good), so you may hear trains rumbling. And we're hearing that the LIRR station in Jamaica, Queens, where many city residents are headed to in order to get an LIRR ride into Penn Station, is a complete ZOO.
This is certainly a crazy day. We're going to gear up to walk to work. Take pictures and send them to photos@gothamist.com on your mobile phone, or tag them with "gothamist" on Flickr. And of course, give us your thoughts about your commute to work (or days at home). We're about to gear up to head to work, snapping pictures along the way.
Also, here's the city's contigency website. Read the city's injunction on the transit workers.
UPDATE: Just walked down to Gothamist HQ on Chambers from Spring Street. Avenue of the Americas and Church Street both eerily empty-- seems like not too many cars are moving uptown because of the restrictions. Switched to Broadway, which seemed more crowded-- but most taxis just had one person going downtown-- a few had two or three. Chambers was pretty quiet-- people may just be coming in slightly late. We're going to check out the scene at the Brooklyn and Manhattan bridges in a few minutes. If you happen to be walking across the 59th Street Bridge, the GW, or one of the others, please grab some pictures or a few seconds of cameraphone video and send it to us! If you're already at work, what did you see on the way in?
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
and the snappy graphic was ready! how convenient. i kidd...but this kind of thing is a great showcase for people who may not know much of gothamist.
NYU has finals this week, right?
I guess this beats "a dog ate it".
Thanks, Moe - I was waiting for SOMETHING to happen last night, so I was inspired.
Can I say WTF. This is over a freaking pension plan for new MTA workers. Well I went out to my train station. And it's not locked. I saw a train run past the station. The toll booth people are still at their station. I don't get the cool strikers. This strike is so lame. I was at least expecting one of those inflated rats.
I really hope this ends with the MTA opening up their books and the TWU going into bankruptcy. Neither side is good, but if the MTA only takes the "public" out of "public service" while the TWU takes out the "service", I'll side with the party that still recognizes that organization's mission is to serve the people of New York.
Has Roger gone Rogue?
I've been pro-union my whole life, from a union household (albeit a wacky right-wing one), was a shop steward in the teacher's union, paid dues to the Newspaper Guild and still pay them to the Dramatists Guild, even supported the baseball players.
But something's not right here.
When that last offer hit the table last night, Local 100 should have looked at it and looked at each other and said, "We won." I'm not a labor lawyer, but there certainly seemed to be to this layman's eyes enough of a cave from the MTA in the last offer to keep talking.
Michael O'Brien, the head of the parent union, thought so too, and told Roger that he couldn't support the stirke. They went out anyway.
And the weird thing is, from a unionist standpoint, is now they are destined to lose because they're going to be smacked down in the courts and in the pocketbook and they won't have the parent union to fall back on. They'll probably never see a deal as good as the one Kalikow put on the table last night and with Bloomberg's fines the stirke fund will be empty by New Years.
And many of these jobs will still be replaced by machines and the workers will have less recourse, not more.
Bottom line, they stopped talking, now we're walking. I'll be on the Brooklyn Bridge, the one trying to shield the nine-year-old from the nine-degree windchill.
Good luck, everyone...
King Hippo, At what point Does the Union say "Enough"?
Municipal Unions have been getting screwed by the City and state for years. How long did it take the City to get a contract eith the Police? People say that this is "Extrortion" by the Union, but what about the Extortion with the Taylor law?
Are the TWU Indentured servants required to work without a contract indefinately?
I think not.
ummm, yeah.
NEW YORK CITY TRANSIT BUSES Southbound
Expect delays: +NY TRANSIT STRIKE+, EXPECT EXTRA HEAVY
TRAFFIC AND VEHICLE RESTRICTIONS INTO MANHATTAN..USE
MASS TRANSIT IF POSSIBLE...
"Are the TWU Indentured servants required to work without a contract indefinately?"
I work without a contract every day. Guess that makes me an indentured servant!
Frankly, it is hard to feel bad for a union that walks away from a contract offer that has terms better than what 75% of Americans have. Especially when that union has no hesitation in hurting other people for their own personal gain.
This is gonna go down in NY history as the Christmas Slaughter. The union's last stand. The end of the line for the U.S. worker. Bloomberg is gonna break this union as the final example of Who's Really In Charge in 21st century America.
It's gonna make Christmas dinner taste a little weird, seeing all those poor working shlubs put in their place. Cold, cold, cold.
I wonder how many "Stuck In the City" Parties start up tonite?
I agree with everything you said Tim N., except for backing the MLB PLayers' Association.
"I work without a contract every day. Guess that makes me an indentured servant!"?
Really? What do you for a Living? Do you work with a Verbal Agreement?
I've had a written contract my entire career else I don't work. IMO, Verbal agreements are not worth spit.
Riddle me this:
As for the "better than what 75% of Americans have", So what? Maybe 75% of America should get better terms.
Personally, I work under an "at will" employment contract. Or at least I did while I was saving up to go back to school and improve my employment prospects.
I don't consider at-will employment to be indentured servitude, but if the MTA feels that their employees' services have a specific value, and that the MTA as an organization can adequately provide service to the public while paying out that appropriate compensation, then I think the MTA should be able to try it.
It doesn't seem logical to me that there should only be one source of labor for the MTA. I could see unions being more helpful if the MTA could hire from more than one union, and the unions weren't allowed to collude anymore than corporations are allowed to price fix. This way just seems like extortion.
IMO, At Will Employment isn't the same. You won't pay a fine if you walk off.
Off Topic a little: Does your contract say You have to give 2 weeks, but they can fire you at any time? Companies seem to like that joke nowadays. (Mine says both of us can walk away at a moments notice)
Me, I don't trust companies Or Municipal Authorities any more than Unions, but I don't like the MTA and the Mayor Extorting the Union.
It certainly can be considered Extortion but Work or Pay Fines/Got to Jail is Extortion too.
At my previous job, there was no 2-week rule. Although the practice was 2-weeks severance when someone was fired or laid off.
I'm a little ignorant of the specific terms of the union contract (although I do have to pay union dues on the college assistantship that was part of my financial aid package, though I get no union benefits since I don't work enough hours.)
Do municipal workers have to pay a fine if they quit? At-will employment means "if you don't like it, then leave" which seemed fair to me.
1. "maybe 75% of America should be getting better terms" You're absolutely right. Please propose a way of paying for those better terms.
2. Unions are a scant few significant industrial bankruptcies away from complete irrelevancy. What's the use of endless collective bargaining when it can all be overturned -- in the employer's favor -- by a bankruptcy judge?
3. The reason public employees are prohibited from striking has nothing to do with indentured servitude -- it has to do with the fact that they are considered essential to a functional municipality. It's for the same reason railway workers were not allowed to leave their jobs for the armed forces during world war II. They provide a necessary and much appreciated function and are WELL COMPENSATED for it. $47-$55k a year to sit in one of those booths and issue metrocards? That's more than the average bank teller makes.
Food for thought.
"Do municipal workers have to pay a fine if they quit? At-will employment means "if you don't like it, then leave" which seemed fair to me."
Nope, only if they strike, They can quit at any time. I know several who had enough of the Crap people/MTA/TWU heap on them and just got other jobs. Me, I'd never work for the MTA no matter how good the money is.
"T. Nast", I'm hardly saying "Workers of the world Unite", but I am saying this: What other people get, IMO, has no relevance to what the TWU (or anyone else) can/should get. An average Bank Teller isn't in a Noisy, crowded subway dealing with safely moving millions of people every day and doesn't seem to be a fair comparison.
If these people are so essential, shouldn't the MTA/Gov't treat them that way? How long should they work without a Contract to "serve" the people?
Look how long the Police and Firefighters went without a contract. Right or Wrong, People are only angry at the TWU cause the Dispute finally lands in their lap. When the public is not affected directly, the public doesn't seem to give a flying Fig about people working without a contract or any raise for multiple years.
Someone's got to be the extremeist... thanks, Dude.
I just hope my "private" express bus that got me into the city this morning, doesn't walk out at some point during the day today in "solidarity" because then i really have no idea how i'd get back home. I don't appreciate that my company wants us to use 2006 vacation time if we stay out either. It isn't our fault! So, not only do i have to pay $8 round trip a day for the bus but lose out on vacation time because of this strike if i stay home. Talk about getting a double shaft. I also think the city should have commandeered charter bus companies to help commuters out at pick up spots. Telling us to bike or walk over the bridge is narrow minded. Not everyone lives right across the water to have that as an option Mr. Mayor (sigh).
"Me, I don't trust companies Or Municipal Authorities any more than Unions, but I don't like the MTA and the Mayor Extorting the Union.
...
Nope, only if they strike, They can quit at any time. I know several who had enough of the Crap people/MTA/TWU heap on them and just got other jobs."
This is where we don't see eye-to-eye. I would not consider the MTA or the Mayor to be extorting the Union because if a Union member is not happy with his compensation, he/she has other avenues of recourse that have nothing to do with the MTA.
If an MTA driver does not feel that he is being adequately compensated for his effort, doesn't he have the right to quit the MTA/Union and try to earn what he thinks he should earn by driving School buses, long-haul trucks, tour buses, etc.?
Yet if the MTA feels that it should try to get more return from their payroll, in the current situation they have no choice but to deal with Toussaint and pay what he says they should pay.
And additionally, if some non-Union New Yorker feels that the MTA's offer is fair and would like to work in those conditions for that money, shouldn't that person have the opportunity to accept the MTA's terms without having Toussaint tell him whether or not he can take it?
Well, King Hippo, We disagree, but we're being civil about it. The TWU, MTA and he Mayor doesn't seem to be. (Love the Fox "News" headlines!)
Speaking for myself, I'm in a job that I provide specific skills that put me in an advantage when I need to negotiate a Salary or what not. In MY case, being in a Union would be a Big mistake. For the MTA employee's Being in a Union under Collective bargaining makes more sense than going it alone. The MTA have positions that they can fill with Various individuals to fill (for serious want of a better word) Generic slots.
If one Conductor wants a raise, he's denied out of hand, but if all demand a raise, they have strength in numbers. I don't really know the history of the Taylor Law, but I bet it was intended to blunt Union collective bargaining more than anything else.
The MTA is in interesting spot: On one hand they want to break the Union, but on the other hand they need the Union to exist to apply the Taylor Law. Seems the MTA wants it both ways.
As for market forces that normally apply (i.e. MY job slot), the public seems to want it both ways. Many don't want a TWU and want Job Market economics to apply, But they don't want Market economics to apply to the cost of the Fare.
IMO, if the fare were based on what the "cost" or demand pushed it to be, it would be at least twice what it is today.
In any Case, I wish this would go to Binding Arbitration and be done with it.
Is it interesting that none of the news coverage include Toussaint beyond press conferences while even Ed Koch is being called up for his two cents?
There is no reason why the striking workers be held to blame for this strike. If there wasn't civil disobedience (that will cause momentary inconveniences) during the '60s I truly doubt desegregation and the Civil Rights movement would've happen. Protesting is what allows us to be a democratic society.
And what's with all of this talk about the toll booth clerks? What about those transit employees who work on those dangerous track lines, put their lives on the line daily risking electrocution, hypothermia, or being a victim to terrorism?
The MTA isn't even willing to practice 'good faith' and open its books--its authentic records--and be held accountable not to the TWU but ITS employer: the taxpayers.
Accepting a plan that would erode the few rights that remain is absurb. Retiring to a pension after decades of service is about of dignity and respect not greed and it shouldn't be priviledge reserved for law enforcement or the military either.
"The MTA is in interesting spot: On one hand they want to break the Union, but on the other hand they need the Union to exist to apply the Taylor Law. Seems the MTA wants it both ways."
No they don't. Without the union around, the MTA wouldn't need the Taylor Law. No union, no contract necessary. No contract covering every employee and ending on the same date, no strike threat. There'd be good, old-fashioned turnover throughout the year of employees who can't get the raises they want.