Gothamist: Transit Strike Editorial Round-Up

simon lee

Thu, 22 Dec 2005 10:43:59 -0500

"Whether you like it or not, a lot of people, who were sympathetic but never mobilized around labor stuff before, are doing so now." what the hell are you talking about... Everyone of the dozens of people I've talked to have been surprisingly anti-TWU with the exception of 2. I didn't think this would be the case, but it most definitely is. The TWU definitely should have thought out their tactics far better then they did.

anon

Thu, 22 Dec 2005 10:11:48 -0500

This may be the single dumbest statement I have heard here in a long while - Toussaint doing a thing to help "the people" except his workers and if he tried he would (and should) be immediatly removed from heading the Union - and one of the main reasons for the high cost of living in NYC is to pay for a bloated and overpayed bureaucracy which Toussaint is part of. Where do you think they are going to get the $ to pay for higher wages for TWU workers- either higher fares or higher taxes - both of which contribute to making NYC unaffordable to all but the very rich and very poor (who are subsidised) Thanks for the compliment. I think it should be paid for through some kind of progressive taxation through a subsidy from the state of New York or the city of New York or the federal government, levied by cuts in programs to, say, give Goldman Sachs billions of dollars to rebuild the area around the WTC, idiotic pet programs like Healthy NY, or any number of other options in which these allegedly public workers who are being villified by not being conscious enough of the public are actually paid by the public, rather than just the customers (i.e. the market). Whether you like it or not, a lot of people, who were sympathetic but never mobilized around labor stuff before, are doing so now. This is an event around which people are getting together, and will continue to get together. It is a spectace, and it is bringing out of the woodwork all those people who have been f@#ked by Bloomberg and/or Pataki and/or the MTA in some way or another--like me. The cost of living in New York City is not high because middle-class and working-class people have too many rights--it's because wealthy people have too many privileges. For someone who seems to support the market, you're pretty quick to blame beauracracy rather than market forces (which are always controlled by those who control the market, imo) for high rents, high food costs, etc. There's a reason there's not enough low-income housing stock in the city, and it's not "bloated bureaucracy"--it's that real estate interests and business interests are more interested in making a buck on luxury housing. I would be interested to know what the MTA and Pataki's and the MTA board's pension plans are.

Mo

Wed, 21 Dec 2005 19:34:52 -0500

The rich so have to gain from this where do you think all of this pension contribution etc comes from? The AFL-CIO? It's this trend to try to mangage everything from the White House to City Hall to the MTA like corporations. Legal/Illegal is all relative, IMO. I mean slavery, segregation, prohibition, and women & minorities' prohibited to vote were all laws at one time. Just because it's a law doesn't mean it's just.

Anon

Wed, 21 Dec 2005 19:10:01 -0500

"striking was (and still is) a method towards achieving reform and progress." So is armed revolution but when your gripe is that future workers will have to contribute more to their pension at a time when people are living longer than ever before and when virtually every worker (and manager for that matter) must do the same - then you have no moral justification to take such illegal actions to extract change. This argument that this is some kind of class struggle between rich and poor is such nonsense - if there is any class struggle at all it is between the poor and middle class - the middle class TWU (50-70K a yr) using the poor people's suffering to extract concessions from the powerful (MTA) which will ultimatley be paid for by the poor (and middle class) in terms of higher fares and higher taxes- the rich have nothing to do with this fight at all. Me and most people I know who are in higher income brackets (75-300K) get paid no matter what - we can show up late, take a vacation day, use "remote computing" etc..Strike is a huge inconvenience YES - but a life or death economic situation No - but for the (working) poor delivery guy, the cook, the security guard etc.... every hour they miss is actual dollars lost -dollars they cant afford to lose. And for the really rich - well subway fares, taxes and commuting are sort of academic anyway.

Mo

Wed, 21 Dec 2005 18:27:50 -0500

"If the City and MTA cave like bitches, Toussaint and his civic terrorists win." This cat must've learned history from cable television because if it weren't from unions, strikes, and collective bargaining we'd all be be slaves to our employers. For all of you griping and sending your nasty curse-word laden POSTINGS, this too is activism and social justice. Our commercial-length memories don't allow us to remember that long before there was the mega-WTO-globo-protests, striking was (and still is) a method towards achieving reform and progress. Today we think by signing e-petitions and campaign contributing we'll get our way. No. The reason seven million people are suffering is because WE are the true owners of the MTA, and WE are the bosses of Bloomberg and Pataki and the longer this lasts the hotter the fire under us will make us clean some government house. This strike is so that we average citizens who rely on the subway (AND I'M including the Transit Workers as well because none of them have the wealth those in government do) don't have to tolerate the scraps bloated corrupt orgs like the MTA feel like offering us. And one question: Where all the politicos (including Campaign-Bloomberg) that just weeks earlier were scurrying about to get union endorsements? Hello, Senators? Congressmen? Democrats? Not a peep, not even a rat! BTW thanks Gothamist for such awesome strike coverage!

David

Wed, 21 Dec 2005 17:50:44 -0500

"There are, I think, 3 million New Yorkers without health care, the cost of living here is already high, people are constantly getting pushed further and further out of the city center by developments for the wealthy (and whimsical expenditures of money like Healthy NY or the JFK Railway Link), and I trust Roger Toussaint and people like him to solve those problems more than Mayor Bloomberg or Governor Pataki." This may be the single dumbest statement I have heard here in a long while - Toussaint doing a thing to help "the people" except his workers and if he tried he would (and should) be immediatly removed from heading the Union - and one of the main reasons for the high cost of living in NYC is to pay for a bloated and overpayed bureaucracy which Toussaint is part of. Where do you think they are going to get the $ to pay for higher wages for TWU workers- either higher fares or higher taxes - both of which contribute to making NYC unaffordable to all but the very rich and very poor (who are subsidised)

Abysmal Chump

Wed, 21 Dec 2005 17:25:27 -0500

To all those who keep harping on how well paid MTA workers are for their unskilled labor... I've had jobs cooking french fries, stocking shelves overnight at WalMart, crawling around floors with a edge sander, and enduring obscenities and threats from customers with a smile. I'd go back to any of them before taking a job in the subways, no matter how much they were paying. That's got to be the least pleasant job in the city, and if this is what those guys/girls feel they need to do to deal with it, then God bless 'em. And, all this 'shocked! shocked!' commentary about MTA salaries notwithstanding, you know it's true, otherwise you'd have applied to work there as well. Cause if it's such easy work and such wonderful pay, you'd have to be crazy -not- to, right?

Jayson

Wed, 21 Dec 2005 17:24:33 -0500

This is about money. The TWU lost the respect of the city when they extorted us. We don't care how legitimate the complaints are or who is negotiating in good faith. We'd rather not be involved at all. This is not a grocer's union striking and driving up their salaries. That's free market capitalism where we can choose to go pay lower prices at the non-union grocer next door. In this situation, we cannot go to the competitor. We commuters have no choice, this is a monopoly raising rates and we must foot the bill. Our commute price went from $4 a day to ten times that amount, that's extortion. And I hope the union leaders do go to jail for their "right" to take money from us. We all support workers fighting for their rights, higher salaries and safer working conditions. Hell, I'm for more polite customers, too....I wish I had some. We are not for stealing undeserved money by leveraging a government institution. It's theft in union clothing.

anon

Wed, 21 Dec 2005 17:22:02 -0500

symbolic warfare is important in tool-using chimp bands like ourselves. It's not just symbolic--it's an effort to build repricocity. Anytime you're in a situation where you're getting f@#ked in some way, you have two choices: 1) ask the people f@#king you over (either directly or indirectly) to help you or 2) find other people who are getting f@#ked over to even out the balance of power a little so you end up with a better solution. I support the TWU in the hopes that they'll support other workers, immigrants, lgbt people, and other disempowered people generally, etc., and that this strike will be part of a process of building a larger culture of respect.

CW

Wed, 21 Dec 2005 17:07:12 -0500

MT, Then you should get yourself a better union rep. Just because your union rep doesn't want to fight for you doesn't mean other unions shouldn't. As for what was read about some surplus going to their pensions, I don't know if it is true but... The MTA, mayor and governor haven't been telling whole truths either. Where I work people were complaining that they don't pay any medical but that's not true. I know for a fact that just like every other New York based Company, the crappy HMO is the "FREE" insurance they can take. However, to get real insurance, the kind that pays for their chemotherapy and other treatments nedded, they need to pay for it like every other New Yorker. Also, the other half of the pension problem, what noone is talking about, is that the MTA, wants to make them standard. It doesn't matter whether you work 25 years or 50 years, you get the same pension. There is no benefit to staying on the job longer. With the rise in elderly prescription plans, along with all the cuts in Social Security---Are You Kidding Me? Definitely a "No Brainer' GO TWU- we need more unions to take a stand- it's where the non-union companies look to set the standards for their workers. If you take less, other underpaid New Yorkers will also suffer- ya may not want to believe it but it's true.

dhex

Wed, 21 Dec 2005 17:06:18 -0500

"This isn't just about transit workers for me, and I don't think it is for most people who support them." probably not. symbolic warfare is important in tool-using chimp bands like ourselves. as little as i like all the parties involved, the use of the word "terrorist" to describe striking union workers is completely retarded.

anon

Wed, 21 Dec 2005 17:00:07 -0500

Civic terrorists? Nice. Anyway, has anyone noticed how cosy the allegedly Republican politicians and the allegedly pro-worker unions have gotten in the city and state? That's why we haven't had elections for governor or mayor each time around the last time (I mean real elections that are competetive, not the bs we were given with unions either non-endorsing or actively siding with the elite in order to get some narrow gains for their workers). Given the number of issues that affect working people in the city today, I don't think the solution is to sell out the TWU, whatever you think of their reasoning (it's really about whether they'll sell out their future workers and workers in general by backing down in the face of bull$hit withouth questioning it). There are, I think, 3 million New Yorkers without health care, the cost of living here is already high, people are constantly getting pushed further and further out of the city center by developments for the wealthy (and whimsical expenditures of money like Healthy NY or the JFK Railway Link), and I trust Roger Toussaint and people like him to solve those problems more than Mayor Bloomberg or Governor Pataki. This isn't just about transit workers for me, and I don't think it is for most people who support them.

Mike

Wed, 21 Dec 2005 16:59:15 -0500

The MTA should just announce that 33,700 jobs have just become available. Correct me if I'm wrong, but if the contracts have expired then the MTA should have no obligations to the TWU.

Anti

Wed, 21 Dec 2005 16:47:08 -0500

Who gives a shit about the surplus? It's not the fucking transit workers, they're already extremely well-compensated above market. Newsflash: The surplus, to the extent that any of it isn't actually reasonably earmarked for future liabilities (like unfunded pension obligations for these same selfish, striking ingrates), belongs to the New Yorkers who paid for it at the turnstiles. These stupid fuckers think we sympathize with them? I'm willing to outlast them, I'll walk everyday. If the City and MTA cave like bitches, Toussaint and his civic terrorists win. They should fire all of these selfish pricks, and let them re-apply for their jobs, sans pension, sans free fucking medical, sans 25%-above-market pay, Horation sans for chrissakes. Fire them all, just like PATCO, we shouldn't ever let a single point of failure strangle the city like this.

K

Wed, 21 Dec 2005 16:46:54 -0500

winodj, the nytimes article specifically states that these pension savings grow in the long run...so its $20 million in the first three years, but after 10 years its like 180 million.

AT

Wed, 21 Dec 2005 16:22:35 -0500

A lot has been said of this "billion dollar surplus", but from what I understand, this is a 1-time thing. Going forward, there are deficits projected. Add that to the unfunded pension liability and the case for raising wages is poor. besides, even if there is a surplus, why should it go to the workers, rather than improved service/lower fares? With regards to the MTA keeping two sets of books, if that's the case, then prosecute. It is a completely separate issue. Just because you have the devil on one side doesn't make the other side an angel.

winodj

Wed, 21 Dec 2005 16:20:24 -0500

This is about respect. Not saying the TWU is negotiating in good faith, but the difference between the MTA and TWU is 20 million dollars in pension contributions. Over three years. So the difference is less than 2% of the actual surplus. Toussaint and the TWU is absolutely right. They are standing up for their rights as workers. How are they suppose to believe that the MTA is negotiating in good faith, when they agreed to not take a pay hike three years ago when they thought the MTA was broke? How are they supposed to believe that the MTA is negotiating in good faith when they get caught with two sets of books and misplacing a billion dollars? Working in the subway and MTA has its definite risks. NYC has one of the best and safest mass transit systems in the country because they have a union willing to stand up for their rights in the workplace. They have union leaders ready to go to jail for their rights in the workplace. You bitch about your position relative to a train conductor and the rights they have? Who do you have backing you up? And why aren't you fighting for your rights?

David

Wed, 21 Dec 2005 16:14:22 -0500

Dhex - yeah the MTA is living large on the public tit, and so is just about every other Govt worker - the issue isnt that our public officials (or Public Agencies) arent inefficient and or corrupt - the question is do we allow municipal workers to negotiate collectively - I say NO. The above WSJ article says it well, Muni workers have a power that no other worker has - the power to vote their bossess in, that plus general free market principals, and the never ending trough of public $ puts municipal workers FAR ahead of the average worker and therefore eliminates the necessity of collective action; not to mention that putting muni services in the hands of Unions results in exactly the nightmare we are now living. What people have to understand is that the MTA's surplus is OUR surplus - MTA is not a private buisness, if the MTA has a surplus it simply means that the public payed too much (in either subsidies or fares) and assuming the workers are being payed a fair wage (seems like more than fair) - then the $ should come back to the public. The Union has no more right to the MTA surplus then some Dept of Agriculture worker did to the 'Clintonian' surplus circa 1999.

Vince

Wed, 21 Dec 2005 16:03:42 -0500

Let's not forget what the TWU is asking for: --Raises of 6% per year over three years. Are you kidding me? The average annual train operator's salary is $63K (in some cases, some workers receive $70K per year), which seems like a lot for a job that requires little skill, little education and about a week's worth of training. That is, on average, a higher salary then in a lot of professions that DO require specialized training and education(i.e., nursing, social work, teaching, etc.). In fact, when I get to the Grand Central subway in the morning, there's an MTA worker whose sole job is apparently shout, "Good morning, have a nice day!" to train riders as they get off the train. THAT'S ALL HE DOES. I don't know his salary, but I would venture to guess that it exceeds $50K per year. --The retirement age to be lowered to 50. Huh? MTA workers already get very sweet retirement packages. But to be able to retire with full pension benefits at 50 years old? Life expectancies have steadily climbed this century (one of the reasons that many corporations are facing a crisis with their pension plans) so I think 50 years old is a little early. Don't get me wrong, I think the MTA and it's satan-like leader, Peter Kalikow, are among the most abominable entities in the entire universe, but the TWU really has to be more reasonable in what it's demanding.

sam

Wed, 21 Dec 2005 15:58:05 -0500

Privatization would just make the system beholden to shareholders rather than politicians. At least we can (theoretically) replace politicians. If Bloomy can get control of the schools back, he should get control of the MTA back. One of the big problems (aside from shady internal accounting) the MTA faces is servicing its debt, which it had to take out to bring the system back from the near-collapse of the 80s. Anybody remember graffiti-covered cars and scary stations? The state legislature never stepped up to properly fund any improvements, and it won't because Long Island and upstate don't want their tax money going to NYC. *See commuter tax. Also, how did the contract expiration date move from warm weather to December?

Wed, 21 Dec 2005 15:56:06 -0500

my theory is that toussaint played right into spitzer and bloomberg's power play to bust the union. sweet mother of god, it's about freakin time. BTW, the reason the MTA took over the private busses is that they were MOBBED UP. methinks bloomberg is doing us a solid. look behind the curtain and read between the lines.

Jen

Wed, 21 Dec 2005 15:43:27 -0500

Ian, true re: my limited knowledge of accounting, but the MTA has admitted it kept two sets of books.

dhex

Wed, 21 Dec 2005 15:36:40 -0500

"You SHOULD pay for things with taxes. If you don't want to pay NYC taxes, move back to the suburbs." clearly. now, do you have any actual rebuttal for what i've said or are you just another idiot who thinks anyone who doesn't believe george bush is taking orders directly from satan's cock is a republocrat and that's that? "Your right dhex - and it is also the reason that Municipal Unions should be illegal" that's not the solution. it's not like the mta isn't made up of kommisars and suck-ups who wouldn't hesistate to face-fuck everyone they could for miles just to squeeze out a few more minutes of easy living on the public dole. as little sympathy as i may have for most of the union's demands, the solution isn't to completely defang the workers. however, with a subway...well, how does one privatize that? you don't, outside of splitting it back into the original lines, which would no doubt be continuously fucked up. busses are another story, but still fraught with issues and interference from the state. a better question would be "how do we make the mta accountable for fucking us over?" i don't know whether making the board an electable position would be wise or not, but it would most certainly put the fear of god into those would-be transit controllers.

m.d

Wed, 21 Dec 2005 15:34:45 -0500

MTA should clean up their service - new trains are a start. How about stations that don't smell like pee, announcement boards for when the next train will arrive, non-sleeping employees, and better overall communication about service advisories? Then the public will not take out [as much of] their anger on the employees, who are in the unfortunate position of being the public face of the MTA, and they won't feel so under-appreciated.

escap

Wed, 21 Dec 2005 15:29:39 -0500

Hey! It looks like "Dick" stole my thunder...

ACE

Wed, 21 Dec 2005 15:28:37 -0500

Cabby Socks Woman: Cops New York Post ^ | December 21, 2005 | DOUGLAS MONTERO, ALEX GINSBERG and C.J. SULLIVAN Posted on 12/21/2005 12:07:25 PM PST by Dichroic December 21, 2005 -- A cabby belted an Upper East Side woman in the face last night after she argued that she was overcharged on an eight-block ride, police said ......... Lillian Gauna, 34, said she hailed the cab at 88th Street and Third Avenue at around 8:30 p.m. and asked the driver to take her to 81st Street and Second Avenue. The driver, Muhammed Lone, 29, insisted she pay an extra $5 on top of the $10 "single zone" flat fare that the new strike rules call for, she said. When she refused, Lone allegedly leaped out of his yellow cab and punched her in the face. Cops arrested him for assault. She declined medical treatment. (Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...

escap

Wed, 21 Dec 2005 15:27:54 -0500

The WSJ Editorial is called "A Taste of Paris". That way they get digs in at organized labor and the French at the same time. Quotes include, "This strike is a carefully timed union strategy to inflict maximum economic damage in exchange for maximum extortion at the bargaining table" and "since public-employee unions are among the largest donors to the coffers of the very politicians with whom they are negotiating, it's not surprising that the union bosses have full confidence that the state will eventually pay their ransom." The Journal also criticized Bloomberg for setting a bad precedent in his previous generosity towards other unions thus far.

Dick

Wed, 21 Dec 2005 15:27:00 -0500

Wall Street Journal A Taste of Paris December 21, 2005; Page A18 Yesterday the 33,000 New York City transit workers presented their Christmas gift to their seven million customers: an illegal strike that has paralyzed the city they "serve." One predictable result has been gridlock. During one of the most frigid mornings of the year, the Brooklyn Bridge was clogged, not just with cars, but with hordes of New Yorkers on foot, in many cases walking miles to work. The strike is walloping the city's economy with an estimated $400 million of lost commerce each day the strike persists. Retailers are missing out on the busiest shopping days of the year. Make no mistake: This strike is a carefully timed union strategy to inflict maximum economic damage in exchange for maximum extortion at the bargaining table. The Transport Workers Union is playing hardball, and we only wish New York Governor George Pataki and other officials representing the state's commuters and taxpayers would be as tough. But since public-employee unions are among the largest donors to the coffers of the very politicians with whom they are negotiating, it's not surprising that the union bosses have full confidence that the state will eventually pay their ransom. No doubt adding to union bravado is the knowledge that city and state officials have for decades caved to virtually every union demand. Mr. Pataki famously buckled to Dennis Rivera and the health-care workers union -- offering a $1.8 billion payoff before the 2002 election -- even as the state was awash in red ink. New York Mayor Mike Bloomberg failed to use the fiscal crisis after September 11 to drive any changes in public-sector work rules. This is how the unions are repaying them. The average salary for a New York bus driver is $63,000 a year -- about 25% more than for similar private-sector workers. Over the next three years the union wants a package that would raise salaries about three times the rate of inflation. The real union plum is a "25-55" rule that allows retirement at half salary at age 55 after just 25 years of service. The state wants to raise the retirement age to 62; the union said fuhgeddaboutit. There's also the gold-plated health-care retirement package, which will saddle the city and state with billions of dollars of future unfunded outlays. (No one knows for sure the real amount because there has never been an audit of the agency's health-care pensions finances.) Current employees and most retirees pay nothing for health-care benefits, and the state is merely asking all new workers to contribute 1% of salary to offset the costs. Again the union scoffed. On the opposite page, Steven Malanga argues for firing the workers and hiring replacements. That's fine by us. But if that's too much for Messrs. Pataki and Bloomberg, they should at least announce that any fines imposed on the unions by the courts (such as the $1 million assessed yesterday) will under no circumstances be negotiated away in any settlement. Better yet, they could use this strike as an opportunity to end the public transit monopoly by legalizing all forms of private competition -- including jitneys. Los Angeles, Denver and San Diego have all saved money by contracting out transit services to private bidders, and New York could do the same. Disabling strikes of this sort are what happens to cities that become dominated by public-employee unions. Political leaders operate as if employers (taxpayers) serve the employees (unions), not vice versa. Labor leaders begin to think they can get away with anything. Meanwhile, the tax burden rises (New York's is nearly twice the national average) while the tax base shrinks. Just as in France, the unions punish a city and pay no price for it. Will New York's political leaders let them get away with it again?

Jayson

Wed, 21 Dec 2005 15:23:32 -0500

The MTA has a monopoly that we've given them and are mismanaging with wild abandon. But just because they are a screwball organization doesn't mean that the union has the right to exploit the monopoly and force an undeserved raise on an unwilling city. Does their job suck? Yes, but so what. Who cares? The rest of us have to go to Google to see what the word "pension" means. They can go somewhere else, I'd rather have people who were paid less and happy in their job working there anyway. Want a quick raise? Stop paying your union fees! I don't even know why the union stops at 8% raises, they can demand 50% raises and we'd have to pay it! We have no choice...it's not like there are any other competing public transportation systems in New York City. No matter who "wins" the city will lose. If the MTA wins, we pay for this stupid strike and they keep their surplus, if the TWU wins, we pay higher fees to pay for the higher salaries and fines the city levied. The loss of work, the extra police and emergency vehicles are paid for by the city regardless of the resolution of this issue. And if that's not enough future fees they're are tallying up, we can all look forward to our $30 commute home from work today. Both "sides" suck.

Wed, 21 Dec 2005 15:22:00 -0500

You SHOULD pay for things with taxes. If you don't want to pay NYC taxes, move back to the suburbs.

Urbandog

Wed, 21 Dec 2005 15:19:39 -0500

Your right dhex - and it is also the reason that Municipal Unions should be illegal - B/c that same endless pot of tax dollars results in a bottomless pit into which Unions can demand to partake. In the corporate setting the Union is still checked by the limited revenue/profits of the buisness but with Municipal Unions there is nothing to hold demands in check (except the Taylor law in NY) and not only do Unions get to negotiate at the bargining table, they also get to VOTE in the bosses they would like.

dhex

Wed, 21 Dec 2005 15:13:49 -0500

"As for this surplus everyone keeps bringing up, the MTA did the right thing by reinvesting it and giving holiday discounts." the holiday discount is one of the stupidest fucking things ever undertaken by the MTA. they're fucking off with our money, as you pointed out; i would have preferred some debt reduction or planning for the future, but there's no need to plan for the future when you get tax money. that's what all y'all don't seem to get, with the exception of mr. twice - if you can always raise taxes - which are *never* unavailable (since taxation is backed by the full prisons and ammunition of the state of new york and the united states government) there's no reason for a group like the mta to do anything right. what are people going to do, not take mass transit? not pay their taxes?

David

Wed, 21 Dec 2005 15:10:07 -0500

Waah Waah, I want to be treated with dignity, I want to be treated with respect, Waah Waah. WTF are these idiots talking about - you make 60Gs to drive a mutha F'ing Bus (or train), you have FULL (as in NO employee contribution) and FULL pension at 55 - plus generous sick and vacation time...What other kinda respect do you want??? Most of the rest of us w/ jobs that require NO education, dont have health benefits, dont have pensions and dont make 60K a year and for sure sh*t sure dont have a union to complain too when our bossess treat us like crap - I saw 2 people on the news last night who were intereviewed walking to work say that their bosses would FIRE them if they were late or didnt show cause they couldnt get to work (through no fault of their own) And whats with this idiots who say give these workers more $ - Who the F do you think will pay for that???? ME either through my taxes or through higher fares - the MTA isnt a corporation with shareholders its a PUBLIC agency - so essentially it is take from worker A and give to worker B ( maybe you didnt notice but millionaire execs dont pay subway fare - they get driven to work)

Ian

Wed, 21 Dec 2005 15:06:43 -0500

To Anonymous at 2:33 - unfunded pension liabilities, far from "MTA lying" are the reality in most parts of coporate america today. Its difficult to pay someone's pension for almost as many years of retirement as they spent working. Hence the need to raise the retirement age to prevent all of these pension plans from going belly up. I wish everyone who questioned MTA accounting actually had a clue about accounting 101. Which is not to say that they are not blameless, just that no one accuses Delphi or GM of keeping "two sets of books" when they announce big losses. Of course unions cannot shakedown those companies without reprucussions, like customers defecting to other brands. Public sector unions, of course, think they are free to do this whenever they want.

K

Wed, 21 Dec 2005 15:06:09 -0500

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/15/nyregion/nyregionspecial3/15surplus.html heres an nytimes article about how they spent the surplus then. sheesh.

idiots

Wed, 21 Dec 2005 14:59:30 -0500

Who the hell trusts the Post for accuracy? Did you read the Post when they talked about Iraq and Katrina? Are you guys ignorant or just idiots?

Think twice

Wed, 21 Dec 2005 14:48:02 -0500

I posted it before and I'll post it again. The IRT was actively driven to insolvency, by a public sector that wanted control of it's lines. The BMT was profitable (in spite of the politically motivated IND, the artificial nickle fare, and every other trick up the government's sleeves) till it was forced out of existance with the Unification of 1940. The subways were never wholly private nor were they intended to be. Yes they were financed with government subsidies and debt (like the MTA) but also from equity (unlike the MTA). Who knows what the fare might be after re-privatization or what company would run the Subway. We could look at the HBLR in Jersey City as an example of how to do it right. At least the city should have direct ownership of the trains and buses, not the state and study the idea of privatization and weigh in it's feasability

jenny

Wed, 21 Dec 2005 14:38:01 -0500

Ian -- the Fire Dept. and Police Dept. have gone through stretches that lasted YEARS and never went on strike like this. The MTA contract expired and hey, let's not work! And don't compare a train conductor to a firefighter. Firefighters get paid less than conductors do if I'm not mistaken and yes, getting people to work is important but saving people's lives is vital. As for this surplus everyone keeps bringing up, the MTA did the right thing by reinvesting it and giving holiday discounts. I get so sick of hearing MTA employees saying they deserve to snatch the surplus out of the evil hands of the MTA. It isn't the employees' money -- it's the riders' money.

John

Wed, 21 Dec 2005 14:35:11 -0500

Jen, news from the Journal is limited to subscribers only, but editorials and commentary are free. You could have read that editorial. Of course, you're right: They think unions suck!

Wed, 21 Dec 2005 14:33:17 -0500

"unfunded pension liability" sounds like more shady MTA bookkeeping and lying.

Not A Friend Anymore

Wed, 21 Dec 2005 14:30:14 -0500

(Did I make this up or did anyone else read something in the Post this morning about a significant portion of the MTA's surplus already going to pay pension-related stuff?) $450 million of the $1 billion. The other half should have been lower debt rather than the stupid discount and the other stuff. (Um, how many of us can imagine being yelled at all day. If you are in any industry that deals in anyway with customers you face the same indignities (granted I've only ever been pissed on metaphorically, but still)) What share of the customers yell at the workers? Compare that to the share you've screwed. What share of the workers even have to deal with the customers? (- and none of us get to retire at 50 with full pension and benefits.) If you believe the rhetoric the strike won't be over until you can, like TWU members did after the 1966 strike, after which so much money had to be diverted to the pension that staff was cut and parts not ordered, and the system collapsed.

dude

Wed, 21 Dec 2005 14:29:27 -0500

Tim N. - I'm a cyclist who rides his bike over the Brooklyn Bridge alot, but I have to agree (and temporarily shun my fellow cyclists) that the Brooklyn Bridge pathway should convert to walking only, at least during rush hours (7-10 am and 4-7 pm maybe). It's become dangerous as a pedestrian and cyclist on the Brooklyn Bridge. I often have to get off of my bike and walk briefly due to congestion. Yes there are alot of clueless tourists and walkers on the bridge, but the walkways get too narrow in the middle and hence too dangerous. Plus, the Manhattan Bridge is a 60-second ride away in Brooklyn and a five-minute ride away in Manhattan. Maybe they could turn one of the reverse-commute driving lanes into a bike lane in the mornings/evenings. I know it'll never happen, but wouldn't it be great if the walkway on the bridge were reserved for peds and bikes had their own route?

K

Wed, 21 Dec 2005 14:13:01 -0500

according to NY1, 450million was used to pay down the pension debt. http://www.ny1.com/ny1/content/index.jsp?stid=5&aid=55595

Joe

Wed, 21 Dec 2005 14:08:11 -0500

The Wall Street Journal editorial is by Stephen Malanga, editor of the City Journal (you can read it here ). He basically says the MTA should pull a Reagan and fire all the striking workers as there are plenty of people who want to work for the MTA (30 applicants per job opening). The MTA could hire back experienced workers but only under new MTA terms. He also calls for privatization of "big chunks of the transit system". Re: MTA surplus. The MTA used $450 million of the surplus to fund the pension system. See http://www.wnbc.com/traffic/5533910/detail.html

MT

Wed, 21 Dec 2005 14:04:39 -0500

Um, how many of us can imagine being yelled at all day. If you are in any industry that deals in anyway with customers you face the same indignities (granted I've only ever been pissed on metaphorically, but still) - and none of us get to retire at 50 with full pension and benefits.

MORE BIKES

Wed, 21 Dec 2005 14:03:01 -0500

WHAT CLEAN AIR MY NOSE BREATHS TODAY..HMMMM. YES MORE BIKE LANES WILL BE AMAZING. IF THEY WANT TO MAKE A SMOKING FREE ENVIRONMENT, THEY SHOULD CONTINUE WITH CLEANING IT FURTHER, AND LIMIT CAR POLLUTION IN MANHATTAN. AS FOR THE MTA, IS PRECISELY THAT TYPE OF CORRUPTION WHICH MAKES NOT ONLY THE UNION HERE MAD, BUT AT A LARGER SCALE THAT MENTALITY IS NOT WELCOMED IN MANY COUNTRIES AROUND THE GLOBE. IT IS A MATTER OF PRINCIPLES.

Ian

Wed, 21 Dec 2005 14:00:56 -0500

I think when the head of the TWU says the strike isn't about money he's right. I think it's the culmination of a lot of little indignities that the union has had to deal with at the hands of the MTA. Everyone in this city knows that the MTA has been one of the most corrupt and mismanaged organizations in town. In addition whatever the union agrees to will be used as a standard for future negotiations with other unions, hence the support they're getting from cops, firemen, teachers et al. Unfortunately the TWU is having to set the bar. The union did fail to get public support beforehand though and it could cost them. When you hear all the loud voices screaming for the union's head just think about how many of them would be saying the same thing about the other unions. Could you imagine this kind of outrage if the police or firemen's union threatened a strike? And before you think that a transit worker has a cushy job, just imagine being yelled at all day, developing respratory problems from breathing in exhaust fumes and subway debris for years on end, and having people actually spit and piss on you. (a subway conductor was telling me some horror stories that came with the job after explaining that the union has been wanting to draw a line in the sand for some time now.)

pugsley

Wed, 21 Dec 2005 13:46:18 -0500

Pataki, Spitzer and Bloomberg are all asleep. They should have already forced the issue into arbitration, which can be done whether or not the TWU chooses to participate. They should have set a deadline for workers to return. Those not showing up should get fired.

Tim N.

Wed, 21 Dec 2005 13:45:35 -0500

I like the four to a car rule, though there was considerably more gridlock this morning than yesterday (where there was nearly none in the am that I saw... 6th Ave and Bway...). I also like coning off the bike lanes. Why not make the Brooklyn Bridge ped-only (walking bikes) and the Manhattan Bridge bike only during rush hours? Other thoughts: d- I will be Republican candidate for President and you will be my running mate before George Pataki is. MT- I would doubt that about the pensions and the surplus. Roger and the guys may have lost their leg to stand on when the TWU-I didn't back them up, but everything I've read said that the surplus went to holiday discounts, infrastructure upgrades, and projects like the Second Ave Subway, with a small percentage going to a pension contribution.

c

Wed, 21 Dec 2005 13:42:33 -0500

I'm curious as to how people would propose solutions to the problems of private subways that predate the MTA's existence. Specifically: a system about as disjoint as one can get, horrifically late trains, barebones service, etc. It's a vital public service: it's purpose, in some sense, is to run massive deficits into perpetuity in order to ensure a basic level of public transit service. It's corrupt and mismanaged, granted, and so maybe the structure of the management needs changed, but in the past few years, we have ample evidence that privatization is not a panacea--Edison schools, Enron, etc--and so I'm not sure why it's being touted as such, especially given the system's woeful history with private firms.

K

Wed, 21 Dec 2005 13:42:12 -0500

MT, you are correct, i read the same thing about how half the surplus is already going to the pension. and what is this BS about the discounts only benefitting tourists about? i'm not a tourist and i'm benefitting from the discount...wtf?

Mrs. H

Wed, 21 Dec 2005 13:39:23 -0500

Keep one of the north-west avenues car free forever! I think a lot more people would bike to work if they felt safe on the road, and those wide open avenues have been a godsend these two days.

MT

Wed, 21 Dec 2005 13:36:46 -0500

Did I make this up or did anyone else read something in the Post this morning about a significant portion of the MTA's surplus already going to pay pension-related stuff? If that's true than the union doesn't have a leg to stand on.

Wed, 21 Dec 2005 13:32:17 -0500

Privitization is the first step down the road to getting screwed. If privitization was the answer, why did the MTA just need to take over private bus companies? And, to the above poster: because a lot of of the people who are screaming fire the MTA weren't in NY in 2003. Or, if not, they're apparently just ignorant and mass media-lulled.

me

Wed, 21 Dec 2005 13:30:50 -0500

you sound like the guy at the dinner table who thinks that because the guy sitting next to you makes more, he should automatically pay more. do you think the mta should just open their wallet and let the union take whatever they want? at some point, no matter how much money you have, you have to say "enough – we're treating you fairly and we won't be extorted."

d

Wed, 21 Dec 2005 13:30:16 -0500

Pataki has more or less killed his already low chances of becoming president (or even VP or undersecretary of commerce for that matter). He wants to be president yet can't step in to deal with strike that has shut down the most economically important city in the country? Have fun in New Hampshire, George.

Your Failed Memory

Wed, 21 Dec 2005 13:24:56 -0500

Why does nobody remember that the MTA was caught red-handed a couple years ago, with a several hundred million dollar surplus that they "found" due to a clerical error? This was soon after the last strike threat. Why does nobody remember that the MTA just had a billion dollar surplus? Why does nobody remember that just a month or so ago, the MTA flushed millions of dollars down the toilet by giving tourists holiday discounts?