NY strike union fined $1m a day

oscarBravo

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4547476.stm

Apparently it's illegal for public employees to strike in NY state.

I have mixed feelings about this. Allowing for the differences in labour relations, labour laws et al: I've always felt that unofficial disputes should be dealt with harshly, but I'm not all that comfortable with taking away a worker's right to strike.

Sand

I know that story isnt a detailed analysis of the issues involved, but the only complaint the workers seem to have is that theyre not respected? That doesnt seem a valid reason to sabotage the public transport system of a major city. Who knows, maybe theyre being worked like dogs, spat upon by the average commuter and forced to sell themselves into indentured service but otherwise, Im with the judge on this one.

Manic Moran

Being on the other coast, I'm not paying too much attention, but it seems that some of the demands are an increase in pay of 8% per year over the next three years, and a reduction in the half-pay retirement age from 55 to 50. They claim that the MTA has currently a $1billion budget surplus and can damned well afford it.

On the other hand, the starting position of the city is that the budget surplus is due to one-off property windfalls, they are looking at almost a $1billion deficit over the next year, want to raise the retirement age from 55 to 62, and start to merge a few job descriptions for greater efficiency if combined with higher wages.

The 1980 strike lasted 11 days, and cost the cityand its businesses over $1.1 billion.

NTM

DadaKopf

I'm in New York right now. I can tell you, being a tourist during an MTA strike is hell. I've got blisters on my blisters. Still, I'm not letting a labour dispute ruin my few days here.

The strange thing about the media coverage here is there's very, very little being said about what the dispute is about. Most of the coverage focuses on the human interest aspect of poor New Yorkers walking to work in temperatures below freezing. Strangely, most people are in favour of the MTA workers, according to the media. And though the city is definitely slowing down, there's little sense that the city has ground to a halt. It's a bit of trouble getting into and out of town, but many have decided to stay at home to work or drive. The traffic isn't so bad after 12pm.

Anyway, from what I gather, they're looking for a moderate pay increase, reject the move by the MTA management to raise the age of retirement and they want a few moderate additional welfare provisions. So the workers are losing money themselves, and the local union is being fined (I think), so there's a possible dispute between the 'local' and 'international' unions - meaning the parent TU congress and the NY MTA workers' union.

Anyway, now I have to figure out how I'm going to get from Queens to downtown, then uptown.

Nox

The gutless NYC politico's will not make the fine stick. They will 'negotiate' it away. They should do what Ronnie did when PATCO struck ... FIRE THEM. And don't forget ... this strike is illegal, as was PATCO's.

Nox

Moriarty

Apparently any worker out on strike is getting fined 2 days worth of pay for every day they stay out. That's on top of the union fine.

lazydaisy

Yeah the fine - it could eventually be lifted. Nothing is ever as it seems in NYC.

The media is definitely supporting the MTA and not the workers and Dadkopf is right -its really hard to get any info on what the details are. This morning on the news, a reporter and crew were were out and asked a construction worker about the strike and he said that he supports the strike even though its an incovenience and the reporter said "oh no you dont" and took the mic away. All the focus is on the workers and the inconvenience to commuters and none on the huge salaries and bonuses the fat cats at the MTA give themselves.

The powers that be are really trying to get the public to turn on the workers, and it seems to be working. A lot of people are saying they should be fired. A lot of people who dont have to work in or even take the subway!!

To get from Queens to downtown- looks like a taxi or hitching for you. Look at craigslist nyc to see if anyone is offerring lifts.

Manic Moran

I think the last time a public sector service went on strike (1981/82?) they were all fired. It was the Air Traffic Controllers, fired by Reagan.

NTM

lazydaisy

Yes MM that's true - it was with the air traffic controllers and Reagan. Im not sure that NYC wants its unemployment stats any higher so that may be an incentive for them not to do any firing. The market is still recovering from 911.

FTA69

I'll admit from the outset that I'm not familiar with the details of the case, but I do suscribe to the ideal that the worker has the right to work, likewise he has the right to withold his/her labour without being fined and punsihed for doing so. It seems the land of personal freedom only applies that principle once it suits the government.

Manic Moran

FTA69 wrote:

I'll admit from the outset that I'm not familiar with the details of the case, but I do suscribe to the ideal that the worker has the right to work, likewise he has the right to withold his/her labour without being fined and punsihed for doing so. It seems the land of personal freedom only applies that principle once it suits the government.

Depends on your point of view. In Ireland, the Gardai are prohibited from striking, yes? Because of the vital role they play to the nation's operation. MTA is stupidly vital to the economy of America's largest city. We're not talking Dublin Bus, here, we're talking almost every commuter in the city center. 7 million rides a day, I believe the figure is. I believe the idea is that the greater good prohibits strikingh by the MTA.

Or something like that.

NTM

oscarBravo

FTA69 wrote:

[Ideally] the worker ... has the right to withold his/her labour without being fined and punsihed for doing so.

Per my original post, I'd broadly agree with that - once fair procedure is followed (exhaustive negotiations, strike notice and all that). It's the situations where workers down tools and walk out without following procedure that get to me.

therecklessone

Nox wrote:

The gutless NYC politico's will not make the fine stick. They will 'negotiate' it away. They should do what Ronnie did when PATCO struck ... FIRE THEM. And don't forget ... this strike is illegal, as was PATCO's.

Nox

Good ol' Ronnie eh? One of the few unions to back his campaign for President in 1980 was PATCO after he promised to address their concerns re. pay and working conditions. Just like every good politicain, he reneged on his promise when in office, fired the ATCOs when they went on strike and replaced them with military controllers. Interestingly, the US faces a severe shortage of controllers in the coming years as a direct result, with 1000s approaching retirement age now and not enough controllers passing through their training programmes.

So if they were to sack the MTA staff, how long would it take to train up replacements? I imagine the armed forces a little stretched at the moment, so scab labour fromthem is out of the question.

dahamsta

Manic Moran wrote:

The 1980 strike lasted 11 days, and cost the cityand its businesses over $1.1 billion.

I'm convinced at this stage that there's a whole PR company out there dedicated entirely to calculating how much "Disaster n" cost in "damages". Other PR companies subcontract them to work it out like. And I'm convinced that they calculate them using a random number generator set on Stun. Or just one fella with a dice and a caculator with BILLIONS on it in big letters.

One of these days these figures will be backed up by a logical explanation. Ha ha, just kidding, the chances of that happening are 8 billion-to-one, and will cost me 63 trillion wasted man hours in attempted explanations, at a mean wage of 16 bazillion dollars an hour. Put that in your pipe and shove it up a PR professional's arse with a red hot poker, wrapped in razor wire.

adam (not a fan)

A Dub in Glasgo

Manic Moran wrote:

Depends on your point of view. In Ireland, the Gardai are prohibited from striking, yes? Because of the vital role they play to the nation's operation.


NTM

Maybe the MTA workers should have an organised sick day instead, that would get around the no strike rules.

Nox

therecklessone wrote:

Good ol' Ronnie eh?

Yes. One of the finest President's we've ever had.

therecklessone wrote:

One of the few unions to back his campaign for President in 1980 was PATCO after he promised to address their concerns re. pay and working conditions. Just like every good politicain, he reneged on his promise when in office, fired the ATCOs when they went on strike and replaced them with military controllers.

True.

First ... In this country, organized labor (the leadership) is a toy for the Demo party and has been for decades. Your implication is that unions opposed Ron. The unions oppose virtually any Republican.

Second ... Of course they were replaced by military controllers. You don't go to the local employment office to hire Joe six-pack to fill that position.

therecklessone wrote:

Interestingly, the US faces a severe shortage of controllers in the coming years as a direct result, with 1000s approaching retirement age now and not enough controllers passing through their training programmes.

Again true ... today. That problem is being addressed as I type.

therecklessone wrote:

So if they were to sack the MTA staff, how long would it take to train up replacements?

Hmmm ... this is a tough question. Here's a thought ... let's go to the local employment office an hire a few Joe six-packs. About an hour of OJT ought to be enough to teach him how to do the subway. Someone giving him/her an over-the-shoulder on the route for a day ought to be enough for someone with a CDL. So, I'd say in answer to your question ... Not very long at all.

therecklessone wrote:

I imagine the armed forces a little stretched at the moment, so scab labour fromthem is out of the question.

"scab labour" is a union term. The PATCO folks violated the law and were legitimately FIRED. There was ZERO "scab labour" used for the PATCO situation ... just as there would be ZERO if the NYC MTA folks were fired for violating the law as they should be.

Nox

FatherTed

Well, they union have decided to come back to the negotiating table...after a judge yesterday that the union leaders will be put into jail if the strike continues. I think the workers have been lead badly by the union in this one. The union not the MTA/NY were the ones to quit the negotiations on Monday night and just returned this morning.

lazydaisy

Here are some details from the New York Observer. For anyone who is interested.

http://www.observer.com/pageone_newsstory1.asp

and the editorial
http://www.observer.com/pageone_newsstory1.asp

I agree with the poster who said that workers have a right to strike without being punished for it. That is normally the case in the US but NYC is exempted from that. Go figure, a city full of liberals.

Well, the unions are putting a huge cost onto everyone else. I suppose you could make a case for the fine, as a tax to make sure the unions absorb the full cost of their actions. But then again that would require a redistribution to those who lost out from the strikes. And of course the whole point of a strike is to put a cost onto everyone else.

Interesting that the state uses it's unique ability (compared to other employers) as an enacter of laws, to increase its bargaining power when dealing with its employees, by banning strikes. Some might see this an example of the state exploiting it's power & unique position in society.

Manic Moran

Again true ... today. That problem is being addressed as I type.

Really? I took a look into ATC a few years ago. The requirement to have once been a military aviation controller still stood, so I was out.

NTM

Nox

Manic Moran wrote:

Again true ... today. That problem is being addressed as I type.

Really? I took a look into ATC a few years ago. The requirement to have once been a military aviation controller still stood, so I was out.

NTM

http://www.faa.gov/careers/employment/080505_ATCS.pdf

Apparently not true today.

Nox

lili

i would like to know if the workers revendications are justified.

Manic Moran

Nox wrote:

http://www.faa.gov/careers/employment/080505_ATCS.pdf

Apparently not true today.

Nox

Oh FFS, I've got three months left to apply...

NTM

starn

I hope they make the fine stick. There is little or no reason for unions in this day and age. There is more then enough legislation in place to protect workers. It seems to me that unions that the only driving force in unions nowadays is enlightened self intrest.

AngelofFire

There is more then enough legislation in place to protect workers

GAMA?
Irish Ferries?
Smart Telecom?
Tesco Agency workers?

therecklessone

Nox wrote:

Again true ... today. That problem is being addressed as I type.

The FAA is facing a staffing shortage that is forcing fewer and fewer controllers to guide more and more planes - both in the air and on the ground - creating a greatly reduced margin for error.

The agency has stated that it plans on hiring 12,500 controllers, but that will take a decade, meaning that even in the best case scenario, the system will be left woefully understaffed for the foreseeable future.

NATCA President John Carr

Source

starn

What about the health board or CIE, or teachers unions. These unions have become bloated and TOTALLY unnecessary. CIE has a driver to clerical staff ratio of 1: 8. So for every driver the company has 8 people working an office job. WTF????????? What about the Health Board were the ratios is 1: 7. Why I just dig a big hole and put all the money I have been paying in Tax there. The Health boards receive approx one third of the overall budget each year. But we still have empty wards and long waiting lists. Why because unions have made these unnecessary clerical staff untouchable. How many times do you hear some remark a government job is a job for life? I pledge my vote to the first party be NOT MATTER WHO THEY ARE to promise to recognises and restructure these public bodies and introduce a massive headcount drop. We come a long way from the days of Jim Larkin when Unions protected the weak and the voiceless. Now they have there voice. Unions are now mearly protecting the inept from the tax payer. Just look at how the teachers unions exploded when Noel Dempsy asked if we were getting the most out of our teachers. Now Noel Dempsey is one of my old teachers, and knows better then anyone that there are people out there teaching who shouldnt be. I remember one teacher who I used to stand in for. This guy never made his morning classes and if he did he was usually sozzeled. One day I'am teaching his class for him. He storms in the door, collapses on his desk, reacking of drink, all the while not notices me, and groans "Take out your books, ya little sh!ts, so at least whn ya fail, you can say ya tried". People have tried to have this man removed from his position and each time the ASTI stepped in and nothing happend. FFS. This is a disgrace. Unions do not have the public intrest at hearth. The are bloated and self indulgent and should be done away with, Run this bodies as if thet were in the PRIVATE SECTOR, where they can be target driven insted of slowly meandering along wasting tax payers money


Rant Over

oscarBravo

AngelofFire wrote:

Smart Telecom?

What about them?

AngelofFire

They dissmissed two employees back in June because of Union activity.

oscarBravo

AngelofFire wrote:

They dissmissed two employees back in June because of Union activity.

That's illegal. Has the company admitted that that's why the employees were dismissed?

Nox

therecklessone wrote:

NATCA President John Carr

Source

When I read this, the only thing that comes to mind is:

If you increase my budget, there will not be a problem. Since they have their own school for ATC ... start increasing class sizes.

Hypocracy thy name is bureaucrat.

Nox

Sangre

Having studied labour law unions are only needed to ensure reasonable pay. But then again in a capitalistic society surely demand for work should ensure that?
Anything else is adequately covered by Irish and Eu legislation.

If in fact the workers are breaking the law then injunctions etc., including fines would be imposed here so its not too unusual.

Sangre

AngelofFire wrote:

They dissmissed two employees back in June because of Union activity.

So?
You don't need a union to ensure protection from that. Its a Constitutional right.

DadaKopf

The 'laws of supply and demand' aren't sacrosanct. If there weren't organisations out there to challenge companies' attempts to maximise profits by constantly depressing workers' wages, things would be as bad as the industrial revolution (and people are talking of a race to the bottom again).

See, for some workers, what you say works - the demand of companies for certain jobs, and competition among them, will raise incomes (but companies will still try to recapture costs). But there is a whole other side of the labour market, on which the higher earners, and economy in general depends, ranging from menial service employees to civil servants, who companies and paymasters would love to squeeze if they could.

How do you suppose labour rights legislation got enacted in the first place, because it wasn't due to the good will and moral rectitude of the politicians or greedy capitalist pigdogs.

Nox

Sangre wrote:

So?
You don't need a union to ensure protection from that. Its a Constitutional right.

Yes ... but not on company time.

Nox

Dub13

starn wrote:

CIE has a driver to clerical staff ratio of 1: 8. So for every driver the company has 8 people working an office job. WTF?????????

This could not be true.....for example I believe Dublin Bus has 1000 buses and 3000 drivers,by your numbers that means they have 24,000 office staff.

billy the squid

starn wrote:

I hope they make the fine stick. There is little or no reason for unions in this day and age. There is more then enough legislation in place to protect workers. It seems to me that unions that the only driving force in unions nowadays is enlightened self intrest.

not in the US there is not.

All a company has to do in the us to avoid paying out pensions in the US is apply for Chapter 11 bancruptsy.. or if it wants to renage on agreements made with its workers.

when it is free of its obligations it can then come back out of chapter 11.

lazydaisy

BTS,

How is the MTA going to file for bankruptcy with a billion plus surplus?

Manic Moran

Easy. It looses the $1bill surplus next year, then files.

NTM

lazydaisy

Thats going to be pretty hard with 7-8 million people buying metrocards.

starn

Dub13 wrote:

This could not be true.....for example I believe Dublin Bus has 1000 buses and 3000 drivers,by your numbers that means they have 24,000 office staff.

It is true.
I'am refering to the group as a whole. When I can get the exact figures, Ill post them

Victor

Manic Moran wrote:

Easy. It looses the $1bill surplus next year, then files.

But it still has all those assets it could easily sell. I imagine most judges would refuse court protection in such a case.

lazydaisy

Right. Additionally the MTA is run by New York State, so how would it file bankruptcy with itself? And NYC would pretty much grind to a halt, which means the economy would be f******.