There are also indications that hundreds, if not a thousand or more, have returned to work. The MTA has been running TV ads appealing directly to workers.
As of this writing, there are reports that the two sides are meeting face-to-face.
With respect to firings, the NYDN had this to say:
Wanna just fire them? That's a rail tough job
It has become an angry refrain as New Yorkers walk, bike and hitch their way through the cold with the striking MTA workers in mind: "Why don't they just fire them all?"
According to the Taylor Law, which outlaws strikes, a striking worker can in fact lose his job.
But that doesn't make mass firings practical, according to Jerome Lefkowitz, an architect of the law.
Everyone fired for striking could ask for an individual hearing on his or her dismissal: "It would be a very complicated and expensive process," Lefkowitz said.
There's also the obvious problem of quickly finding, training and dispatching people to replace the 33,700 strikers.
Haste in replacing striking workers has contributed to tragedy in the past: A 1918 transit strike, during which a dispatcher was sent to fill in for a motorman, ended in the horrific Malbone St. wreck, which killed nearly 100 people in Brooklyn.
Then there's politics.
Asked yesterday whether either union honchos or striking workers should be fired, Gov. Pataki sidestepped the question entirely.
"That's for the MTA and the lawyers to look at. That's for the court," he said.
While some call on Pataki to fire the strikers, as President Ronald Reagan did to striking air-traffic controllers in 1981, Doug Muzzio of the Baruch College School of Public Affairs said it could hurt him.
"Just the public safety issues - he could be seen as really irresponsible here," Muzzio said. "[And] if he fires them, how long does it take to certify and train [new] people?"
I got an idea, give them the contract they asked for... just debit the half-billion or so this strike has cost the city so far... and make it contingent on getting rid of the union's leadership.
Fire the bums now. You'll have people lining up for these jobs inside of 4 hours.
L
It would be a nice change of pace, if it accomplishes nothing else.
The governor should fire them all. Where is Reagon when you need him. No one left here but cowardly regpublicans that run from the battle. It was a great nation before the socialists ran it into the ground.
Union public workers don't know how good they have it...
A co-worker of mine described what he called the perfect job action for transit workers. He experienced this while on a business trip to Seoul, South Korea a few years back. The Seoul transit workers were involved in a labor dispute with their management, so they went "on strike." Maybe you have to be Asian to think this way, but it was the most simple and effective job action I've ever heard of. They showed up for work every day during their "strike" and performed their job functions as if it were any ordinary day . . . the trains and buses ran in a timely, efficient, manner.
The one thing they didn't do was collect any fares on the buses and trains.
This was a perfect job action for the union, because it accomplished three things that are almost impossible to do simultaneously in a public sector strike:
1. There was no disruption in the lives of the general public;
2. The financial cost to the transit system was devastating;
3. Public support for the union was nearly unanimous, since the public was actually better off from a financial standpoint when the union was "on strike" than they were under normal conditions.