Posted on 12/24/2005 2:52:08 AM PST by JohnHuang2
Yes! Another NYC transit thread!
L
Boo hoo hoo, If the author lives there, move away, go away, or shut up. He extorts all the money he can from his employer and I bet the boss thinks he is overpaid. He can be replaced with an 8th grade dropout same as the thugs.
Bloomberg has no authority to fire anyone in the MTA.
How about Pataki?
Pataki could force the MTA board's hand, maybe. But even if he could, it wouldn't be practical. It would shut NYC down for weeks, lead to mass protests by other unions, and step far outside the rules that have kept the city running for decades.
But then again, the MTA union didn't have the authority to go on strike.
Extort is a very strong word. In fact it is probably actionable.
I suspect that Mr McCullough, like nearly everyone else I know, gets paid what is required to keep him from moving to another job. That's not extortion it is the free market.
The thing that is interesting about debating this issue with non-New Yorkers is their insistance that the powers operating in this thing are fair, legal and apparent.
The basic operating principle in this thing is "might makes right." These were two large powers clashing over financial advantage. Fair and legal has nothing to do with it.
Also, remember this, at the same time when Bloomberg was proclaiming "thuggish, thuggish, thuggish" in his whining monotone and Touissant was harping about "disrespect, disrepect, disrepect," their guys were 150 yards away from the official negotiation site hammering out a deal.
On top of that, we will never know all the details of whatever deal they finally reach.
There is one drawback, capital controls all the purse strings, so labor has to unite to fight for their share.
Yes, big government is no different than big business, they control the best games in town.
An 8% per year raise is way too much when inflation is around 3%, especially when they seem to be pretty well paid already.
On another note, Kevin McCullough seems to think the U.S. would collapse without NYC. Hardly.
Because 3/4 of the transit workers belong to one, two or even three different 'minority' groups, and had Pataki fired them, can we imagine what the uproar would have been? The city would have been completely shut down, riots and adverse devastation..
It IS from WND after all.
Good throrough comment.
If this was an illegal strike, why couldn't each union
member have legal action taken against them by individuals
that use the MTA?
Maria says she is afraid of losing her job, well who was the
transit operator of the route she took? What time was the
vehicle of choice not operational, and who wasn't at the controls
because of the strike? They are responsible when they are
at the wheel, or controls, why not now?
I've heard this question mentioned a couple of times. Is this
just foolish thought, or is there something to it?
When the strike started, to be fair, the customers, that is the ones paying the bills, not necessarily those receiving services, should be relived of any obligations to pay. This means any taxes used to fund transit, would be canceled. When the Transit Authority gets it's act together with it's hired help, they can then go strike a deal with any willing customers.
This is no different than customers of Ford going to GM, if Ford is unable to supply cars, due to a strike or any other reason.
When government workers strike, the customers should not be held captive, the customers - those paying the freight - should also be free to "strike" and vote on reentering into agreements with "Authorities", School Districts, or whatever.
When a great deal of money and/or power is involved the rules become very flexible. It may not be nice and it may not be right, but it is the way it works.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.