Skip to comments.New York Transit Strike to End ?
Posted on 12/22/2005 6:29:07 AM PST by ElRushbo
just saw a headline come across about a possible resolution-- cnbc reporting annoncement may come shortly...
Anyone wanna bet the union doesn't have to pay the $1 million a day fine? Either this judge will throw it out or they'll appeal and get it overturned.
Merry Christmas! Pffft.
I hope they still have to pay the fines.
I'll say it again: who cares? (besides the sheeple of NYC, that is).
Leftists reaping what they have sown, is how I see it.
This would be good news - bump.
It was pretty well understood that the strike would only last for a couple of days. The union would be broke by then, and the leadership is facing the prospect of going to jail for violating the court order against the strike.
Bloomberg shoud do a 'Reagan' and fire them all!
Hope they lock up their Mafioso leader before it's settled.
$101,000 a year for being a Bus driver?
Ralph Kramden would have been in fat city.
And retirement at 55 with bigtime health benefits.
The MTA must have caved even sooner than I thought they would. Bloomberg cut them off at the knees with his handwringing about not wanting the strikers fined or jailed.
keep in mind that they want to lower retirement age to 50
Unbelievable. A pity the MSM isn't shouting this info from its headlines.
"Bloomberg shoud do a 'Reagan' and fire them all!"
yeah but Bloomberg is no Reagan
Any new word? Nothing on NY1.
This is going to become a big problem for many public entities, not the least of which is those in New York.
Starting in 2006, GASB (Government Accounting Standards Board) 45 will require that OPEB's (Other Post Employment Benefits) such as retiree health care MUST shown as an accrued liability on the budget, similar to pension benefits. Rather than using pay-as-you-go for retiree benefits (which does not show the "true" cost of health care for employees), GASB 45 requires public entities to estimate the future value of such benefits for its retirees and then calculate an actuarially derived yearly expense to be shown on the budget.
The implications of this is huge. I'm on a local school Board and all Board Members only know is how much we pay per year for health care. The figure cited includes all current AND retired employees. But GASB 45 will change that because the actuarily derived yearly expense will end up going against the bottom line - and may cause school district entities to increase the tax levy to fund this liability.
For the school district I serve on the Board, teachers and administrators can accrue sick time, and then convert that sick time to health care upon retirement - and that is way many school districts handle retiree health care. So going back to our school district, a teacher or administrator can concert anywhere from 17-25 days of accrued sick time to one year of paid health care for themself upon retirement.
GASB 45 does not require entities (such as a New York City's MTA) to FUND the liability, but in reality, emtities will have to fund this liability in some fashion. I believe this will end up forcing many small public entities to consolidate - taxpayers are at their limit in these parts of what they can afford to pay for taxes.
I believe that offering health care upon retirement without some provisions to control cost is one of the worst benefits that can be paid to employees. It is a guaranteed benefit that has a variable cost. In 10 years, I predict you will see many school districts having to consolidate due to the inability of smaller districts in rural areas to increase the tax levy enough to cover the rising costs of health care.
Southack, sending to you, as I consider you well versed in things economic and fiscal on FR.
All the news I'm getting is right here on freerepublic.
Time to bust the unions and end this socialism.
I'll tell you who cares (besides us New Yorkers):
1. Other unions across the country who would like to try the same (obnoxious and ridiculous) tactics employed by the TWU. They're waiting to see if the TWU is sucessful or not. Judging from the press conference held yesterday by the union's leadership to cry and moan about the "harsh language" used by the Mayor, and the public outcry for their hanging, the answer is: no.
2. The public relations firms who will now be lining up like Russians on a toilet paper line to help "rehabilitate" the image of NYC Transit workers. Although how you rehabilitate the image of old-style (mostly-) minority communists, with French-style retirement benefits, making $60k to drive a bus is beyond me.
3. The people of the City of New York, who, for better or worse, actually drive the economic engine of the country.
4. The people of the City of New York, some of who are currently having to share rides from licenced bandits in taxis with the great unwashed masses from every third-world sh*thole you can imagine, and being charged $40 to travel two miles or less.
5. The stores, restaurants, theatres and tourist attractions which currently have no clientele during the holiday season (the biggest of the year), and who will have to lay off or fire their staff because of it. That assumes, of course, the staff can actually get to work to begin with.
6. The NYPD which has had to keep officers sleeping in the hallways in the stationhouses during this strike so that they are available to their job of protecting the public. The FDNY, which has done likewise.
Bzzzzzz! You just aren't trying hard enough, FRiend. NYC is the Nation's largest librat bastion. They are getting just what they have promoted.
1) Unions are in a tailspin in this country, FRiend. Illegal strikes by gooberment worker unions at Christmas time is NOT buying them any friends.
2) PR firms??? Mostly New Yawkers. Tuff tookis for them.
3) The people of NYC that truly drive the Nation's economy DON'T use mass transit anyway.
4) & 5) They are New Yawkers; and mostly liberal. They are getting what they have pushed for.
6) Public service means just that; service. I am a cop in my small town. I can tell you that I'd put up with any such hardship when my community needs me most.
Dude, stop painting all of us NYers with such a large brush. You're doing exactly what the liberals are doing when they sneer at "fundies." I expect it from them; I expect better from conservatives.
Like talk show hosts, posters to internet forums can't single out every exception to a rule.
True, there are many fine, upstanding, conservative New Yorkers. Equally true, there are MANY MORE leftist moonbats that would turn us into a communist state if they had their way.
It is a local problem, for locals to solve. I'll say it again: reap what ye have sown.
"(besides the sheeple of NYC, that is)"
Sheeple??? Back to your trailer park Bubba. I've got one prominent figure pointed your way. You want to come to NYC? We have rednecked tourists for breakfast.
Tuff Tookies?? He's dead!
I used to think NYC was all lib. Then I started reading the NY Post. I love that paper.
If the city gives into the union, they're still screwed.
Read the NY Sun. www.nysun.com
I think folks Upstate care. Aren't there a couple of obscure state-wide taxes that go to subsidize the MTA?
Never would have been a strike if the MTA idiot Kalico didn't throw that ridiculous pension demand in the union's face at the last minute.
Holy Cow! Do they really think that sign breeds solidarity? How out of touch.
The rest of New York should have jettisoned the southeastern counties of their state decades ago.
How about this: I live on Staten Island (the Forgotten borough of NYC). There is an $8 toll on the Verrazano-Narrows Bridge, and Staten Islanders are the only New Yorkers who must pay a toll in order to drive home (there are $6 tolls on the New Jersey crossings, as well). Last I heard, only 70 cents actually goes to maintaining the bridge, the rest goes to subsidize mass transit in the suburbs (Metro North and the Long Island Railroad), with a healthy cut for the state and the city, of course.
Staten Islanders who register in order to get a special sticker, or who use EZ Pass, get a discount of almost $4, however, from many parts of this island, the only way to get into Manhattan to go to work is to take an MTA express bus, since train service (Staten Island Rapid Transit, not part of the strike) only runs along the south shore. The Staten Island ferry is, of course, free, but can only be reached via the train or bus, unless you live within walking distance, and helps you not one bit if you work anyplace other than Downtown.
I totally agree with your "I pay taxes, too" point of view, but when viewed in this light, I'd say you have comparatively little to moan about.
I'm all for Upstate seceding and forming a new state. I tell friends in red bits of PA that they could come along with us. The more the merrier :)
In other words, he felt that docking their pay was a more effective strategy.
Now you get an idea of what we Kalifornia FReepers get to put up with; but we tend to catch it on a daily basis...(and usually for good reason)
I'm listening to the John Gambling Show right now.
The "mediation panel" has said that they've recommended that MTA employees come back to work, while they hash out the pension issue.
Supposedly, Toussaint is going to go back to his executive board with this proposal.
They also want a media blackout on negotiations.
May I humbly suggest that you don't want to go there since the MTA isn't the only thing Downstate sucking up Upstate's tax money.
I don't want to get into an Upstate/Downstate argument with you, since it would be counter-productive and you'd only be embarrassed (just kidding).
However, having lived upstate (Rochester and Utica), I can certainly understand your plight. Yes, the nine million or so denizens of New York City certainly do exact a toll on the people Upstate, but just think of where you'd be if it were not for Wall Street --- you'd be Vermont, only straight.
PS, while I'm at it, Staten Island attempted to seceede from New York city in the 1980's and early 90's, only to be slapped down by the evil cabal of Cuomo, Clinton and Dinkins.
They made the the argument that the city could not exist without the tax base of a half-million Staten Islanders. And they were right. Staten Island alone accounts for almost 20% of all city income tax revenues.
In the meantime, $300 million was spent to build a new naval base on the island that has gone unused, and which the city hasn't found a decent use for. Billions were spent on housing for all the expected sailors and their families, which necessarily went to "low-income families" (i.e. useless mouths) since it would not be going to productive individuals (sailors and marines), and we now live on a crowded 12 mile by 7 mile island, with no mass transit, an $8 one-way toll (thank you Mario Cuomo), with 600,000 people (and climbing) on it.
Had the folks in the State Assembly (all those Upstate Republicans)taken a stand for freedom, and allowed Staten Island to become an independant city, perhaps Staten Islanders would not have to be smeared with the same brush as the Manhattanites.
This is the political equivalent of fantasy football, of course. But if it could be done, the Middle Atlantic region has a good chance of producing three or four conservative U.S. Senators, instead of just one.
Right on, Dave. It's easy to be a conservative in Arkansas or Alabama. Try being on in New York City or DC. We have first-hand experience of the effects of perpetual liberal government. This strike has pissed off all New Yorkers, regardless of their political persuasion. I've found it amusing to hear liberal, pro-union New Yorkers advocate stiff penalties for the thug transit workers. It looks like this b.s. is almost over...they better follow through on the fines...
IMHO, a better way to get conservative senators would be to repeal the 17th Amendment and go back to appointment by state legislatures. Somehow, I can't imagine even the most liberal state legislature appointing a$$hats like the Swimmer or the Hildabeast to represent their state's interests in Washington.
I am no fan of the 17th Amendment, but the Republicans have captured Senate seats in the South well before the state legislatures went Republican. For example, by 1993, the GOP held both U.S. Senate seats in Texas, although the party did not obtain control of both houses of the legislature until 2002.
It is actually a fraud that has been perpetrated against the taxpayers. Benefits are being promised that taxpayers have not agreed to fund, and taxpayers haven't been told of the future costs of those promised benefits.
If this was a contract for a car, you the taxpayer had been told that your healthcare car cost $25,000...and then ten years later find out that the Seller of the car was demanding another $25,000 in "benefits."
Except, you didn't agree to those benefits...or at least didn't agree to pay the Seller that extra $25,000.
Likewise, teachers get paid every two weeks for current work. Paying them after they retire...for doing no work...is akin to being asked to pay again for a car that you bought ten years ago.
If a car dealership asked you for an extra $25,000 ten years after you bought a car from them, you'd tell them to go pound sand.
Well, retired teachers are asking for that extra $25,000 (or perhaps even an extra $250,000) for their "benefits" long after they were paid for their work.
But the buyer of the car doesn't owe an extra $25,000...and neither does the taxpayer.
The taxpayer is actually being defrauded because the taxpayer hasn't been told the true cost of the promised benefits to teachers.
This is like hiding payments to teachers in a public budget; it's illegal.
If you found out that a $250,000 per year football coach was secretly being paid an extra $200,000 in taxpayer money "off the books," then you'd be outraged because the taxpayers hadn't agreed to those extra off the books payments.
Well, the healthcare that has been promised to teachers is off the books...taxpayers haven't been shown the real amount. That's the same as hiding the extra payments to the football coach in that it is a fraud perpetrated against taxpayers.
Right now, people "in the know" claim that the taxpayer *can't* be told the real amount of future healthcare costs because it is too hard to forecast...
...But being too difficult is no excuse for fraud.
Which is to say, yes, it is difficult to forecast future healthcare costs...but that doesn't excuse defrauding the taxpayers.
It's still a fraud.