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.
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.