About Kesher Talk


NPJrecipe-sidead.jpg

Recent Comments

  • Fat Man [TypeKey Profile Page] on Che Moods : ""In plain truth, he hardly cared for them at all." And Che? He didn't give...."

« IDF Diary - Week 2, Day 1 | Home | Smackdown On NSA »

December 20, 2005

Transit woes

Good. May the ghost of Ronald Reagan come to Mike Bloomberg in a dream and strengthen him in his resolve.

City Journal had an article this spring which explains the tangled web of political and financial dealings that make the NYC transit system lurch from one crisis to the next, which is worth reading in its entirety. It offers some ideas for market-driven solutions similar to those implemented by Tony Blair for the London Underground. Since the New York Metro Transport Workers Union is holding the system hostage right now, here's the dirt on them:

The Transport Workers Union opposes any real cost-cutting efforts, such as a plan to restructure all above-ground rail operations into a single new subsidiary, and all bus operations into another—a consolidation that could save $210 million over three years. Why the resistance? The new bus division would have the authority to cut civil-service protections for new employees—who would still have their union security, of course, but transit workers are accustomed to two layers of insulation from management.

The one modest consolidation that Kalikow did get labor to accept carried a stiff condition that means it will save only millions instead of tens of millions, as the MTA had first hoped. In 2002, bus lines in Brooklyn and the Bronx—formerly private lines that the MTA had purchased decades ago—were merged with the rest of the MTA bus operations. Until then, these lines operated as separate units, so that a mechanic from a Brooklyn depot could not repair a Bronx bus that had belonged to a private company decades previously, even if the bus had broken down across the street from the Brooklyn depot. But when the TWU accepted the consolidation, the MTA had to give legacy employees of the formerly discrete bus units full MTA benefits, including 12 days of sick leave each year instead of five.

The MTA has had scant success in pushing transit workers to boost their productivity in exchange for raises. Three years ago, Kalikow got the TWU to accept a few basic efficiency provisions—not enough to cover the cost of the raises, and nowhere near the cost-saving labor flexibility he wanted, which would have required workers who clean stations to perform extra duties, like removing graffiti and changing lightbulbs, as they clean.

Meanwhile, the agency’s heavy health-care costs for these same employees, $873 million this year, or 9 percent of the MTA’s budget, are expected to balloon to $1.15 billion by 2008. These costs include a new prescription-drug benefit for NYCT retirees who aren’t yet old enough to qualify for Medicare. “Local 100 may be the only union in the U.S. that can claim health benefit improvements this year,” union leadership exulted in 2002. And there are plenty of retirees, since most NYCT employees can quit working after only 25 years of service at a lavish pension of 50 percent of their average last two years’ pay. Switching to a system of 401(k)s, as most private-sector employers have, would cut these swollen costs and would give workers an incentive to stay on the job for more than 25 years to increase personal savings.


Judith | 12/20/05 at 07:13 PM | Categories: NYC

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.keshertalk.com/cgi-bin/mtb.cgi/4353

Comments

wow, all those links were very interesting. Very interesting that the International told them not to strike. I was a member of a very large union for many years....did a lot of work for it, including holding office and lots of picket duty. Then in 1984, we went on strike again, I had just separated from my husband, and wasn't allowed to touch any of our assets, so I was virtually without any funds to support myself. I called the union and asked if they had any type of fund that I could draw from during the strik. They said no, and that I should have thought of that before separating, that I knew it was likely there'd be a strike. I was devestated, and found a job cleaning houses so I could eat. We went back after 4-1/2 weeks for exactly what was on the table when we walked out. So the rank and file lost 4-1/2 weeks pay for nothing. The officers all got paid. I stopped participating after that. Then 3 years later there was talk of a strike again. I told my boss that I'd probably be crossing the picket line, would he protect me? He said sure, but I had better resign from the union or they would collect all my wages. So I sent a letter of resignation & was told what a traitor I was. I resigned from the union but still had to pay dues with each pay check. Oh, and what really aggravated me was that the workers in the national union headquarters tried to organize and they were all fired. Bunch of hypocrites.

Maggie [TypeKey Profile Page] | December 20, 2005 10:38 PM

Post a comment




Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style and URL links.
My spam filter rejects any word containing "sex" and "poker" - use asterisks like so: "p*ker")