Transit union cripples NYC
Published Tuesday, December 20, 2005 by Editor | E-mail this post 

In what would be an all too familiar scene on the streets of Paris, commuters in the nation’s largest city must face the grueling task of traveling to and from work without public transit. In many American cities such a strike would only inconvenience a select few, but in a city where most residents don’t even own cars a transit strike can be truly devastating. More than 7 million passengers, who normally use NYC transit each day, must now confront the chaos of New York streets, thanks to transit union. "This is a fight over dignity and respect on the job, a concept that is very alien to the MTA," the union president argued. What it really is, however, is extortion.
So what do the union members want? Higher pay, naturally. They called for salary increases greater than the 3% proposed by the transit authority and refused calls for new employees to pay a portion of healthcare costs, like most workers in America already do. As mayor Bloomberg noted, a transit strike is illegal and will result in significant financial penalties for all strikers. These financial penalties aren’t sufficient. Each and every striker should be given an ultimatum: return to work or be dismissed outright with no pension whatsoever. Criminals should not be given deference, especially when they exhibit a complete disregard for the welfare of others, in this case 7 million others.
The proposals made by the transit authority were completely within reason and in line with workers in most any other public or private work setting. If new employees are unhappy with the package of offerings and incentives the transit authority provides, then they would be advised to seek employment elsewhere, as is their right. These strikers who on average earn over $50,000 per year, should be pleased with the salaries they earn as is, after all we’re talking about driving a bus, not brain surgery. If anything, transit workers make too much, relative to the level of skill required to operate a bus or subway train and should forfeit their raises for those public servants who risk life and limb each and every day (i.e., fireman and police). If NYC officials are wise, they will host massive job fair during this strike to interview replacements for these strikers. Perhaps this could also be an opportunity for NYC to explore automation, perhaps not for buses but certainly for trains, some communities have already ventured down this road with great success. The cost savings alone would be tremendous.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-12-20-nyctransit_x.htm
Bravo for raising the point about public service workers who should be getting a more significant raise (fire, police, emt). It's difficult to argue that those on the front lines don't deserve a larger share of the public trust. For these MTA workers, it's hard to make such a case. They already have significantly better benefits than most workers in the private sector, which puts their total compensation at or above rates of similar private-sector jobs. The risk they face daily is no different from that faced by 7M commuters each day. It is not to say that their roles are not important, on the contrary, they are a crucial component to the economy of our largest city. Nonetheless, in the relative sense one must concede that if we must pick a group to be first in line for a pay raise, the MTA doesn't make the cut.
Can we start ferry service from the Rio Grande to NY Harbor? There are many, many people who would risk their lives to take on any one of these now-stricken MTA jobs. I say bring the willing in to work under temp permits until the strike ends.