Right on! These public authorities are shadow governments which have no oversight and accountability to the people. Pataki is responsible for everything that will happen with the MTA and TWU talks. He appointed Kalikow and he's just as responsible for the MTA's corpratist anti-worker elitist corrupt mentality.

The real reason the corpratists don't want the strike is not that it would hurt working people in NYC, NJ, CT, and basically the entire tri-state area, the real reason is that it will loose the city 400 million dollars a day. It will loose the elitist corpratists major profits.

After whatever happens is over, we must get to the root of the problem. The way to do that is through the 2006 elections here in New York State. Elect an Attorney General and Governor that are going to team up with the Comptroller and go after these public authorities once and for all. Also, work on getting a democratic majority ( hopefully some of them will be progressive ) in the State Senate.

This is absurd. We should fire them and hire people for half the cost. As it stands now, the over-generous MTA employee packages are paid by everyone, including the poorest New Yorkers. It is not progressive in any way to support these people.

Actually, what we are doing Josh is supporting the bloated, fat, corrupt MTA management with our dollars. The workers are only getting what workers deserve-- a living wage and security.

The people that run the MTA are thugs. They had TWO SETS OF BOOKS! They raised fairs on riders than spent the surplus on givebacks that only benefit tourists.

How about I show up at your job Josh and tell your boss he's paying you too much! That's no way for those of us outside the halls of power to treat each other.

You are proposing the MTA act just like Wal-Mart. What next you'll want to send those jobs overseas.

If the MTA could "fire them and hire people for half the cost" Don't ya think Kalikow & Co would already be doing that? The trains would run with scab labor tomorrow. How safe we'd be on them is another question.

Just because people didn't go to college doesn't mean there jobs don't require skills.

I don't know much about corruption in the MTA, but I do know that even with a Master's degree, I make more than 10K less than the average MTA worker. Yes, I chose to work in counseling. I love my job. But I'm sure that I personally have more trouble paying rent in NYC than an MTA worker.

I can understand the fight for better pay, benefits, working conditions, security, more dignity, etc. However, I'm having a hard time feeling sympathy for the transit workers in this fight.

You are conjfusing the issues. Yes, the MTA management is not the best - and it should be better. Certainly there are better ways of refunding the surpluses. Maybe they could make the monthly card cheaper - and spread it over the entire year. But this is just a side point to the main issue.

80% of the costs of the MTA are labor. Also, that is the official number. The costs of future pension benefits are not factored in - an act of very creative accounting that is encouraged by both union and management.

If you increase their wages, who pays for that? We could cut the cost of fairs in half. By suggesting we don't, you are saying we should tax all people in NYC to pay for the TWU's way-above-living wage benefits.

And, considering that many transit systems are automated, I can't seriously think of putting much value on what these people do. It seems that a clever toaster could replace most of them.

It just blows me a way that people who support taxing the poorest people for a special interest group (TWU) could call themselves "progressive". What does that term mean to you?

I hope they pay for it if someone doesn't get the help they need at an understaffed hospital.

I agree. They should do like Reagan did and fire them all.

Why would we trust the "official" number from the MTA on labor costs when we already know they run the books in a self-servering, politically motivated manner?

As an aside, if the social worker thinks it's a problem that an MTA employer gets paid more than him, then let's have a discussion about how don't value our social workers, teachers, and nurses. I agree, they should be paid more.

Comparing MTA staff to toasters is plain insulting and reveals the spurious, mean-spirited nature of the argument. Those tunnels don't maintain themselves. The hundreds of thousands of struts, support structures, diagnostics, pressure valves etc do not maintain themselves. I've felt pissed off at MTA staff at times, but they are needed to keep a complicated system going, and no technology can self-monitor 100%

Josh-
Not getting paid enough? Maybe you should organize.

White collar workers need to wake up and smell the coffee. They are next in line as you can see from what Verizon just did terminating the pensions of their white-collar workers.

Don't get mad at the workers Josh, they're just doing what we wish we could-- asserting their right to a livable work situation.

Michael, what do you imagine the labor costs to be as a %? 80% is, especially considering the pension understating, a very reasonable number. In any case, this number is easy enough to determine with a decent audit.

You have to remember that the vast majority of people are lower to middle class earners. If you want any one group to earn more money, who will that come from? It is illusory to imagine that there are enough rich people out there that can be taxed to support these special interest groups.

The first thing that needs to be understood is what is the prevailing market wage for this kind of work. Some jobs, like cleaning the trains would pay lower and some jobs more. You now can see the differential between the market value of the work, what they are currently paid now, and then what they are demanding. Next, when you see how stubbornly the TWU refuses automation, how they abuse the sick leave policy (average of 13 days per year), etc, you have to also add that cost back in. A flexible market-rate force would certainly lower costs there also.

So, being conservative, let's say that we could lower prices of transportation by 50% by switching to market rate labor. That means an $80 metro card becomes $40.

So now, you like the MTA workers and want them to make more money. Perhaps we could create a private charity that would enhance their incomes. Would that work? If not, why? If a significant number of people feel the way you do, then maybe they would wind up making even more money than before? I would imagine that in your gut you know that no one would give them a cent - but ask yourself why?

You can take any powerful special interest group like the TWU and make them richer. The point is, this will come from the vast majority of middle class and poor people. You really can't fight simple multiplication and division.

If you think this is about money, you're not paying attention. Would you give up two days' pay for every day on strike over a measly 3 percent disagreement over wages? Whatever raise they'll get will be eaten up by fines.

The work that transit workers do is grueling. It's dirty. It's hard. The supervisors scream at them and write them up. The customers yell at, and sometimes, even punch them. Transit workers die on the job at rates that are comparable to firefighters.

But fuck them, eh? The lazy union bastids.

As for the negotiations, they clearly broke down over retirement. You know, my grandpa was a transit workers. One of the micks during the Quill days. He broke his hip on the job two years before retirement. He was a money collector, one of the guys who ride the "money train" (not at all like that stupid movie) in the middle of the night and collect the fares and bring them to the TAs accounting office. One of the large containers carrying all those nickels, dimes and tokens fell on and crushed him. He recuperated slowly, and had to hobble along for another two years so that he could finally rest.

62 is just too damn old for that job. It's not safe for the workers, and it's not safe for the riders. If you don't have compassion, Josh, at least have a little sense of self-preservation. Do you want your driver to have a heart attack at the wheel?

Hope you enjoyed your walk today. You could use the fresh air.

Most of the debate in this forum and others has focused on the demands of the strikers and the financial situation of the MTA. While fair wages for men and women who drive our busses and trains should concern us all, we fail to discuss the problem that today is bothering millions of New Yorkers: public transportation. I've been a huge fan of trains and the subway since I was four, but the world has ended and it's not working today, so I pulled up the mayor's contingency plan. Our city has a bunch of great ideas: safe bike storage in several downtown city parks, convenient carpooling areas, and bike lanes on major bridges and roads.

It's too bad the city needed a transit strike to before it began to implement alternative transportation plans. Because right now, when we need such transportation solutions, the bike route that should be in front of my apartment building doesn't exist; the city has only "recommended" its construction (you can view the map here: http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/html/bike/bm.shtml). It's not really a map of bike routes though, more a map of proposals. The city says the proposals "are the result of extensive fieldwork involving analysis of traffic conditions and assessment of the connectivity, accessibility, and safety of the network, as well as meetings that sought community input" (same source). Thanks for the research, Mayor Mike, but there's no bike route in front of my building yet.

There has been no provision made to exempt disabled drivers from the HOV rules during the strike. This is shame upon shame.

IMO, the sticker is the retirement, pension and health plans. The MTA is responsible for the welfare of employees until the day they die!! Imagine having to support your children for the rest of their lives!! Not only your children, but your grandchildren as well.

Like Social Security, this concept of pensions for life must be fixed. Paying an employee for 60 years for only 20 years worth of work is insane! Not to mention being responsible for the retiree's rising medical costs.

The worst is that it's a problem that keeps compounding itself. The better the quality of life, the longer a person lives, the longer he/she gets a pension. The better the quality of healthcare, the more treatment a person gets, the more money he/she accrues due to medical bills. It's a never ending process.

I think it's imperitive that people accept the fact that the old system just doesn't work anymore. When Social Security was first instated, people didn't live past 65!!! Now the average age is 78! It just doesn't work anymore and workers have to understand that we must give back. It will be much better in the long run.

IMO, the sticker is the retirement, pension and health plans. The MTA is responsible for the welfare of employees until the day they die!! Imagine having to support your children for the rest of their lives!! Not only your children, but your grandchildren as well.

Like Social Security, this concept of pensions for life must be fixed. Paying an employee for 60 years for only 20 years worth of work is insane! Not to mention being responsible for the retiree's rising medical costs.

The worst is that it's a problem that keeps compounding itself. The better the quality of life, the longer a person lives, the longer he/she gets a pension. The better the quality of healthcare, the more treatment a person gets, the more money he/she accrues due to medical bills. It's a never ending process.

I think it's imperitive that people accept the fact that the old system just doesn't work anymore. When Social Security was first instated, people didn't live past 65!!! Now the average age is 78! It just doesn't work anymore and workers have to understand that we must give back. It will be much better in the long run.

Josh, I think that many progressives would also like to see a much more equitable taxation system in this city. You can rifle through the archives on the economy and fiscal responsibility if you really want more, but I think we all can agree that too much of the burden of paying for mass transit falls on the shoulders of the poorest New Yorkers when everyone in NYC uses mass transit (including drivers who benefit from streets that would be this overloaded every day if most folks weren't trundling along underground).

There is no reason that people who get to sit in heated offices all day long are somehow entitled to a more comfortable life than anyone in steel toed boots. If you'd like to trade places, though, the MTA is hiring. JB, your problem really isn't that counselors are paid too little or transit workers too much, but that decent housing (or housing) is beyond the reach of even middle income New Yorkers.



I, for one, am glad to see the TWU sticking up for a decent contract (and one that doesn't sell future workers down the river). A 3% per year raise is less than the change in the cost of living.

If the high cost of health care is so prohibitive, maybe the MTA should start making some noise about fixing the health care system. They've got the clout. Instead of blaming workers for the cost of health care, they could ask the federal government to actually address the problem.



(And Adam, there is a wee transportation archive, too.)

Shaun,

You claim this is not about money? Are massive pensions free?

Again, you fake progressives fail to address the fact that these way-out-of-market pay packages are only supportable by taxing the poor and the middle class. There are nowhere near enough rich people to support these kind of insane pay packages.

Like the above poster points out, these are unsustainable programs. And the sad thing is that it's the vast middle and lower middle classes that pay for them.

"The supervisors scream at them and write them up."
Oh no. That's horrible.

If you want these muggers to have more money, why don't you give them your own? Why tax the poor?

Rob & Josh,

You are both obviously clueless about the realities of life as a transit worker. First of all, Rob, your claim of living 60 years after working 20 is absurd (obviously said tongue-in-cheek). We have to work minimum of 25 years before being able to retire (assuming we have the age). It is a statistical fact that a vast majority of bus operators die within 2 years of retirement. Our widows then collect our pension for 5 more years. The ONLY people that can retire after 20 years is law enforcement officers & firefighters. I don't begrudge them that advantage. I think it's a disgrace that the cops & firemen have such a low starting salary that some find it necessary to apply for food stamps!



Josh, would you lose a day's pay for making a mistake on your paperwork? I can. If, when making a turn, my rear tire scrubs the curb, that's a day's suspension. Forget your tie? Go home (unpaid) and we'll see you tomorrow. I could be sitting at a bus stop and get rear-ended. Guess who's going for the drug test? Last year, the MTA Board voted raises for the top 7 presidents in the authority(as reported in the NY Times). They recieved a MINIMUM raise of 20 percent. They also recieve $13,000 per annum towards THIER pension plan. On top of that 6 of the 7 presidents recieve a housing allowance of $48,000/year. Our demands are unreasonable? Get a grip. Try getting some solid facts before entering into an argument. Josh, one other fact....NYC transit operators are the LOWEST paid of the major cities.



There was a study done to determine the cost of upgrading the NYC subway system to an automated one. If I remember correctly, the cost was in the neighborhood of 2 BILLION dollars. The system that we currently have was first laid down in the early 1900's.

This is the article I was discussing in my previous post.


December 11, 2004

Facing Deficit, M.T.A. Gave a 22% Raise to Its Director

By SEWELL CHAN

The chairman of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, which is seeking a fare increase and new state taxes to stanch a growing budget deficit, approved a 22 percent pay raise for the authority's executive director last year; the raise took effect last January.

The action by the chairman, Peter S. Kalikow, raised the annual salary of the authority's highest-paid officer, Katherine N. Lapp, to $235,000 from $192,500.

The pay increase was not publicly discussed, though Mr. Kalikow said there was no requirement to do so.

Mr. Kalikow and other officials said the increase was an appropriate step because the presidents of New York City Transit, Metro-North Railroad and the Long Island Rail Road had received substantial pay increases in 2002 and 2003.

For several months at the end of last year, all three presidents were paid more than Ms. Lapp, to whom they report.

"It was absolutely an appropriate and correct thing to do," Mr. Kalikow said of the raises. "I think our guys are absolutely compensated correctly."

The salary of Ms. Lapp, a lawyer who was appointed in 2002, is in line with that of heads at other major urban transit systems.

The top official of the metropolitan transit agency in Boston is paid $225,000; in Chicago, $197,750; in Los Angeles, $302,375; in the San Francisco Bay area, $269,717; and in Washington, $259,088, officials with the five transit agencies said this week.

Direct comparisons with other urban transit systems are difficult, however, because of the New York system's size and because it is an amalgamation of two commuter railroads, a bus system on Long Island and New York City Transit, the largest component. Each of the four transit agencies has its own history, organizational culture and administrative staff and operates with relative autonomy.

The pay raise for Ms. Lapp, who was appointed by the M.T.A. board with support from Gov. George E. Pataki, was approved after the heads of the authority's largest subsidiaries were awarded substantial raises starting in 2002. The pay increases are reflected in payroll records obtained from the authority under the state's Freedom of Information Law and were discussed by officials interviewed yesterday.

Ms. Lapp did not respond to an e-mail message inquiring about her raise. The authority referred all questions about the pay raises to Mr. Kalikow and to Thomas J. Kelly, the M.T.A.'s spokesman.



In April 2002, the president of New York City Transit, Lawrence G. Reuter, negotiated a new contract with the authority. His salary rose by 23 percent, to $225,000 from $182,500.



A year later, in April 2003, the president of Metro-North Railroad, Peter Cannito, renegotiated his contract and received a 25 percent pay increase, to $215,000 from $172,500.



In October 2003, the senior vice president for operations at the Long Island Rail Road, James J. Dermody, was named its president. He is paid $215,000, the same as Mr. Cannito. He previously made $172,010.



Two other agency heads also received substantial salary increases last year.



Michael C. Ascher, the president of M.T.A. Bridges and Tunnels - also known as the Triborough Bridge and Tunnel Authority - received a new contract, raising his salary to $182,500 from $157,500.



Mysore L. Nagaraja was appointed the first president of the authority's new Capital Construction Company, with a salary of $182,500.



Mr. Nagaraja had been the senior vice president for capital program management at New York City Transit, where he was paid $161,000.



Most of the M.T.A.'s 65,000 employees receive annual raises up to 3 percent. Ms. Lapp and the five agency presidents receive other compensation in addition to their base salaries. They each receive a $13,000 annual contribution - the maximum amount allowed this year under federal rules - to their retirement plans under Section 457, a pension arrangement.



Ms. Lapp and Mr. Reuter also receive a $4,000 monthly housing allowance, while Mr. Cannito, Mr. Dermody and Mr. Nagaraja each receive $3,500 a month for housing. Mr. Ascher was not given a housing allowance.



The salaries were negotiated by Gary J. Dellaverson, the director of labor relations at the authority, in consultation with Ms. Lapp. In the case of Ms. Lapp's salary, he said, he consulted with Mr. Kalikow to determine the size of the pay raise. Mr. Dellaverson, a lawyer who has worked for the authority since 1990, is paid $187,975, second only to Ms. Lapp among officials who work at the authority's headquarters.



In an interview yesterday, Mr. Kalikow, who has been chairman of the authority since 2001, said the salaries of Ms. Lapp and the agency presidents were not based on formal evaluations, but on his ongoing assessment of their work. He added that the officials could easily make far more in the private sector.



"I evaluate them because I work with them every day," he said. "I speak with them three or four times a day sometimes. I speak with them in crisis issues and planning issues. I have a pretty good idea about how they function. I'd put this group of people up against anybody."



Barry Feinstein, a prominent board member who has worked with four chairmen since 1989, said, "I don't have difficulties with wages for that level of executive being established by the chairman of the M.T.A."



But an advocate for transit customers said the raises sent the wrong message to the public.



"The M.T.A. claims that it's doing internal belt-tightening in the face of these budget deficits while it's giving quiet and large salary increases at the same time," said Neysa C. Pranger of the Straphangers Campaign, a project of the New York Public Interest Research Group, which is financed by philanthropic foundations. "It's hard to believe the M.T.A. is living up to its word."



Mr. Kalikow, a real estate developer who does not receive a salary, said the board was not required to formally vote on the pay increases, which are made at the chairman's discretion. The next round of raises could begin in April, when Mr. Reuter's contract is up for renegotiation.



"We don't discuss people's wages, which we think is their own business," Mr. Kalikow said. "We do discuss it officially, on and off the record, with the board members. Nobody is completely unaware of what everybody is making."

Tim-
Contact me-- I'd love if you'd do a guest blog. I want to get the word from the mouths of the workers out there for everyone to read.

elevin-shift&the#2-drummajorinstitute.org

Tom,

Are you striking to lower management wages and expenses? I think not. You are being dishonest. You want more money. Our maid missed her jobs today and will miss them all week. She makes a lot less than any of you, who live off of the taxpayer. She also has to pay for the expensive metrocard that funds your wage gouging.

I'm sorry you don't like your job and it's rules. I've had jobs that I don't like, and I've had to work hard and find other better ones. But if your issue is really just these little indignities, then how come the TWU won't exchange indignities for perhaps a PAY CUT. But again, you are suffering self-created indignities; you can't be judged as an individual and promoted or given raises based on your abilities. You are stuck as a number in a union with binding rules for all.

As far as the suggestion that TWU workers have a 20 year difference in life expectancy than the mean, I would doubt that. Please show any proof of that.

Does the management stink? It seems like they do - if we could find people who are better and would work for less, then we should. At the same time, top managerial talent gets paid a lot more than them. Maybe the solution is to pay more and get better people in place. If we had really good people in place they would have fired all of you leeches a long time ago and cut the pay in half. 7,000,000 New Yorkers don't need to subsidize you.

Wow, Josh, stop frothing at the mouth. It's really unseemly. And if I were you, I wouldn't be boasting about that maid of yours, who you're most likely not paying taxes on and whose MetroCard you're surely not subsidizing.

And on what planet should anyone have to trade indignities for a paycut? I've dealt with my share of surly subway folk and bus drivers, but these folks safely transport millions upon millions of people every year. I'd say the taxpayers live because of them. I'm sorry if you see them as beneath you but your spittle's getting in the way of your message, which appears to be: unions are evil unions are evil unions are evil!!!

Gee, Josh's maid can't get to work so she can clean out his toilet. Bwaah! Poor boy, he'll have to get down on his knees and clean it himself. If you need her so badly, fuckhead, why not pick her up in your Caddy and bring her to your house. What are you too good to have her in your car? Add this to the list of problems of the well-to-do and dumb.

Gilliard slaps Josh around. Good for laughs:
http://stevegilliard.blogspot.com/

People like Josh are such slime.

Josh,

you are obviously someone who doesn't need to ride the mass transit system so are ignorant of how it works.
First of all, I'm a taxpayer too, so I help fund my own salary. I never said I dislike my job, in fact I enjoy it.
The draconian rules make an already stressful job even more stressful. The amount of time we are given to complete our trips is woefully insufficient, especially if you drive in full accordance with the MTA rules.
It's a pity about your maid...maybe YOU should buy her metrocard as an incentive for improved performance. You'd probably would have gotten along fine in the antebellum South. You seem to think people (employees if you will) are no better than slaves. I wonder how often you need to change maids...when was the last time YOU took a paycut? Never, I'm sure.
How do you think the MTA came up with the 1 billion surplus? The managers pushing their papers? It was the UNION employees who did it. There was a report several years ago about how a TWU station team rebuilt a subway station in Manhattan in less time and under the proposed budget that an outside contractor had bid on the job. But despite that, the MTA is farming out more work than ever before. No union is perfect but if it wasn't for the unions, we'd all still be working without paid vacations, sick days, a 40 hour work week to name a few items that the early unions gained for everyone.


if you actually did the math on the latest offer (mainly the pension contributions) you'd realize (maybe you wouldn't) that the new hires would in effect be getting a 4 percent pay CUT. On top of that, the savings would be a mere 22 million over the 3 year term of the contract. In the scheme of things, 22 million is chicken feed. The way to save that money is to finally give up on the 2nd avenue tunnell. It's a red-herring that only exists to gain votes.

Josh,
one final thought...Don't you find it odd that the MTA can approve their budget for the fiscal year 2006 without having settled the contract with their union? Sounds to me like they have NO INTENTION of bargaining in good faith, thinking they can hide behind the Taylor law. Well our union called their hand and we'll have to see what they do now. I'd much rather be working but there comes a time where you have to stand up for yourself and now is the time.

If we have our fares go up who will stand on the picket line for the riders? If the strike continues, who will pay for my monthly expenses? If the city continues to loose money, will social services for the under earners be lost? Do you think a credit card company will buy the excuse I can't pay my bill because I haven't been able to work due to the strike? Let's see, if the strike continues what can I pay for medicine or food - decisions, decisions. Let's hope in this season of miracles, reasoning will happen and we can get back to business.

Tim,

How not-slick are you? Do you think that even the dumbest reader sees you not responding to the basic point - that you are shaking down everyone in this city, especially the most vulnerable for more money for yourself?

And then you keep trying to blame the MTA management. They forced us to strike...

I'm sure the management could be better, but this is a strike that is clearly about one thing: Mo' Money.

And think about all of the people who take the train. Hard working people who don't make very much. You are forcing them to pay more to support your wage gouging.

Shame on you. I hope the MTA fires all of you.

Now I hit refresh and see this comment:
"Gee, Josh's maid can't get to work so she can clean out his toilet. Bwaah! Poor boy"

It shows the inhumanity of these pseudo-progressives. This woman is now out of work for two days. I can live without her fine. She cannot live without her work. She makes about $150 a day and needs it. Are you going to reimburse her for all of her missed wages?

How incredibly cruel and self serving of you and the unions.

"you seem to think people (employees if you will) are no better than slaves."
No. You are free to leave your job and find a better one. You are free to pursue the education that would get you a better job.

You seem to think that the hard working people should subsidize you. You still don't explain where the money should come from that you want to take.

"Wow, Josh, stop frothing at the mouth. It's really unseemly. "
The TWU is taking money from the poorest peple and endangering those who need emergency medical services. That is unseemly - and I do get pissed off to see how people who don't care have the audacity to try to wear the "progressive" label.

"How do you think the MTA came up with the 1 billion surplus? The managers pushing their papers? It was the UNION employees who did it."
No, the surplus came from people like me paying taxes and buying metro cards. Right there we should give the money back to the people. Why not?

It all comes down to this simple fact. If you don't like your job, if you think that the rules are too strict, if you think your pay and priveleges are insufficient, then quit and find another job. It's really that simple. I've done it before and I know countless people who have done it as well. It really makes all the difference.

If the MTA cannot stop it's revolving door and they cannot keep quality workers, then the MTA will be forced to give better pay and benefits.

Also, there are plenty of jobs that will send an employee home for not being in uniform (unpaid!). Cosntruction workers are sent home if they come to work without their steel tipped boots. The reason you have to take a drug test if someone hits you is because if you are intoxicated or high then the MTA will get sued for tens of millions of dollars. It's part of the job. Deal with it or quit.

BTW, don't make a case that a higher ups make more money than you. You don't do their jobs so you can't compare what you do and what you make to what they do and what they make. The higher ups are responsible for the entire transit SYSTEM. You are just responsible for your route and your time. BIG DIFFERENCE!!

Also, improving management and lowering that cost is separate from this strike. Maybe we could get good management for less? Or maybe we need to pay more to get the right management.

But that has nothing to do with allowing the overpaid TWU to get more money from the citizens of New York. The most fair thing to do now would be to lower their pay about 50% and bring them in-line with similar workers in this town.

Josh and Rob. I'll just come right out and say it. You guys are either racist cowards, clueless snobs, or blatant jackasses.
I dont think the term "open-minded" means anything to you.
Rob, you kindly contradicted yourself and especially Josh by saying:

"You don't do their jobs so you can't compare what you do and what you make to what they do and what they make. "

Notice the quotes??? Then again, you're both idiots, so I guess you dont notice them.
And don't even try to insult me because I make way more than you and I *drive* to work, so go to hell in advance, s_c_u_mbags

Kevin, if you're so concerned about being open-minded, why don't you just open your eyes and take a look around the US. These pension plans don't work. It's a compounding system. Instead of rejecting the notion of pension reform why don't you guys try to find a way to fix it. I really don't think that contributing 6% pre-tax is unfair. GM is going bankrupt, Airlines are going bankrupt, and now municipalities are going bankrupt.

You can keep going this route and kill system causing you to loose your job or you can give something back and fix the system so that these "unborns" can actually have a job.

"ll just come right out and say it. You guys are either racist cowards, clueless snobs, or blatant jackasses."

Nice, logical response.

" Then again, you're both idiots, so I guess you dont notice them. And don't even try to insult me because I make way more than you and I *drive* to work, so go to hell in advance, s_c_u_mbags"

Again, you can see lots of anger and little thought. This is typical of these fake-progressives when they are unmasked and their ideas are shown to be no more than a shill for a powerful special interest grroup.

I've made the point over and over again that supporting the TWU comes directly at the expense of the middle class and especially the poor. All people who by and large make a lot less than the TWU. Throwing out angry epithets only reveals quite a bit.

Seem to be under the notion that sacrificing more of your paycheck will actually mean the money is going to some worthier cause. If that worthier cause it's just to let the executives (and the politicians whose hand they grease) increase their cost of living-it-big, then hell no. And why, Rob, should the workers have to make that sacrifice to save this supposedly doomed pension-system? Where's the "shortage" in a surplus? You are thinking like a business... but business are nothing without people... broaden your mind if at all possible.

Josh, you are a true loser. Now I'm a special interest, powerful, blah blah blah ? If you are going to quote, be more thorough about it.

By the way, if you hate your job so much (counselor my ass), and theirs is so great, then you have your solution don't you

Kevin, there really is no surplus. Let's use a little analogy. Imagine that you are married and have two children that will start college in 2 and 3 years respectively. As of right now you earn a enough to get by and expenditures roughly equal earnings. All of a sudden great aunt Edna dies and leaves you 25k. What do you do? Do you immediately plan to spend the money and give it away to your children or maybe go on vacation?? Or maybe you put it away in a bank account and save it for the upcoming tuition costs that you will incur once the kids start college.

The surplus is spent already. Just because you're not spending it right now doesn't mean that it hasn't already been allocated for use down the road.

That's why the MTA has already approved a budget for next year without waiting for the results of the labor agreement. It doesn't matter. The money is spent already! That's really all you have to understand!

"Seem to be under the notion that sacrificing more of your paycheck will actually mean the money is going to some worthier cause. If that worthier cause it's just to let the executives (and the politicians whose hand they grease) increase their cost of living-it-big, then hell no"

?? What the hell does that mean in English ??

"Josh, you are a true loser."
I'll take your resorting to insults to mean you give up and know you are wrong.

Rob, you say the surplus is already spent - which by definition makes absolutely no sense.
By the way, using your same analogy about the Aunt dying and leaving $25K - let's explore a 3rd and more relevant option comparative to the MTA situation.

Let's say that the house that my family and I live in is falling apart. I get that 25K and spend it on a yacht - meanwhile my roof is falling in on my family and I...
That's the way the MTA is looking at it. How can you allocate the money elsewhere without taking care of the base. That's like the owner of a small business not paying his employees, because he is spending their paychecks on his new ventures. How long do you think that will last?

And in case anyone is still doubting the value of the workers and their jobs - try $400,000,000 a day - according to all the papers.

The base that you are talking about is the Transit System, not the transit workers. The roof leaks, you fix it. The stations and tracks are woefully out of date and in need of repair, you fix it. That's why the surplus is already spent. Also, don't you realize that the second avenue line will mean more work for you guys for years to come.

You're saying that the surplus is already spent on repairs? You must never ride the train because the system hasn't improved that much at all - and I'm saying that as someone who was very familiar with it. There were always service problems and delays, not to mention excessive filth. If the surplus was being spent on that, then why hasnt all that changed? Either you're in a vacuum or you want everyone else to be, that argument is nothing more than a justification to make some wealthy people wealthier and keep some not so wealthy people - not so wealthy. As far as the 2nd avenue project being more work... I wont even repeat the statement you made above because it shows a great deal of ignorance.

The bottom line is that if the job was so great, and if the MTA was so fair, then 30,000 people would not be sacrificing so much money per day to go on strike.

Kevin, Rob is trying to explain to you that this money is better spent on improvements in the system, not by giving it to you. Paying you more will not make the system any better.

What I'm saying is that it is in error to believe that the money will go toward "improvement in the system" because history has shown. It is also arrogant to assume that the workers are not worthy of a certain level of respect for their job simply because you are dissastisfied with your job. It takes TWO to bargain so why is everyone blaming the workers for a failed "negotiation" ? The MTA had absolutely nothing to lose by bargaining (they raise the fare at will), they will do this regardless of the outcome of these "negotiations". Do you actually believe that workers wanted to strike - no doubt, during christmas, in the cold ? If you underestimate their intelligence, you show your lack thereof.

The MTA has always been a wizard at making money disappear, but it entered contract talks showing a surplus of $1 billion

Almost half - $450 million - is being spent on pensions and it was offered salary hikes of 10.5% over three years.

Health and pension costs threaten to bankrupt government just as much as they do auto manufacturers and airlines. MTA officials say those costs have tripled in recent years and that pension spending hit $453 million last year. Costs are expected to keep rising and are a large part of projected deficits in 2007 and 2008.

The agency is right to shift some of the burden to workers, just as many private companies have, with one difference: Benefits for current workers are untouched. The MTA offered options - later retirement, longer service, greater contributions - all applying only to future employees. Each time the union said no. One labor leader called that stance "an ideology."

Like most ideologies, it ignores reality and brings its own pain. Thanks to the Taylor Law, its followers face big penalties.

Ultimately, this is going to break the union and you guys are going to wind up getting a worse deal than what was on the table.

Kevin,

I agree that the extra money is unlikely to do much to actually improve the system. Therefore, we should reduce fairs and return that money to the people of this city.

" It takes TWO to bargain so why is everyone blaming the workers for a failed "negotiation" ? "
People are blaming the TWU for two things:
1. Demanding well above-market wages.
2. STRIKING. Negotiations could have continued without a strike.

Josh, did you pick up your maid today and drive her to her job cleaning shit that you don't want to clean? You need your shit cleaned and she needs the money. Where's your Christmas spirit, man?

Red_Neck_Repub,

It would be difficult for me to do that on my bike. However, you and your TWU friends should at the very least offer to pay her car service.

Rob -
I dont know that I believe the MTA's numbers on anything - for the aforementioned reasons. However, we all know for a fact that they cut workers at the expense of safety concerns which is probably atleast a partial explanation of their coming out with a surplus. With that type of attitude (and myself, as a rider, experience with the system), it's not without reason to believe that the workers are not treated well REGARDLESS of what we consider to be enough - therefore why can they not ask for something better?

Josh -
It will never ever EVER happen. I thought that perhaps the MTA would have reduced the fare a few years ago when I, myself, noticed there would be a surplus - low and behold - They actually raised it again! What makes you think that the fare will go down if they dont give the workers an increase? You must really know something the rest of us don't and that history hasn't shown us.

As far as "NEGOTIATION" - how much of a negotiation is it when the MTA (and parties concerned) kept throwing around the Taylor Law as a threat. The union called their bluff and no matter how much they lose, the city will lose more - and whoever uses the transit system will lose more also. The "negotiations continued" would have equated to a stall until after the holidays where a strike wouldn't have been much impact but the union chose to make a strategic move to hit the MTA in the pockets - what would you expect?

I have and always have had respect for other people because I will never walk in their shoes. Hopefully, I will never have to walk next to rats and an corroded steel with hundreds of thousands of volts running through it and who-knows-what dripping from the ceiling, to repair an electrical generator - because guess why I'm not qualified - are you?

Kevin,

"It will never ever EVER happen. I thought that perhaps the MTA would have reduced the fare"
Perhaps you haven't heard, but the MTA had proposed cutting fares for the holidays. While it might have made more sense to spread that out over the year, I would consider that a cut. As Rob has pointed out, if they use this money to pay down some of the pension costs, that is also reducing fares.

As far as negotiation, the Taylor law exists at the will of the populace to prevent exactly what has happened. This is a good thing.

"and whoever uses the transit system will lose more also." Certainly anyone on the way to a hospital will do very poorly. Congradulations on excellent thuggery.

"I'm not qualified - are you?" There is a range of jobs there that each demand a market wage. We are paying over that and need to reduce that.

But again, you fail to respond to the most basic issue, which is that for you to get more money it has to come from somewhere. From where do you expect it? You already make way more money than the median NYC worker. It is galling to take from them to line your pockets.

Josh,

Your bike! You don't have a car? What are you, Poor? I thought you were a high-paid executive type with that maid and all. She's your maid, pal. If you want her to clean your shit you should send a cab to get her. You're not a cheapskate, are you. Who's gonna clean your toilet? Do you work for the MTA? Is that why you're so pissed off? C'mon, tell the truth!

Red_Neck_Repub ,

How dense are you? My point is that SHE is missing her many jobs because of this strike. My kitchen is irrelevant.

How can you not understand this simple point?

I dont know why I bother, but oh well here it goes Josh:

The proposal was an empty promise and would have been a drop in the bucket for them. It was only done because they were expectly their usually millions during the holiday season and to spur shopping, etc... no big savings there. It wouldn't have made any difference whatsoever to the average new yorker.

Also, the employee "fair" practice act is... Well let's just say this, it didn't help here, did it? If it's the will of the *populous*, then how come 30,000 people disagreed with it?

As far as your comment on someone being on the way to the hospital, the MTA workers are not responsible for the well being of everyone in the city - if you had said "the government", then maybe I'd agree with you. Why should the workers bear the grunt of ny on their back? Where was Pataki and Bloomberg at the negotiations - what did they have to contribute besides threatening penalties to the workers? If anything, the city should have done something in their power to avoid putting the people through this - but they relied on the same thing you rely on - You hope that these 'lowly transit workers will just stay in their place' and continue to be complacent but it didnt work.

Frankly, I can't understand what position you are in but you seem to be talking more and more out of your own misery... This guy doesn't make that much, so such and such shouldn't make that much... I dont agree.

Do you think this would've happened if we had elected a mayor with a spine instead of bloomberg the cowardly, whining, etc...? No, because other mayors assumed their responsibility and didn't hide behind mottos like "We're new yorkers, we can handle it... "
We hired full time business people to do the job, people who have no touch of reality, and no people-skills and it's no wonder they dont know how to negotiate.

"The proposal was an empty promise"
Again, we don't know that. But then we should make sure excess funds are invested or refunded. Not given away to people already paid well above market.

" then how come 30,000 people disagreed with it?"
Maybe because they could rip off another 7m people? Again, there are plenty of people who disgree with the law and steal. Does that make it right? By your reasoning, any law is void if someone disagrees.

"he MTA workers are not responsible for the well being of everyone in the city - if you had said "the government"..."
No, the responsibilty lies squarely with those who walked off the job. Again, you try to shift the blame around. If all doctors scheduled to work on a given day don't show up and someone dies in the hospital, is that the government's fault?

" Where was Pataki and Bloomberg at the negotiations " I wonder that too. They should have been training replacements weeks ago.

"Frankly, I can't understand what position you are in..." My position is simple. Taking money from lower and middle income new yorkers to increase your above market income is wrong. You still fail to address this. You're not getting money from the government, but getting it from everyone in the city.

" if we had elected a mayor with a spine instead of bloomberg the cowardly, whining," If we had, he would have fired you all by now and replaced you with better people - for probably a lot less.

Ok, now I know you don't read. I dont work for the MTA. I'm pretty sure I make more than you but that's irrelevant. It is you, my friend, who is shifting the blame. You should be angry at the MTA's mismanagement of your fares, instead you buy into their argument and point your fingers in the same direction as them. If the MTA workers are so easily replacement, where are the replacements at? At 400,000,000 a day - wouldn't the geniuses at the MTA have had them on the job right now? Your above arguments were very hollow, so please take your time before you respond again.

"I'm pretty sure I make more than you but that's irrelevant. "
What is the point this comment? You should instead try to find some sort of logical basis to frame any of your "ideas".

"If the MTA workers are so easily replacement, where are the replacements at?"
Excellent question. The management should have had a replacement plan in effect.

"Your above arguments were very hollow" I wait for you to directly respond to one point. Please take your time.

I don't really think that this fight is getting anywhere productive right now.

While I concur with Amy on her blog post, I think its safe to say that while I disagree with Josh, he's coming from the right place but getting to the wrong answer. And this comments war is not headed in a useful direction.

Josh’s concern about low-income workers not being able to get to their jobs is valid. One of his comments specifically asked what his housekeeper was supposed to do to get to her jobs and points out that she may loose money because she can't get to them.

I'm not sure what beating up on him for that will accomplish. He’s concern is valid. His solution is not.

That said, I think Josh's idea that the negotiations are by nature a Zero Sum Game on the backs of the public, where either riders pay higher fares or workers get less pay is totally wrong. TWU workers winning does not mean the poor have to loose. The MTA will try to play it that way but that’s just cause they will refuse to trim their own fat and distribute resources in an equitable way (and creative accounting). The Zero Sum Game’s “starvation mentality” has been perpetuated by Conservatives with great success. They have used it to divide and concur since before time began (and no, I don't think Josh is conservative, he’s just buying their hype). In the starvation mentality worldview, there are winners and loosers and we’d better fight each other like hell to be on the winning side. WRONG.

Blaming people who make a living wage and have the things all workers deserve (including a union) for the fact that other workers make poverty wages is tunnel vision. We can all win. DMI recognizes how Conservatives have been very successful at playing the middle class against the poor (remember "welfare queens"? remember Giuliani?).
Truth is-- the middle class and the aspiring middle class (aka.the poor) have inextricably shared interests. (Check out our recent Immigration Policy Paper for one example).

I'll be doing a post from that perspective shortly.

Now stop name-calling darn it!

Elana,

A large public transit system is ran on fees provided by the general public which pays for it. Paying the workers more will require more funding. This funding comes directly from the public. It's very difficult intellectually to work around this truism.

If you attempt to come up with a scheme to fund the transit system by taxing or charging only certain higher income people, then you are essentially talking about a tax on them. Given the size of the transit system and the number of rich people in the city, you will be hard pressed to shift too much of the burden onto a small enough group. But, even if you did that, you are still doing that at the expense of other programs. You do have to make peace with the idea that you are increasing the wages of a group of workers who are paid well over the median at the detriment of other programs.

Elana, I actually am an economist at a mid-size bank in the city. There are few things that the majority of the economists agree upon. This is one of the exceptions - there is near unanimous agreement on this. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, of course. But, you do have to at least be honest with yourself and acknowledge that the data and the teams of people who study this around the world consider these views on par with witchcraft.

My gut feeling is that you do identify with and want to help the poor. Supporting the TWU does the exact opposite. You probably feel that if you only got your message to a few more people that you could convince them to see things your way and the world would change for the better. That's a noble idea. The difficulty that you will encounter is that you are pushing dated ideas that lack current intellectual support. You are then trapped in a Sysiphian struggle that is doomed to fail.

One thing that I have been bouncing around with a few friends of mine is launching our own truly progressive organization dedicated to helping the poor. There are exciting new ideas, like school vouchers, that have made a tremendous impact. There are other ideas for reforming healthcare that are exciting and bear lots of promise. If you'd like, if and when we get started, I can add you to our list. Lower income people in New York City have among the lowest rates of home ownership, along with ownership of other assets. These are all things that can be helped along by creative policy that also doesn't contradict the current research.

On a separate note, "Blaming people who make a living wage" is one comment that I take exception to. Perhaps you're not familiar with the current income distribution in New York City. Their pay package actually puts them in second quintile. These numbers are well above a living wage and to claim otherwise distorts the conversation.