Implications of the NYC Transit Strike

Great Debates
1

There is a transit strike looming in NYC.

There are 34,000 workers represented by the Union.
There have been two strikes previously in recent memory. 12 days in 1966 and 11 days in 1980.
The current average salary of an MTA employee is $ 44,000

Here is a link to the average salaries of other industries in NYC as presented by a Business Week survey in 2000. (2000 salaries are unreasonable to use as they have dropped, however it’s an useful gauge)
http://netscape.businessweek.com/smallbiz/salary/sb_nyork.htm

From the above NY Times article:

What are the far reaching implications of this? At first glance to me I would have to say my reaction is “Fuck those bastards” (the transit workers) but, that is obviously an unfair reaction since I have so little information.

Do the workers have a legitimate grievance? Salaries have been dropping in the private sector, and the city is 4 billion in debt. Wouldn’t it be reasonable to expect them not to take a raise for one year?

And then, is it reasonable for them to strike and cripple an already beleaguered city?

How “average” is the 44,000 average REALLY? Is it safe to assume that they are pretty much all making 30,000 or more?

My reaction is anger immediately, because this will hurt ME as a contractor. If I can’t make it to work, I don’t get paid at all. I certainly DO NOT make 44,000 a year. Is it worth the potential loss of 60,000 jobs and 100m+ per day loss to raise the wages of 34,000 workers 24% over three years, when the wage is being paid out by a fiscally broken city and there is already an 18% property tax increase coming our way?

My reaction is that they are completely unreasonable. Please, anyone with more information on the subject, correct me or confirm my suspicions. I am definitely not anti-labor. However, in this particular instance I really don’t see that the benefit outweighs the cost, or is even in league with the cost.

Erek

2

Both sides of the fence:

  1. It’s hard to live on $44K in the NY metro area. The bulk of MTA members raises came in the late 70’s (ironically after Ford told NYC to go to hell)

  2. The reason why the MTA is showing such a huge deficit (even with local, state & bridge toll subsudues) is because they’re not charging enough for fares. My (uncite-able) guess is Market value for a subway, commuter rail or bus ride should be double what they currently charge. There’s no $ to pay the MTA employees, because gov’t controls the pricing / revenue flow.

But,

If they decide to strike, even with the insane $1 million + $25,000 per worker fine that doubles each day (and never gets paid {see 1966 & 1980s strikes}), the Taylor Law should be amended to:

  1. Mandate arbitration
  2. Allow dismissal of all illegally striking workers, ala Reagan & the ATC union.
3

Hmm, well I live in NYC and I know that $ 44,000 is not hard to live on, unless you are the sole wage earner. I am my sole wage earner, I earn about half that, and I still live here, but I am of course single. It’s about 10,000 above the average salary here. And well, the bottom of a recession might not be the best time to start with your grievances. There are enough people out of work, that we don’t need MORE competition.

Erek

4

The confluence of the city’s economic problems and the timing of the contract is unfortunate, but it’s a 3 year contract, and the union shouldn’t give too much up over a (hopefully) temporary situation.

My guess is that there will be a lot of hootin’ and hollerin’, some brinksmanship, maybe some service slowdowns, but no general strike.

5

Well, let’s hope you’re right. I’ll do fine, but the overarching implications of the strike worry me.

Erek

6

I agree that the timing is unfortunate. I wonder why they can’t try a few shots of the bow first? e.g. first, a one-hour strike. Then a six hour strike. Then a full day. etc.