The MTA declares a "Formal Impass" basically meaning that what is on the table (on their end) is it.....how is that "bargining in good faith"?
http://abclocal.go.com/wabc/story?secti ... id=3744460
So the MTA is stomping its feet, just like the union did, now who's to blame? If the MTA cared for its passengers, and the economy and the daily operation of NYC, they wouldn't have declared a formal impass, and been discussing things on teh table and been realistic in its demands - maybe the union wasn't wrong with the MTA not bargining in good faith.....why should they, they have the city, state, and SOME of the public on their side. (the percentage of those in sound bytes who are against the strike and the union is not a realistic number) Who do the workers and TWU have on their side? Just about every ohter Union in the country, and most people who work with any kind of collective bargining agreement. (although many won't admit it, im sure)
Thats not to say that the Union couldn't and shouldn't be more flexible either, BUT, the MTA has the entire city and state on its side, and flexing its muscles, while the Union and its workers have each other, thats it.
If thats not strongarming, i dunno what is........
This is a MAJOR point in the history of Unions in America. This is really going to be a make or break. THE BIGGER PICTURE HERE, affects EVERYONE in this WHOLE country, not just those users who are inconvienced in the NYC area.
the MTA is trying to start a slippery slope of changing work rules for people who aren't hired yet. Thats a VERY dangerous proposition. If successful, companies and unions will now start banging heads about this concept, and it will effect every one here, in one shape or another, either with new careers in the future, or their children's jobs and careers. Just like the health care payments and co-payments and pension reductions that people are experiencing today, when individual contracts are negotiated (one on one) or with Collective Bargining Agreements for tens, hundreds, or thousands of workers.
If that slippery slope of giving away healthcare benefits wasn't started years back, it wouldn't be an issue now, and maybe the runaway healthcare costs by greedy docs and medical facilities and insurance companies would be taken up and solved by the Gov't, but now, why - let them do it, they raise teh rates, and just make the workers pay more, don't matter to the company (what ever company or industry) those who have the influence with the gov't, not the "little people". Its a blanket excuse for ALL the companies (not just mass transit companies) to simply start to pass on some of the costs that were formally part of the employee's pay package, to the employee themself, instead of focusing on the cost, and getting the gov't involved, and finding the root of the problem.
Getting back on topic, don't get me wrong, Mr. Toussant (how ever you spell it or say it) does seem to be slightly out of his mind, and although I think they should have negotiated longer, and I also think his calling of strikes every three years has severely hurt him and his union's standing with many people, and maybe his "relationship" with the MTA - but the MTA's sole job is to get as much as they can out of the worker (legally and illegally) while the Union's sole purpose is to get as much as it can out of the company for its workers......the Companies have been getting the upper hand for way too long, its time for the workers to actually try to stay at the same level they were, and maybe actually better themselves every time a contract expires.
Sorry this is so long, and im sure those who know me, konw im not one to get everything into a few lines. But we all need to look at things in a bigger picture - In my opinion, the fight the TWU is currently fighting has the potential to be as significant as getting a 40 hour workweek and retirement benefits in teh first place, decades ago.