Who excluded elected officers?

Roger Toussaint excluded elected officers in the 2002 contract except for his chosen ones who followed him blindly - consultants and attorneys chosen by Toussaint. Maybe now Toussaint owes an explanation on why he did not allow elected officers to hammer out their department agreements?

A major folly of Roger Toussaint agreeing to the merger of MaBSTOA and TA Surface was disastrous giving a win to the MTA on a gold platter. The first year wage freeze TWU Local 100 members received a $1000 bonus instead of a raise which was a wrong decision by Roger Toussaint.

On health insurance coverage first he agreed to an increased medical co-pay for basic benefits, second he accepted that members would pay for enhanced medical benefits, and third he gave up union representation in the Health Benefit Trust - what a genius. Roger Toussaint did not prepare the membership to view bargaining as part of an ongoing struggle he failed to involve the membership so his militancy was rhetorical and posturing.

Based on the above Roger Toussaint is fatally flawed since he now goes around ‘bad mouthing’ John Samuelsen president of TWU Local 100. Did Tousaint forget all of the above? Who made those terrible agreements? So who is specifically to blame for letting this happen?

There is no question that the membership might have believed that it was justified if we really witnessed a remarkable improvement in their welfare. However now they are paying for all those terrible decisions. What we want to know is whether this deception was intentional. Our suspicion is that it had to be. Roger Toussaint carries too much baggage - he is part of the problem - not the solution.

Unfair labor practice?

Since our employer MTA has been stalling the contract negotiations - it is clear they are violating Section 8(a)(5) for bargaining in bad faith. ‘Working on labor relations. He said the MTA has “the worst labor management.” Charles G. Moerdler - MTA board member.’

It is not a secret MTA has terrible labor relation which we know first hand. TWU Local 100 has demanded a fair contract with cost of living adjustment which is reasonable. However our employer’s hardball tactics that have been deployed so far must be met equally by the following.

First prepare the members for a walk out. Second start selecting picket captain now. Third start classes now at an accelerated speed for the picket captain. Forth prepare the members on where to head in the event of walk out. Fifth coordinate with other local unions to honor TWU Local 100 walk out. Sixth plans must be developed on how to keep scabs from reporting to work. Seventh have plans on what to do if the MTA tries to run limited service with scabs and supervisors. Eight every member must be signed for walk out related duties.

If Joseph Lhota believes that TWU Local 100 will be asleep at the switch then he should think again. If he desires an adversarial relationship then so be it. We would like to remind him TWU Local 100 members entered this employment relationship like any other employee around the nation to obtain as high a wage or salary income as possible. That objective is not complex to understand - if Joseph Lhota desires conflict we will give him one - he has to provide an incentive for cooperation which we have not seen yet. If he thinks TWU Local 100 members are a commodity that should be purchased as cheaply as possible and used only as management desires then we say no.

We are familiar with the poor management - we remember the lay off of 2010 and the ramped up disciplinary actions that have been deployed against TWU Local 100 members. Especially with the authoritarian approach by the management that allows no room for TWU Local 100 members participation in management decisions. If Joseph Lhota thinks power resides on one side with the attitude ‘us’ against ‘them’ that we the members of TWU Local 100 should lose - we say no to that attitude.

It is obvious Joseph Lhota does not believe in enhancing this employment relationship - by entreating TWU Local 100 members as equal partners who pursue a common goal, which is providing a reliable mass transportation service to New Yorkers.

TWU Local 100 members shakedown

Everybody is talking about helping the financially squeezed middle class. But around here you're more likely to see evidence that MTA is squeezing TWU Local 100 members even harder to make up its own cash shortfall (due to white collar mismanagement).

The MTA in its service reduction of 2010 drastically scaled services to New Yorkers and it only hurt New Yorkers in their reliance of their premier mass transportation system. Now imagine that you don't live in New york City, don't have kids and you don't eat out. Still the economy has yet to force you to sell your car, you'll be paying more for driving too. Mayor Bloomberg wants to increase the Muni Meters price. Further the E-Z pass rates just went up.

If you have tighten your belt enough to withstand those charges and you’ve made it from the Muni Meter to where you want to go, then drive carefully. If you end up in an accident where you require medical attention then you might want to check your wallet before calling for help. The City now plans to charge injured drivers $490 for an emergency response from the fire department, $415 for a car fire without injury and $365 for an accident that does not result in injury. So you can expect more hit and runs, too.

But if you are a member of TWU Local 100 those numbers drain your wallet fast. A fair contract for TWU Local 100 members is a must, at least with the ‘crash tax’ Mayor Michael Bloomberg is being honest about his intentions however we do not have to like that. MTA should not try to delude TWU Local 100 members into thinking that no wage raise and cost of living adjustment are not warranted. MTA must know those numbers don't lie and they can ask Mayor Bloomberg about that. 

Should we walk if talks don’t lead to contract?

First - thousands of office cleaners and commercial building workers with the 32BJ Service Employees International Union voted to allow their bargaining committee to call a strike. That strike could have involved about 22,000 workers if there was a failure to reach a new contract by 12:01 a.m. on January 1, 2012 - CBS Local - Dec 1, 2011. 

Second - workers at four Macy's stores in the New York City area have voted unanimously to authorize their union executive board to declare a strike if negotiations fail to produce a new contract by 11:59 p.m. Wednesday - Local 1-S - Crains New York Jun 13, 2011.

Third - Verizon Workers Vote to Authorize Strike - NY Times Jul 28, 2011. Forth - the drivers and mechanics of Westchester's ... of Transit Workers Union Local 100 voted Sunday to authorize a strike - Feb 26, 2012 NEW YORK (AP)

Is it time to look at all the options on the table since all workers within New York City have pointed repeatedly to walk out in the event that there is no contract - we are no different than the rest of the blue collar employees in New York City.

One thing that might help is if we start now to be more vocal about the stalled contract and how MTA does not want to agree to a fair contract under Joseph Lhota. It is time for us to begin TWU Local 100 campaign. His stance on TWU Local 100 members may be part of a negotiating tactic with the state, which is also slashing funding for MTA, but when you look at the whole picture, a more sinister and disheartening motivation emerges.

Stop blocking a wage raise

A growing number of people Occupying Wall Street are raising awareness about the inherent unfairness of corporate welfare - as we know MTA is a Public Authority that likes to act like a private corporate.

How can we bail out banks and give tax breaks to oil companies without also helping regular blue collar employees who are suffering? Especially for TWU Local 100 members where that question has been the subject of a struggle that began with Michael J Quill before encampments popped up in Zuccotti Park. Now it is once again coming to a head at MTA.

There is no question that there are companies that are receiving millions of dollars in subsidies for some form or other in the name of transportation. Joseph Lhota would like you to believe the capitalism is about putting your hand out and making everything you can for yourself!

The self described 99 percent who were occupying Zuccotti Park cited a statistic that 1 percent of the country controls more than 40 percent of the nation’s wealth. Little of that money has found its way to our TWU Local 100 members where almost half are on the poverty line. It is clear MTA needs to rehire the laid off workers desperately who need to be put back to work, since our fellow co workers continue to slip into poverty.

As the calls for a reassessment of this country's values grows louder on Wall Street, the least the MTA - CEO, Joseph Lhota - can do is to rehire the laid off members of TWU Local 100 since that is a moderate call for fairness.

Taking a nice long gaze into where TWU Local 100 stands

We are asking - and trying to answer - a question that’s been on the minds of TWU Local 100 members which is what makes TWU Local 100 members? Many of you are aware we are boisterous when we get together and many come with complaints that we are being moved out of our New York City. Kicking and screaming, we demand to be put back in our rightful New York City.

When for example, some of us live on both sides of the tracks, the postman is unhappy because he knows he will be carrying the extra burden of letters to that member. However we are faced with the 2012 contract fight against our employer MTA who are not intending to grant a fair contract to the TWU Local 100 members. 

Many of you are aware the contract negotiations have been stalled since the expiration of the contract on January 15, 2012. There are clearly certain areas in which this contract can be adopted - we definitely say increase in wages for the TWU Local 100 members is a must.

Since the MTA argument is opposing the wage increase - one has to wonder why MTA wants to aid big corporations, but thinks it’s alright for TWU Local 100 members who work for a living to have to scrounge for their livelihood? TWU Local 100 members work everyday only to bring home pennies.

We know the MTA are not merchants. If you get onto MTA website there are fantastic services that they don’t even promote - if you are in bus, train, subway station, bus depot or train barn you don't see things promoted. At least New York City can promote Icahn Stadium, Citi Field or Joe DiMaggio Highway.

We heard from the former CEO and chair Jay H Walder who has said that service is not sustainable in part because of the lack of financial soundness, in which he demanded that TWU Local 100 members make payments towards its future health benefits (we don't know for how long). He also claimed that those health benefit payments were costing the MTA and that they are having a considerable impact on the MTA - which should be taken with a grain of salt (he omitted the mismanagement by the white collar). If MTA wants to stay profitable it should focus on marketing more than the finances.

John Samuelsen president of TWU Local 100 should continue to do whatever it takes to get a fair contract for the TWU Local 100. Members should view anyone who is against the fair contract or fails to stand along with John Samuelsen - who thinks it is fair that we should get a fair contract which should be remembered.

Where they were?

As the MTA budget scenario was being painted by the former MTA CEO and Chairman Jay H Walder in early 2010, there just wasn’t enough money to go around. Then he went on with the choices the MTA faces which are frankly impossible to make. He went on that even if he were King Solomon, every possible portioning out of the budget will still leave MTA in financial dire straits. It is after all a zero-sum game - he was a good salesman - he truly sold that vision to New York City.

As many of you are aware TWU Local 100 was hit hard with lay offs of over 1000 members some members are still out and have not been rehired, some who were unfortunate passed away waiting to be recalled. As we know many of our fellow members  are on their own, they are not wealthy. They are faced with financial, health and other daily dilemmas. None of them planned that they would be laid off we believe many of them were thinking they would be working.

We know many of our fellow members who are still laid off and who are doing so on little more than handouts since their bank accounts depleted long ago. That is where TWU Local 100 members did much more with the Solidarity Fund to provide for our fellow co workers with a helping hand in facing their medical bills - it was important to our fellow co workers.

Roger Toussaint the former president of TWU Local 100 who was the current director of strategy and planning in the TWU International what did he do to try to help avert the layoff of 2010? Did he at least offer any help? Definitely he has forgotten our laid off co workers. Those who were in his administration did nothing as well. They just let it happen and stood idle by while this happened that is their form of solidarity - one wonders why.

That is their record - given they may have some explanation to do. Imagine choosing between these - this situation must not continue. It cannot continue our fellow co workers who are laid off have no financial wiggle room in their daily lives. Along with certain other fixed costs in their expenditures. We know in our hearts that our fellow laid off workers deserve to be rehired back, it has been a long wait.

Which is better?

Before the airline industry was deregulated the Airline Pilots Association (ALPA) was generally regarded as one of the most successful unions in raising the wages of its members. The International Ladies Garment Worker’s Union (ILGWU) on the other hand has had only limited success in raising wages. After deregulation of the airline industry over 40 new airlines began business - was this good for the Airline Pilot Association (ALPA)?

If human beings could be bought and sold like commodities such as wheat how would it change the operation of the labor market? Would the supply of labor become more or less sensitive to the work rules or working conditions? Would employers be able to automatically police themselves? Hint: a major US electronic company that has its overseas factory workers work under harsh working conditions, where conditions are so bad, it’s not uncommon for workers to permanently lose the use of their hands for the rest of their lives. This condition could be easily prevented if the workers were rotated through different positions in the factory, but they are not. Why - because there are no labor laws in that country to protect labor.

Those above two theories lead to one conclusion which is that even when there are laws that are supposed to protect the labor and the capital, politicians find a loop hole to wither that protection just as overseas. However in the overseas case their approach is more naked.

In the long run the demand for labor

Productivity growth and employment in both agriculture as well as the telephone industries are increasing. The relationship between productivity growth and labor demand is clear by the different patterns of employment change in those two industries. Those industries have experienced an overwhelming revolution in the technology of production in the past 20 years.

For example a long distance telephone call was handled with mechanical switching equipment, long distance operators and cable transmission systems but now we can make the same long distance call with direct dialing equipment and satellites. We can also remember facsimile machines and how bulky and noisy they were which are on their way out being replaced by emails. 

A similar transformation has taken place in agriculture with the introduction of high yielding hybrid grains, modern tilling and harvesting machinery and computerized egg, fish and cattle production.

We know many of you in TWU Local 100 may say so what does that have to do with us - we are in the transportation industry which has no relation with agriculture and telephone industries. What we desire to point out is that it is the same principle applied across the board regardless of the industry. What we desire to point out to Joseph Lhota is that the technology in the transportation industry has constraints.

The process of technological change and capital/labor substitution in both industries resulted in dramatic increase in labor productivity - either way the output increased courtesy of labor. That productivity growth also leads to increase in employment in the industries. Here is the problem in our view about MTA - there are still outstanding laid off members who are not hired back - we wonder why.

As we know there is overcrowding and we are also aware that the crime tide is changing especially in the stations that do not have station agents. Here is the clear nexus, the absence of the station agents gave the uptick in crime. 

The telephone industry also offers clear example of the skill twist that technological change imparts to labor demand. A recent study of a large telephone company, for example found that technological change reduced the demand for labor in inverse relation to the skill level of the occupation - the least skilled category - telephone operators suffered a decline in employment while more highly skilled labor increased.

Joseph Lhota should work energetically to rehire the laid off station agents.

Technology cannot substitute station agents

For most goods the technology of production allows at least some room for choice in the  exact proportion of capital and labor that is used in production. In some cases however technology is such that capital and labor must be used in strict proportion to each other allowing one and only one capital/labor ratio in production. Examples include airplanes which require a fixed crew size or a bus, or train, or station booth which all require a fixed number of labor.

We are also aware of the MTA’s goal of substitution of the station agents with technology however we know there are constraints. We will use an excellent example between the difference in the ease of substitution in both capital and labor. MTA operates almost like a firm that wants to maximize profits. The principle of a private firm is that a firm will never pay workers a wage that is higher than the minimum necessary to attract a sufficient supply of labor since doing so would raise labor costs and reduce profits. This motivation to maximize profit is reinforced by the quest of gain on the part of the owners of the firm, therefore one wonders why the current management operates in this fashion. 

Since capital and labor are required in fixed proportions, it is impossible to produce a given level of output with more of one but less of the other. Second if one factor is held in constant, adding more of the other will not increase output at all, maybe Joseph Lhota is aware of those principles. There are less station agents thus it is impossible to produce at given level. We recommend rehiring the laid off station agents to bring the production at the given level.

Roger Toussaint a bad idea

In a surprisingly serious interview with the Wall Street Journal on March 13, 2012 under ‘Clash at Transit Union by Ted Mann’ Roger Toussaint talked about his disappointment with President of TWU Local 100 John Samuelsen and with the Executive Board.

Here are some of Mr. Toussaint’s comments: 1) ‘He previously ruled out a power grab, including in an open letter to the union's executive board in January’  2) ‘It's about getting it from them’ 3) ‘including appearing at a recent meeting of the executive board’ - imagine George W Bush hanging outside of the US Congress it makes no sense. Those we would imagine are made up pejoratives.

In regard to Roger Toussaint’s spotty record, he can blame John Samuelsen all he wants but he cannot run away from his spotty record. He has to answer for it - he can look at the man in the mirror who gave away ‘No Layoff Clause’. Until now he has not come clean with an explanation to the membership which deserve an explanation. He had the ability to deny in giving the MTA ‘No Lay off Clause’ but he did not rather he gave it away freely - why.

Who gave away Union Hall (80 West End Avenue) - it should have been for thirty million more than he received. Until now he has not come clean with an explanation to the membership who deserve an explanation - isn’t that the truth, Mr. Roger Toussaint? Can you deny it?

Who gave away Christmas contract deadline? We are not sure what he truly thinks is the right path for the current contract negotiations, other than that he governed by fear. As president he kept everyone around him who blindly obeyed him but tossed away any who questioned him.

Let us give you now our personal opinion of Roger Toussaint - we believe Roger Toussaint does not represent membership interests no matter how you look at him. He has betrayed membership interests.

At this particular point in time, Roger Toussaint has not yet been proven to be corrupt (we’ll see how the 80 West End Avenue scandal plays out however in the minds of the membership it is clear) but he certainly has proven to be inexperienced, insincere, insolent and above all incompetent.  

Roger Toussaint unfortunately for TWU Local 100 is in over his head. He is not up to the job and is even more of a catastrophe than the inept George Armstrong Custer who was at Little Big Horn - based on his spotty record Roger Toussaint is a bad idea!

How many TWU Local 100 members are injured while on duty? Who endorsed this politician?

S1245-2011: Enacts the "state workforce injury reduction act" sponsored by ADDABBO Committee: CIVIL SERVICE AND PENSIONS

PURPOSE OF BILL:

To ensure that agencies seriously examine injuries to their employees and formulate ways to prevent similar injuries from occurring in the future.

Labor demand and productivity

The best level of employment for a firm is contingent on a number of factors such as the cost of labor for the productivity of the work force, the level of production and the price the firm can charge for its product. The labor and productivity forces the employer’s decision whether it is simple or complicated based on the real world.

The standard model of labor demand in economics is based on the theory of demand. Before we can master the economics theory of demand - we believe every firm’s first goal is to maximize dollar profits. The second is production which is based on capital and labor to produce the product. Third the firm must be competitive by having competitive product and labor markets. The importance which the firm relies on is those of both the price the firm can get for its products and the wage rate it has to pay for labor. Both are unaffected by changes in its individual production and hiring decisions controlling those costs. The only cost of labor has been the main goal of many firms - MTA in our current contract negotiations has revealed that it is interested in controlling the cost of labor. We in TWU Local 100 are seeking a fair contract with the Cost Of Living Allowance clause.

How many workers should a firm hire? Economic theory suggests a simple answer - hire additional workers as long as each one adds even so much as dollar ($1) of extra profit to the firm. This solution is so simple and it is so basic as long as the benefits exceed the cost from that activity which would be favorable to the firm management. It is also that the firm wants to maximize profits (profits are the difference between revenue and cost) which determine increase in revenue from hiring one more worker and compare it with the increase in labor cost of that last worker. As long as additional workers bring in more revenue than the cost of hiring them the firm adds to its profit by increasing employment. If the last worker added by the firm brings revenue no greater than the labor cost, hiring stops due to the fact that the profits will be at a maximum - these principles are more favored in private sector. Since MTA is a public agency we in TWU Local 100 do not agree with that approach. However, current CEO Joseph Lhota appears to be utilizing those above principles. We in TWU Local 100 are seeking a fair contract with no lay off clause.

Pattern of capital versus labor substitution

A business firm can use many different combinations of capital and labor in producing its product. Which combination will be chosen? This is a tricky question which we will try to address or attempt to answer. However before we can start to develop this theory it is important first to gain a better perspective of the facts that need to be addressed.

Capital/labor ratio measures the dollar amount of capital (plant and equipment) used in production relative to each employee hour of labor. The capital/labor ratio varies tremendously among industries. Petroleum refining and communications for example are highly capital intensive, while apparel and construction are quite labor intensive. One important reason for this difference is the technology of production. The current state of technology in petroleum refining requires it to be produced with large amounts of capital in the form of oil crackers and distillers. The production of a woman’s dress on the other hand requires large amounts of hand labor for cutting, stitching and fitting.

While technology places important constraints on the proportions of capital and labor used in production, it would be a mistake to conclude that a firm has no choice in this matter. In general quite the opposite is true. This is most starkly revealed by comparing how particular products are made in the United States relative to other countries, particularly developing countries where the cost of labor is much lower. Whether in a capital intensive industry such as petroleum refining or a labor industry such as apparel, producers in less developed countries adapt to the high costs of capital and low price of labor by conserving on the use of machinery and utilizing additional labor. Thus on a Chinese construction site bricks and dirt are carried by hand or pushcart, while in United States bulldozers and forklift trucks do the same tasks. Likewise cars produced in the United States are welded by robots, while cars produced in Mexico are welded by humans.

Since technology generally affords a firm a ‘menu of choice’ as to the proportion of capital and labor it uses, the exact proportion chosen will be significantly influenced by the relative prices of these two inputs. Over time wages in the United States have not seen significant rise than the cost of capital, causing firms to substitute capital for labor. This shift is clearly demonstrated in mining where the amount of capital per employee hour has receded.

This discussion points out two central issues that labor demand must address - first, what determines at a point in time the best mix of capital and labor in production and second how does this favorable mix of capital and labor change over times as wages and cost of capital change? What we know of MTA in this contract negotiation has embarked on the assault of our wages and our benefits in their desire to emulate the developing countries wages. However MTA put its head in the sand by ignoring the rising prices currently in New York. Maybe the MTA should be reminded of what the cost of Wonder Bread plus tax is.

Employment pattern

The demand for blue collar employees is reflected in the level of employment MTA and its sub agencies. One questions jumps at you especially since we are a service producing industry (transportation) what is the annual levels of employment in the entire economy for New York State?

Several aspects of employment pattern at the MTA are particularly note worthy. The first is the trend over time in the total level of employment in the New York State economy. To keep unemployment from rising, the New York State economy must generate new jobs each year - thus MTA must create jobs, both because of the entrance of additional people into the labor force and because productivity growth allows MTA to produce the same level of output with less labor. How has New York State economy has done? Since the election of Governor Andrew M. Cuomo and assuming office January 1, 2011 employment growth has been quite remarkable, with the total number of jobs having increased in the public sector however not in the private sector obviously he has the control over the public sector not in the private sector so the net job gain of New York State is almost net zero.

Maybe Governor Andrew M Cuomo he should look closer the relative decline of agriculture and the goods-producing industries which is a major source of jobs in the New york State economy. Since 49 percent of jobs were in agriculture or industries that produced physical goods of some type. Since his assuming the governorship however employment in agriculture is almost non existence, while employment in the goods producing industries is not in double digits. This performance stands out in stark contrast with public sector employment in New York State, Executive, Judicial, Legislative, Cities, Public Authorities, Counties, Towns, Villages, Schools and Special districts this public service producing industries grew by over 250 percent however in the private sector there is no new jobs - however Governor Andrew M Cuomo cannot continue using this public sector employment that has increased tremendously to demonstrate the growth in New York State economy while there is no growth in private sector.

Now about that Lawsuit.......

There are a lot of things about this lawsuit that just plain stinks;

First off, when did it become o.k. that a member should sue his own Union? Did this lawsuit happen because Ainsley Stewart succeeded in suing Local 100 for wages he was not paid in the Toussaint administration? My guess is that the answer is yes. If not “because” then certainly inspired by. 

Secondly does this crew who sued about the new Union Hall realize that there is a contract fight going on? That maybe right now this kind of thing is not exactly what the Union, all 38,000 of us need?  It does not surprise me because this crew has cared more about politics from the beginning. When members got laid-off they stood by and did nothing. When other crises came to Local 100 they did nothing too.  No wait, they did do something, they kept attacking the President that is all they did.

From what has been told to me, the Judge in this case outlined to the Landers side each and every possible reason for an injunction and explained how their lawsuit did not even come close, on any point.

You would think a reasonable person, after they had this explained to them would understand, and admit they lost a badly thought out lawsuit. Maybe admit that Samuelsen was right. But not these guys, they have articles all over their website saying how the members were denied democracy by the Federal Court.

Think about just how crazy that is….these are the guys who sued. These are the guys who said they could only get justice in the Federal court because the Executive Board is compromised by Samuelsens’ yes people. These are the guys who said Samuelsen was killing democracy inside Local 100 and the Federal Court would prove that…..NOW THEY LOSE IN FEDERAL COURT AND NOW FEDERAL COURT IS NO GOOD TOO.

Kind of sounds like the kid in class who says: my dog ate my homework, or I failed because the teacher doesn’t like me. They have zero credibility in my eyes.

Landers himself writes an article about the lawsuit that says,” But anytime you put your fate in the hands of a judge, it is a crapshoot.” (1)

Excuse me; you brought the lawsuit into Federal Court. Are you saying the Federal Court of the United States of America is a crapshoot? I guarantee that if Landers would have won this lawsuit he would be waving the flag and signing God Bless America, instead of casting doubts on US Federal Court.

Landers also says,” Our union president spent at least $20,000 of our dues dollars in legal fees…”(2) did Landers  forget HE was the one who originated the lawsuit? Not Samuelsen.  The President was just coming off surgery, does Landers think he wanted to be anywhere near a courtroom or home recuperating?

Just how stupid does Landers think the members are? This has gotten to the point of ridiculous. YOU sue someone and they are wrong to bring in lawyers to defend themselves?

It was Not John Samuelsen who wasted $20,000 dollars of dues money on legal fees; it was John Landers and his two handlers: Creegan and Izzy who did that. Blame them.

Listen to what the Editor of the site writes;   “Wait a second, I have a thought! The Federal Courthouse in todays proceedings is just down the street from Local 100's new Condo! Is it fair to assume that someone might take into consideration the money that could potentially be pumped into the downtown Brooklyn area by a large Transit Union such as Local 100? Could today's decision be based on pure finacially motivated politics?” (3)

Surely, if this twisted logic does not prove the inmates have taken over the asylum than what else would? Maybe a funny hat and a little dance? Someone saying they are Napoleon?  I have heard better logic from sleep deprived homeless people on platform benches than from these guys.

So you didn’t lose the lawsuit because it had no merit but because of real estate values? That statement alone proves these guys are clueless and totally disingenuous. So now these guys are accusing the Federal Court of conspiracy?

All along one of the main arguments that we should buy a Union Hall in downtown Brooklyn is that in the location of 195 Montague Street, the selling price we get now will not be available in the near future. Why? Because of climbing real estate values. Now even the critics of the building sale seem to agree about this.

So instead of closing the deal now, (and saving the members money) these geniuses want to delay the deal so the members end up paying more? And one of these guys wants to be President of Local 100? Yeah, right.

If I may add, this whole lawsuit thing is a replay of the E Board trial that resulted in the removal of Israel Rivera jr. in 2010. If you remember Creegan defended Izzy and did a terrible job, (offered little or no defense) that Izzy was removed from his elected office and suspended for 3 years. Ceegan and Izzy blamed a compromised E Board. (even though every vote was something like 35-1 against Izzy).

Now the same crew loses again, this time in Federal Court and what is their angle?                                       It was NOT Fair!!!! The Court was rigged!!!! Crapshoot!!!! Real Estate values!!!!!

These are the guys you want running your Union? You got to be kidding.

The saddest thing about this lawsuit is IMHO John Landers was put up to do this by his two handlers. Those two guys put Landers out in the line of fire because they did not want to be part of a losing law suit against Local 100 because they both aspire to political office inside Local 100. (Thankfully one of them is suspended for 3 years and can’t run).

Their thinking was if this lawsuit turns out to be a stinker (and boy did it ever stink) then Landers takes the fall not them. Because Landers insists that he is not running for office in TWU. (let’s see) Would it be too sarcastic to say this is a perfect example of their leadership skills? Throw their followers under the bus while they remain clean? Oh Boy.

All in all, this is a sad situation. What we have are two officers (one current, one former) who will do and say anything (true or not true) to make the current  Administration look bad and themselves look good. Instead of working for their members and making a name for themselves that way, the right way, these two gems have decided to do it through lies and deceit. What a shame. The best thing to do is to ignore them; so far that is what they deserve.

Many of the readers of this blog probably are wondering why I am posting on it and not Manhattanville. Well I felt that this issue was one that needed some comment. So for better or worse, I did. I would like to thank Manhattanville for this opportunity.  Much Thanks. I know I will probably be attacked for my words, but please remember one thing, the truth has a certain unmistakable ring to it, read what I wrote and then read what they write and decide which rings truer.

by Paulp521

(1), (2), and (3) all taken from twubus.com

Failed lawsuit of train conductor John T Landers V John E Samuelsen, Earl Phillips, Benita Johnson

John Edwards

Monopsony in baseball

The most important prediction of the monopsony model is that the wage rate paid to the blue collar employees will be lower than if the labor market were competitive. One example that offers striking support for this prediction is the dramatic increase in player salaries in baseball following the introduction of the free agent system.

Prior to the free agent system, a baseball player was a ‘free agent’ that could negotiate with any club until he signed his first contract with a major league team or its minor league affiliate. Once signed all baseball contracts contained a renewal or ‘reserve’  clause stipulating that thereafter the player’s services were the sole property of that club for his entire career in baseball unless the club decided to sell or trade his contract. That reserve clause effectively turned the market for individual players into a monopsony by preventing them from negotiating with any other club but their own.

An Arbitrator struck down that reserve clause on December 23, 1975 by ruling on grievance brought by the Major league Baseball Players Association (MLBPA) under the new agreement negotiated by MLBPA and the owners. That stated that players were no longer permanently tied to a club or team. The effect of that agreement was to turn what has been a monopsony into a competitive market.

Some studies indicated that players salaries rose - that is true for the average players as predicted by those studies.

Other studies indicated that the monopsony model is that the blue collar employees are paid less than their marginal revenue of what they produce in a competitive market. Those same studies found clear evidence of their prediction, even with the rise of salary the majority of the players were paid below average.

Fare evasion

As per State Senator Charles J Fuschillo, Jr legislation (S5870) ‘a report issued by the MTA’s subway division noted that 18.5 million people entered the New York City subway system without paying in 2009, an average of over 50,000 a day. These fare evasions cost the MTA over $31 million in revenue’.

It is strange that the MTA did not release the figures on fare evasion on the New York City bus system - what a poor management. It is obvious that fare evasion is more prevalent on the buses side than on the subway side however there are no figures. One wonders why.

We now learn that many state railway companies world wide are tackling fare evasion seriously. Indonesians means of tackling fare evasion is very interesting they are installing barricades called Goal Bola-bolas (‘Goal Balls’) along its lines to dissuade riders from train surfing—riding on the roof of the car rather than in it. The Australians are relying on the new smart card system on Sydney's CityRail transit network to help battle fare evasion. While in China the fare evaders are more sophisticated using fake cards which they make on their own. In England they are relying on utilizing the smart card - smart card industry will soon be able to offer transport operators a range of contact-less technologies derived from the payments and mobile phone industries that will be much cheaper than the transport-specific technologies that have been available to date.

There is no question that fare evasion creates budget constrains however when we see how others are tackling this issue. We note that Joseph Lhota with his white collar buddies are just sitting idle - imagine if those funds were collected then the MTA financial standing would be sound.

We can just imagine the former CEO of MTA Jay H Walder in his second time around where he may claim that he has gained expertise in tackling fare evasion in Hong Kong while Joseph Lhota has not. We wonder what Joseph Lhota would claim - I used to be over zealous in tackling ‘quality of life’ during ‘Guiliani time’ now I am a liberal however I am tough on those blue collar members of TWU Local 100.

Rats

Maybe the management is not aware that there are rats and vermin in the NYCTA whether it be the subway stations, bus depots or other locations. Maybe they need the benefit of doubt.

Any reasonable person once aware of the rats would take appropriate action to minimize the number of rats through extermination as well as pest control at a full time pace. They may deploy tactics that focus on poisoning or trapping, blocking the rats access points with coordinated efforts and more frequent cleaning to remove food debris.

Definitely that reasonable person would intensify his efforts till the rats numbers declined drastically to fewer sightings. Now we can only guess what the number of calls to 511 or 311 were the reported concerns seeing rats daily in the subway? Can we rely on the accuracy from the NYCTA on the number of calls? Or can those numbers be verified.

We would recommend to the management that they should consider employing hypoallergenic cats since it is a known fact that they catch and kill rats at an average of sixteen rats a day. If those cats are employed in two twelve hour shifts then they would catch thirty two rats in a twenty four hour day. However we would be faced with another problem which is the corpses of the rats which would need to be removed.

Maybe the management are not aware that rats are fire hazards since they eat through the insulating cables - it would be a tragedy for things to be burned down due to the lack of a cat. Maybe the management does not take the rat issue seriously. 

Maybe in the view of the management since they do not utilize public transportation like the average New Yorker they could careless about the rats in the subways or bus depots since their office spaces are sterilized by employing independent exterminators and pest control specialists. New Yorkers are not afforded the same while they utilize their premier mass transportation system.

Every New Yorker who has utilized the subway or the buses has seen the rats - the obvious question is why the white collar does not work in diminution of the rats numbers in the subway and the bus depots. Further action needs to be taken, the number of rats are growing. We know the subway stations and bus depots are old buildings, and we are also aware that food is strewn all over the subway station.

If the white collar have driven the MTA into the financial mess pit it is in then they definitely cannot deal with rats.

John Liu and friends

Hou, Jenny Complaint


John Liu

No raise

We are not prepared to accept no raise in the new contract before there is any agreement on what that stage should comprise of. We are not prepared for givebacks it is our purpose to retain the rights of the blue collar workers gains. In many times we have sacrificed in appeasement to the white collar - we say no more now.

We say no to zeros, we would ask the MTA what is their justification for offering no raise to the TWU Local 100 members? There is no coherent answer that Joseph Lhota could give. TWU Local 100 members the majority of them are New Yorkers therefore why would Joseph Lhota be opposed to New Yorkers well being. It is offensive when Joseph Lhota could care less about the blue collar employees well being.

It sends a deeply disturbing question about fairness concerning the blue collar wage raise. This refusal or playing hardball leaves a sour taste among the blue collar employees which is unwarranted.