A possible cost of union membership for workers is a loss of individualism and flexibility in doing the job. In a unionized shop personnel policies are generally more rigid allowing workers less discretion in choosing work schedules or job assignments. Workers also have less room for personal initiative in how the job is done. Another consideration is that the lines of communication between workers and management in a unionized firm are not as open or as informal as in nonunion firms, cutting off the access of the worker to the employer. Finally individual union members may feel they have no influence on the decision making process in the union.
To the Editor of The Chief - Part 2:
ReplyDeleteThis is just another glaring example of how the powers that be play a game of bait-and-switch as to whether MTA workers are city or state employees. If we are indeed state employees, then why are we being held responsible for carrying the cost of student Metrocards for NYC school students on our budget? John Samuelsen needs to call attention to this blatant and obvious political scam and get the Department of Education to handle their budgetary responsibility.
If the MTA and Governor Cuomo are so hell-bent that we accept a series of zeroes in this next contract and won’t budge, I say fine. You can have your zeroes now and we will allow them the opportunity to save face and call the media and claim victory, but I want the contract loaded with things that come due down the road that will clearly benefit our membership long term. First and foremost, as I stated earlier, we must have an ironclad no-layoff clause. Secondly, I want medical, dental and optical plans equivalent to that of top MTA managers, and I want the MTA to pay for it in full. Yes, that means rolling back to zero the 1.5 percent we now pay towards our health benefits. Thirdly, I want a fifth week of vacation after the completion of 10 years of service and a sixth week of vacation after the completion of 15 years of service. Lastly I want retirees to be allowed to cash out 100 percent of all accrued sick time. Give us this and you can have your up-front zeroes and your claim of victory, Andrew and Joe.
JOHN LANDERS, Conductor
PS: I knew Alden's blog was pretty lame, but I just found out how lame when I was forced to break up this Letter to the Editor of The Chief into two postings because of a 4,096 character maximum.
To the Editor of The Chief - Part 1:
ReplyDeleteTransport Workers Union Local 100 President John Samuelsen held his official Pat Me On The Back press conference Nov. 15 at The Sheraton Hotel in Midtown before 300 of his mostly bought and paid-for supporters. In reality this amounted to little more than a pretend show as Samuelsen outlined a laundry list of contract demands Local 100 wants from the Metropolitan Transportation Authority.
Oddly, I agree with him on almost every point. We do deserve all that he outlined and much more. Question is, what demands are realistic, and will this protracted list force a pro-Samuelsen game of contract delay until the next Local 100 elections? Remember, the real goal is for Samuelsen to win re-election in December of 2012, and if he can delay the negotiations that long, it is a big victory for him.
In the meantime, let us take a look at a few of Samuelsen’s contract demands and analyze them:
1. A fair wage increase: Fabulous, but what does that mean? Does it mean a 1-percent-per-year raise or a 5-percent-per-year raise? Does it mean a 3-percent raise over the length of the contract or does it mean a 15-percent raise over three years? Nobody has any idea because John Samuelsen refuses to reveal his acceptable raise numbers to anyone.
2. No layoffs: Again another great idea but a very unclear position that needs clarification. TWU Local 100 must establish an across-the-board policy of no layoffs of any and all of our members no matter what agency or company they work for. This needs to be the starting point in all current and future Local 100 contract talks, be it with the MTA/OA, Private Bus Division, School Bus Division or New York Waterways. Any agency or company not willing to include a no-layoff clause must immediately be exposed as an entity not willing to negotiate in good faith and made to feel the wrath of Local 100’s political and personnel power. We cannot continue to allow management to have this ax in their arsenal to use at their will as Jay Walder did last year.
3. Guarantee Student Metrocards: I fail to see why this is even a part of the MTA budget or should even come into Local 100 contractual negotiations. Yellow school buses that transport disabled students to and from class are covered under the city Department of Education’s Budget. Why is city bus/subway transportation for students our problem or even our concern? I fully agree with the concept that our children are indeed our future, but right is right and the Department of Education’s budget should not get a pass on its responsibility to coordinate and pay for transportation on city buses or trains for their students. We are more than willing to provide the service for them but why should we also pay for it from our budget?
I believe by rolling back the 1.5% contribution to medical you will be throwing our retirees to the wolves. Asking for a 100% cash out of accrued sick time does not make up for the loss of lifetime medical. All of us actives and retirees need to keep this benefit.
ReplyDeleteI don't understand. Why would rolling back the 1.5% medical throw retirees to the wolves? Please explain. That is the absolute last thing I would advocate.
ReplyDeleteAs far as I know funding for the retirees improved health benefits stems in part from the 1.5%. I know you would not want the retirees to lose health benefits however it is a real possibility particularly since retirees are not even mentioned by the leadership. I also think the president is avoiding the retirees by his absence at retiree events and meetings.
ReplyDeleteNice insightful post by you:
ReplyDeleteLet's discuss it:
1. Wages: JS cannot come out and say we want (let's say) 3%. Because that is the point where the MTA will begin contract negotiations. By coming out and quoting a "price" you only hangstring yourself. Also in this economy it would be bad PR to start yelling we want 10%.
2. No Lay-offs: This would only apply to properties controlled by MTA. PBL, Watrways and school bus are owned by separate entities and are not covered in this contract. I also think that MTA or PBL ALREADY has a No Lay-off clause in THIER contract.
3. Student metro cards: For years this Union has paid politicians for their support. When the lay-offs came down last year they did not help us. So JS and PAC has decided a new direction for PAC: community based activism and finding common cause with the public. What better issue to find common cause than student metrocards.
BTW this is a perfect example of that "homerun" moment you seem to be looking for. The change in the "pay for play" aspects of PAC is over and that is definately a Home Run.
1) Wages. You ask for the moon (10%, 9%, 15% whatever)people will think your way out of line so the bargaining process begins. You bargain to where you want to be and because you did that PR is in your favor. To remain mute hurts the bargaining process.
ReplyDelete2) The members want a no lay-off clause in the contract. They should have it.
3) PAC is being run by socialists/communist factions in our union. They are the equivalent of what used to be called Brown Shirts. It is the responsibility of the Dept. of Education to fund the student metro card. Students should not be denied the card. But as mentioned earlier it is not the responsibility of TWU nor it's distribute the wealth PAC creeps.
In the end the deal is going to be made, if it hasn't been already, in a restaurant with management.
Visit: http://twuretired.blogspot.com/
Way off here.
ReplyDelete1. Wages: did you actually say PR would be in your favor if you ask for the Moon? Do you have any examples of that?
2. The administration you worked for gave the no-layoff clause away. Hopefully on a negotiation that you were not part of the main table.
3. You call Curtis Tate and Marvin Holland socialist/communists? Two of the finest men who have worked for this Union in a long time. If they are socialists/communists then we should all think about our political affiliations.
please when you write something be serious.