to me this is an opportunity manish - i love chatting up strangers - this gives an excuse to talk to people - throw a few things out of the loop and peoples' urban defences come down - a coupel of years back when we got the triple whammy of SARS 1, blackout, SARS 2 - it was a joy to go out and just mingle - i even managed to direct traffic at bay and queen :-)- heck i envy you - um... tho' i understand your concern about emergency services... and not being dismissive.

I dunno Manish, I think the raises were a negotiating tool because the Union knew it had to make some concessions...the 8% pay raise wasn't a sticking point.

More important is the fact that current MTA workers don't pay for health pension, and management is asking for a 6% contribution for 10 years (down from 20 years).

Sure this seems like a generous offer to chumps like me who don't even have insurance, let alone a pension. But union leader Roger Toussaint made a valid point, I think, when he said that being middle-class is now a pipe dream for most, and that rollabacks like this one are not good for workers anywhere.

It's not that the union is asking a lot, it's that most workers (even ostensibly white-collar ones like me) are getting so very much less, in terms of real wages and benefits, than generations before us.

When renewing an apartment lease is 6.5% (for a two year lease) and as much as 50% for a new lease at market value..when virtually every professional in a creative field can no longer afford to live in Manhattan....

Frankly, as hugely inconvenient as the transit strike will be, I rather applaud their desire to safeguard the earning potential of a new generation.

Oh, and lets not forget that the MTA raised fares by crying bankruptcy or some shit last year and then (after the increase went through) admitted to keeping two sets of books. And this one billion dollar surplus that, as far as I can see, is not being plugged back into improving infrastructure (doing so only in Manhattan doesn't count) or in rolling back the fare hikes.

In fact, I'm willing to bet that nomatter how this strike resolves itself, the MTA will raise fares yet again and blame the Union for it.

still tinkering, I see ;)

manish- i think the 40 minute walk excuses you from actually going to the gym :)

I am thrilled to be able to work from my local coffeeshop, the Tea Lounge. Not bad to get the blood going, walking the 20 minutes here either.

As the resident evil econ / Libertarian who happens to be in NYC this week... I guess you could imagine that I have a hard time being sympathetic to the transit workers.

• they have a job that nearly 100% insulated from market forces and hence nearly impossible to get fired from (well, with the exception of the "complaint system" - a factor they're rather conveniently trying to cap in their strike).... and despite that rather sizeable gaurantee (how much salary would you give up in exchange for zero downside risk?), they also want...
• in an era of rising life expectation and where there's pressure on pensions everywhere to raise retirement ages, they're holding on to an archaic 55yr old retirement age rather than the proposed 62 and still well short of the 65 most folks in most other parts of the economy expect.
• in an environment where deductibles for healthcare coverage are the norm, MTA workers pay zero; double trouble given that health is the fastest rising component of "comprehensive benefits" for most companies. This is a huge stealth pay raise / cost of living allowance
• in a city where the median household income is $38K, train operators make $60K

I'm not saying I think the MTA mgmt are a bunch of angels either. But their wrong doesn't make the MTA right.

Personally, I find it hard to sympathize with the MTA. The agency doesn't want to budge, yet last year its Executive Director enjoyed a 22 percent pay raise, courtesy of the Chairman.

The TWU was asking for a 9% increase over three years.

I think Cicatrix called it - the MTA will roll out *another* fare hike, saying that it's the Union's fault.

I actually enjoyed my 80 block walk to work this morning, but I hope this gets sorted out soon.

-p37-

As the resident evil econ / Libertarian...

I knew Resident Evil had zombie dogs, but economists too? ;)

in a city where the median household income is $38K, train operators make $60K

Some great points re: market norms, but I don't think you want to attract median-quality train operators and bus drivers. You want to pay them well for the same reason as airline pilots.

And though NYC is mid-ranked in median household income, it's top-ranked in cost of living.

... for every train operator job available, they get 30 applicants.

That's a bit of a rhetorical red herring. As you probably know from your own tech hiring experience, the number of applicants always outstrips the number of jobs, but many of them are not qualified.

in a city where the median household income is $38K, train operators make $60K

that's all...!!?
value-based pricing is usually a mix of the volume served, value delivered per entity, risk, qualifications and stress. $60K is not extreme.

BTW - does that $38K include capital gains payouts,...trust funds etc.

Hmmm, I should think that libertarians and conservatives would seize upon such a golden opportunity to display prominently their disdain for dysfunctional government agencies. :) The MTA brought this one upon itself, and doesn't really deserve much sympathy in this fight:

Unfortunately, Kalikow and the MTA have long since thrown away their credibility. The agency lost $300 million to fraud and cost overruns at its own headquarters, leading Attorney General Eliot Spitzer to tell my colleague Michael Goodwin, "Of all the authorities, the MTA is the most mismanaged, least competent one out there, and everybody knows it." That's putting it mildly. This is the agency that Controller Alan Hevesi found kept two sets of books - one for the public, and the real numbers. The same place that claimed a deficit, then a small surplus, and then a billion-dollar surplus - which the MTA voted to spend down last week even as the strike deadline approached.

So when [MTA negotiator Gary] Dellaverson told reporters that "the bucket is full" and that no more money could be offered to workers, it was almost comical. A reporter asked how much money it would take to meet the union's supposedly unreasonable demands, Dellaverson waffled.

"I have a spreadsheet upstairs," he said. "I haven't run it."

Uh-huh.

So it's not at all clear that the MTA is negotiating in good faith here -- their wrongs, my libertarian friend, may indeed call into question the credibility of their bargaining positions.

The indignities that have resulted from the MTA's mismanagement have undoubtedly poisoned the well here also:

The great and growing disconnect between white-collar and blue-collar workers in our town makes it hard for office workers to see, understand or respect what is at stake in this labor standoff. Few riders know, for instance, that transit workers have to ask for a day off 30 days in advance. Back in October, in an annual ritual, some MTA workers slept on cots in bus depots so they could be first on line the next morning to ask for permission to take Thanksgiving off.

Such accumulated humiliations fuel much of the fury leading up to Tuesday's threatened strike.

It's so interesting how some employers have such deep and bitter labor-management conflicts while others don't -- even though the range of issues at stake in the different workplaces may be comparable. The MTA's inability to manage its relationships with the union and its workforce -- not to mention its inability, apparently, effectively to manage much of anything else important -- has to be understood as a part of the problem here.

And where the hell has Pataki been? Still bored with his job, I guess.

I agree with Wonkatrix, as I so often do -- we probably will end up with a fare hike for which the MTA will try to pin the blame on the union. At the same time, it looks like the TWU has run circles around the MTA so far, so hopefully people will see through all the bluster that our elected officials have been spewing about illegal and irresponsible strikes and and finally demand some accountability for all of the irresponsibility that been taking place at MTA headquarters and the unwillingness of elected officials in Albany and at City Hall to do anything about it.

Oops, screwed up one of the links. Pataki's boredom with his job is here. And here. And here.

I am off work this week, butI fear the strike will last till next week and I'll have to WALK to the office (about 2 hours). I AM sympathetic to the transit workers, but they picked a hell of a time to strike (Christmas season, bitterly cold weather, etc.). They will soon lose any vestige of sympathy from the riding public.

we've got a slight bit of disagreement here chez cicatrix... as a proud union member, i'm all for organized labor and the great increases in on-the-job safety, security, and (dare i say?) civility that organizing has brought with it. I'm also fully aware that the working conditions in the NYC subway system harken back to something dickensonian: heavy industry, in subterranean moleholes with rats and no restrooms. This is job safety in 2006?

To put it in gross yet accurate (at least in my eyes) terms: going head-to-head in this bout we've got the antagonistic and worst-managed public/private partnership in the state, played by the MTA (shouts to AK for the background on that), and the most militant, steeped-in-nearly-ancient-labor-demands TWU. both are headed by puffed-chest buffoons.

This ain't gonna turn out good any time soon.

While I join the ms. in applauding the TWU for standing up for the future of their union, i can't stand by them when it gets to the details that have lead us to where we are, especially their decision to strike over committing 6% towards health care costs. That's a hell of alot better than any other union outside of the firemen (who get, you know, BURNED). If you're an actor, you pay roughly 100% of your healthcare costs; 6% may not be in line with old-school union values, but it hardly seems unfair in this day and age.

Yes, the MTA will continue horrendous management practices and i can't wait until a monthly metrocard costs me $100. do i hear 2008?? all for the pleasure of all-local trains on the weekends.

But in an argument where both sides are so clearly wrong..... how is this gonna end? Federal arbitration? As a union guy, i'm not so keen on the Bush administration coming in and drilling labor agreements like so much Alaskan wilderness.

Thus, i repeat what i muttered at 6:30 this am while watching the news:

"fuck."

also, manish, i know it's against sepia rules, but any way i could have the contact info of that good-lookin' half-breed dholi you wrote about a few days ago? the ms. thinks he's dreamy.

... any way i could have the contact info of that good-lookin' half-breed dholi you wrote about a few days ago?

Sorry, Mr. & Mrs. C-mith, I hear he's quite taken with a ravishing brain-blaster from the massive percussion groupie scene.

when virtually every professional in a creative field can no longer afford to live in Manhattan....

They can't afford to live in Brooklyn either.

And though NYC is mid-ranked in median household income, it's top-ranked in cost of living.

It's not that the union is asking a lot, it's that most workers (even ostensibly white-collar ones like me) are getting so very much less, in terms of real wages and benefits, than generations before us.

Yeah, people who make the median don't exactly live comfortably. "[T]he transit workers' voice is that of median-income New Yorkers, the millions who make $40,000 to $60,000 a year and who are ever more hard-pressed. Middle-class incomes in New York, according to the Fiscal Policy Institute, a labor-funded group, have declined by 11.9 percent relative to inflation in the past 13 years.... By contrast, incomes for the top-fifth of New York earners have increased by 26 percent. Inflation runs close to 5 percent in the city, and housing prices have shot up 85 percent. Few middle- and working-class families can afford to buy a home or apartment, even in the most far-flung neighborhoods."(The Washington Post)

New York as we knew it -- economically integrated, culturally vibrant -- is dying. It's becoming a city exclusively for the wealthy.

"For the past few years I have felt myself tuned into some new, barely perceptible frequency. Only recently have I realized that it is the constant hum of a low-grade sadness. The postwar Manhattan experience that I’ve heard described by folks much older than I, and that I’ve read about in books and magazines, and that I myself have experienced in my own time, is coming rapidly to a close...The parts of Manhattan I have loved... are being developed into detestable orgies of luxury condos, boutique hotels, stores that sell four things..." Sigh.

P.S. For New Yorkers thinking of biking, here are some useful tips:
www.transalt.org/press/releases/051212transitstrike.html
And here are places to buy used & new bikes:
www.recycleabicycle.org
www.newyork.craigslist.org/bik/
www.transalt.org/info/bikeshop.html

any way i could have the contact info of that good-lookin' half-breed dholi you wrote about a few days ago?

Oi, only half-breeds can call half-breeds 'half-breeds' (See: The 'N' word). Apologies if you are one of the aforementioned.

On this topic, DD knew who his gf was...was the answer hidden in the post or are a few people privy to insider info?

Wait a second, is HE Mr Cicatrix? #I'm so confu-uu-uu-sed#.

As for the railways, you're right it's reminiscent of Gate Gourmet Manish, if only due to the protesting sepia hue. We've had a few tube strikes in London over the course of my life time. So I'm rather impressed by the paucity of NY subway striking.

Can't they call in Nitish Kumar or something?

By the way, Manish, is Gothamist onto something?

We know there HAS to be some hipster in Williamsburg [named Manish?] planning a strike party. C'mon, speak up! If not, you have pretty much the same options as you had yesterday (just more localized to where you live) Stay In or Go Out...

Mutiny meetup, special ultralocalized transit strike edition??

Don't forget that one of the minor issues, but an issue nonetheless, was the idiotic rule that you have to put an MTA logo on your turban [1,2] so that people don't think you are a terrorist highjacking the train:

MTA employees have complained about the rule that requires them to call and alert a supervisor prior to taking a bathroom break of no more than ten minutes. Workers have pointed out that supervisors are not always accessible, especially during the overnight shifts. Another rule in dispute is the employee's uniform: "Sikh workers, whose religion requires they wear a turban, must wear one made of TA-issued fabric with the TA logo front and center."[1] But the major sticking point has been the pay raises. [Link]

In some ways, this strike reveals some fundamental elitist tendencies....as in, how invisible do you want the people who take care of the vital necessities of life to be?

Toussaint already complained that they were being treated, scolded, like "children," even at the bargaining table. The conditions under which they work, from the actual physical envoirenment to the rules governing their on-the-job conduct are, as mr.cicatrix said, Dickinsian.

So I don't get why some people (especially, ahem other union members) take the stance that since they've got a better deal than most, why don't they just shut the fuck up?

If I were bargaining for anything I would never, never give up something I already have. Isn't the point of renewing contracts, raises etc to be, at the very least, a cost of living adjustment?

What ever happened to COLA in wage calculations? It seems to be something that no one takes in account anymore. And if you're in NY, you know that this city becomes more expensive by the minute!

I'm curious to see how the people of NYC will handle the change; For example, I recall reading that during the rolling power outages a while ago, people were actually outside, meeting others, relaxing, and generally taking everything in stride. As surprising as that was, it was also refreshing to see chaos kept to a minimum :)

Bikepath and ak, thanks for all the information you provided.

Vinod, all four of your points underline the fact that the Union is trying to buck the market forces that dictate labor/employment conditions. I thought Libertarians were contrarians? This is so "everyone else is doing it"...
;)

Despite what my position and even my language might lead one to think, I'm not quite an old-school lefty. I was actually offered the chance to join two different unions, and declined, both times. I dislike being part of a crowd, and those meetings seem damn boring.

But the discrepency in compensation between white and blue collar workers..hell, between executives and every one else...seems to be widening with alarming rapidity.

I don't feel much sympathy for the MTA's moans that health/benefit premiums are rising. The fact that they are trying to shirk an expense that most other copmanies/entities have more or less shrugged off is not something to encourage.

This is not a "a huge stealth pay raise" - it's something the employees were receiving already. When the uninsured cannot afford to visit a doctor at all, (at $250 for a 10 minute consultation in Manhattan, who can? oh wait) because, in part, the federal govt tied health care to employer's responsibilities....how the hell did it become an act of employer generosity?

Cicatrix -

I try to stay out of family squabbles. But it was nice to read the response of one union sister, in particular, to the strike:

In fact, one taxi group is telling its 7,000 members who drive yellow cabs to sit out the strike, due to potentially crippling traffic and to show solidarity with transit workers.

"We're telling our members to stay at home," Bhairavi Desai, director of the Taxi Workers Alliance, said Tuesday. "First of all, why should we scab for the city? Secondly, it's going to be economically disastrous and highly stressful."

Desai said the meter slows down in heavy traffic, and yellow cab drivers earn an average of $12 an hour when they are idling, because meters are based on mileage and waiting time.

Even the police union, with which Pataki has tried to play divide and rule against the TWU, is on board:

At a rally last night outside Pataki's office only hours before the new midnight deadline, Patrick Lynch, head of the Patrolmen's Benevolent Association, reminded every union member what was at stake.

In a fiery speech, Lynch talked about his own father, a former transit worker who had walked the picket lines in both the 1966 and 1980 strikes and who raised a large family into the middle class on his MTA salary.

"My father was not a criminal in 1966. He was not a criminal in 1980," Lynch said. Then he pointed to the uniformed cops on the other side of the barricade.

"Their hearts are on this side with you," he bellowed as the crowd erupted in cheers.

I always like to think that the glass is half-full -- paan-glossian, perhaps. :)

As for your declining to join not one, but two unions, I suppose that there is something to Oscar Wilde's comment that the problem with socialism is that it takes up too many evenings that might otherwise be spent.... posting comments on Sepia.

the problem with socialism is that it takes up too many evenings that might otherwise be spent.... posting comments on Sepia.

... or spanking mr.c for trying to embarrass me publicly ;)

I had no sympathy for the TWU and think the MTA was the most mismanaged enterprise before today. Now I'm convinced of these beliefs.

The TWU stinks for taking such a hardline approach at a time of year when it is dangerous for a lot of adults and children to be out and about in 20 degree weather.

Consequently the MTA always has contracts expire this time of the year because there is far more pressure on the TWU to not lose pay this time of the year. It's all political bullshit.

I'm a healthy and hearty person and after 3 hours in that cold I thought I was going to lose my mind. It was brutal. Now I have to think of a way back home.

The person that irritates me the most is Roger Toussaint. I find that he loses me as an audience the minute he starts taking cheap shots with his personal indignant comments against the MTA. He loses my respect the minute he opens his mouth. It scares me to think that this man is in there trying to negotiate a contract. He comes across as a total idiot to me. The MTA spokespeople are just about as pathetic.

It was funny to watch a super red Bloomberg walk across the bridge this morning. He had no hat and had a leather jacket. Whats up with that? Any NYker knows thats dumb...

Union's tend to cause the rest of us temporary inconvience, but when managements win it tends to cause lower our standards for longer

22, Most other companies have not just shrugged off increasing health care costs. The airlines and auto manafacturers for one.

Anyway, I side with the MTA here. They are offering well more than market value for the services that their employees provide. The MTA should stick their heels in the ground and bring the union members back to reality. The union naturally expects that their inflated contract will continue to drip with fat. However, I applaud the MTA for refusing to be held ransom by this illegal strike so far.

Paying nothing for health care? Being able to retire at 55 with full pension? Come on, those are benefits that are usually reserved for jobs that require more skill. I don't know how the union won such benefits before, but theres nothing wrong with the MTA trying to force the union to accept conditions that reflect the current market.

I prefer to think of the strike in purely economic terms.

The MTA should stick their heels in the ground and bring the union members back to reality. The union naturally expects that their inflated contract will continue to drip with fat. However, I applaud the MTA for refusing to be held ransom by this illegal strike so far.

Yeah -- the MTA will sure show them! There isn't enough fat for those greedy transit workers in either one of the MTA's two sets of books. Or for the executive director's 22 percent pay increase. Or for the holiday discounts they've been throwing the tourists this month.

The strike is especially galling given that Bloomberg and Pataki have made mass transit such an important priority:

The [MTA's] debt has risen rapidly because Mayor Michael Bloomberg has slashed the city's contribution to the transit agency and Pataki has cut his subsidies to zero to the MTA capital plan for the purchase of new subway and railroad cars and rebuilding subway lines. This has forced the MTA into prodigious borrowing with resulting skyrocketing interest.

How dare the workers disrespect these two selfless elected officials when they have done so much for mass transit? It's just plain irresponsible -- dare I say reprehensible.

QUESTION: How do I get to Manhattan from Jackson Heights? I live near 74th St and 37 Ave. I couldn't get a cab, town car, or car service to take me today (and I had a presentation for school to do)! I tried from 2-3:30p.m. but ppl kept saying they didn't want to go to Manhattan b/c they would get stuck.

Thanks so much!!!

---EMMA

I'm curious to see how the people of NYC will handle the change; For example, I recall reading that during the rolling power outages a while ago, people were actually outside, meeting others, relaxing, and generally taking everything in stride. As surprising as that was, it was also refreshing to see chaos kept to a minimum :)

Frankly there is no choice so we suck it up. Believe it or not people were friendly and warm (no pun intended) this morning in the frigid temperatures. If this goes on for days it will wear away at people.

I feel for women with kids and older folks who are struggling. I feel for those who like me don't have the option to blow off work or work from home and have to make it or they will lose their jobs. Those are the people that are suffering.

People like me with health and a decent job and the ability to pay our way have no business complaining about this strike when so many others are affected far more negatively in this city and no one is paying attention to them.

QUESTION: How do I get to Manhattan from Jackson Heights? I live near 74th St and 37 Ave. I couldn't get a cab, town car, or car service to take me today (and I had a presentation for school to do)! I tried from 2-3:30p.m. but ppl kept saying they didn't want to go to Manhattan b/c they would get stuck.

Emma your only option is to walk to the Woodside LIRR station (it isn't far because I used to do it) from where you are and take a train into Penn Station. Dress warm and expect to wait on a long line outside.

And you don't need a ticket to get on the train. You can get a ticket on the train so don't let anyone make you wait on line to get a ticket.

You can get extra tickets or return tickets when you get to Penn Station. $4.00 Strike fair on LIRR to any Queens Stations.

Thanks, Jane! I'm looking up info on LIRR right not.

Where exactly is the Woodside station you're talking about?

good luck, emma. The LIRR central-queens line was running 3 hour+ delays all day. Further, they are encouraging you to buy tickets before boarding, and the price will be significantly higher if you try to purchase on board. Tomorrow should have shuttle trains running on the C-Q line every 20 minutes to alleviate some of the congestion, but not much.

Just stay home. Few things are that important.

Will spare you all my thoughts and long-winded diatribe on unions and the MTA v. TWU, but will leave you with this: While most of us are fortunate to not have a job that involves working in a dark, dank, piss-smelling tunnel with rats and garbage, if that WERE your job, do you think the TWU deserves our support. Just because WE don't have to do the job, doesn't make it any less worth our support or compassion for the workers who do.

and yeah, only half-breeds can call half-breeds "half-breeds", Bongsy. You Half-Breed.

Yeah -- the MTA will sure show them! There isn't enough fat for those greedy transit workers in either one of the MTA's two sets of books. Or for the executive director's 22 percent pay increase. Or for the holiday discounts they've been throwing the tourists this month.

The execs pay raises are in line with the raises that execs at companies the size of the MTA are receiving. (Thats a whole another debate very similar to people criticizing the Red Cross for paying a huge salary to its head). The pay raises/benefits the union is demanding is not in line with what the market pays.

How dare the workers disrespect these two selfless elected officials when they have done so much for mass transit? It's just plain irresponsible -- dare I say reprehensible.

At least Bloomberg and Pataki have stayed within the law.

Btw, I don't know why in comment 23 you quoted something about taxi meters when thats totally irrelevent. Taxis are not running on meters during the strike.

When renewing an apartment lease is 6.5% (for a two year lease) and as much as 50% for a new lease at market value..when virtually every professional in a creative field can no longer afford to live in Manhattan....

Attack rent control and help solve this problem structurally for all New Yorkers rather than solve the problem through salaries for a small, privileged class....

Hmmm, I should think that libertarians and conservatives would seize upon such a golden opportunity to display prominently their disdain for dysfunctional government agencies. :) The MTA brought this one upon itself, and doesn't really deserve much sympathy in this fight

I agree, the MTA mgmt deserve to fry as well. But don't take that rage out on New Yorkers OR, for that matter, use that issue to justify some pretty extreme demands by the MTA workers....

Vinod, all four of your points underline the fact that the Union is trying to buck the market forces that dictate labor/employment conditions. I thought Libertarians were contrarians? This is so "everyone else is doing it"...

Ah.. but the key is the first point. It's one thing to try to buck market trends, go for a higher salary, etc. It's another thing to do it when you've got a bunch of structurally unfair advantages relative to other folks in the market (nearly gauranteed jobs... a monopoly service w/ no competitors to sweep up your "market share" when you go on strike...etc.)

I don't feel much sympathy for the MTA's moans that health/benefit premiums are rising. The fact that they are trying to shirk an expense that most other copmanies/entities have more or less shrugged off is not something to encourage.

The issue isn't whether the MTA gets to avoid health insurance altogether... the issue is whether or not there should be deductibles as part of the MTA plan -- something other workers already have.

Attack rent control and help solve this problem structurally for all New Yorkers rather than solve the problem through salaries for a small, privileged class....

I'm not going to attack rent control because I'm not a social darwinist - there's an essential fairness inherent in rent control whereby people who lived in shitty, rundown neighbourhoods 15 years ago because they couldn't afford better get to stick around and either enjoy the fruits of whatever they did to make the neighbourhood a nicer, safer place. Or at least lead the same quiet lives of barely scraping, only now with high priced delis instead of the old crummy bodega.

My neighbourhood is gentrifying before my eyes, and as much as I see that as a good thing, I'm glad as hell that I've got rent stablization. Given the trouble I had finding a single person from my socio-economic background to share an apartment with me when I first moved out here...yeah, I think I deserve to live here at a rate of roughly 3-4% more each year.

You think any Union member can afford to live in Manhattan? Most commute in (hahah) from Canarsie or Far Rockaway or Inwood.

As for "a small, priviledged class"...Vinod, please don't tell me you meant the MTA employees by that. Shall we really begin a debate on what defines "a small, priviledged class"?

How to stop the strike:

1) Start firing 100 workers a day on strike. Given the illegality of the strike, this is a golden opportunity to remove yourself of the worst malcontents.

2) fine the union the amount of money that the city has to spend on emergency services, security, etc. 1 million a day is nothing -- that is $30 a day for each worker given 33000 workers. They are spending $10 million a day on overtime police salaries alone.

3) Start jailing and levying personal fines against the union leadership for engaging in economic terrorism. I'm sure some relevant statute can be brought to bear by a creative prosecutor. Where's Spitzer when we really need him?

The transit workers are trying to live high off the hog at everyone else's expense. This strike must be crushed without mercy.

Instapundit had a link to a TWU blog for a while before they closed down the comments (unofficial blog). The comments were running like, 3 to 4 against the strikers and what was striking (oho, Manish is not the only one who can make these silly jokes!) was the way in which blue collar workers who are less favored and white collar workers who have to contribute to their benefits and have no job security were pissed. Seriously, seriously pissed. So, you had this interesing thing where blue and white collar were reversed (and there were favored groups of blue collar workers engendering all kinds of envy) with people saying things like, "suck it up you lazy, rude strikers, I make less and work harder and don't get to retire at 55 with a pension and have no sympathy for you!" And then, lots of complaining about how the job wasn't that hard, nurses and teachers and cops get paid less, and basically, no love for the union. No love for the MTA, but certainly no love for the union. Fascinating dynamic. The world is a changin'.

*The other thing I got from that thread was that transit workers have not exactly engendered any good will with their behavior towards commuters. Lots of comments about how rude transit workers are, how stupid, how easy there jobs are compared to what other people do, etc. Not making a judgement myself, just summarizing. The comments are now shut down.

**As for the preceding comment about transit workers working with rats, garbage, smelly things, etc, I remember as a resident making about the same as an entry level transit worker, 26-27,000 ( I know, I know, it's not comparable and I'm not trying to make it so, just stating for the record) and going to work and running the bowel at autopsy. Meaning: literally scooping sh*t out of a bowel to examine it.

***Also, why don't the artistic types move out of the city and create their own cheap bohemia elsewhere? I am making this observation, not based on an economic argument, but on an artistic and philosophical level. How cool would it be to create your own worlds, hipsters. I mean, really, really, create your own world. Like that radical sculptor who is creating his own city in the desert out West.

****I have a feeling this will backfire on the union. Welcome, automated trains.....

cicatrix - I know we're sorta going off topic here... but you're the first person I've ever seen make this arg about rent control -

there's an essential fairness inherent in rent control

"Essential" is a rather strong word. Most academic studies of long term rent control come to conclusions like this -

In 1989 the typical discount on the Upper East Side, for example, was $432 a month, while in East New York and most of the Bronx and Brooklyn, the discount was actually negative, meaning that landlords were unable to find tenants willing to pay the maximum allowable rent. The consulting firm Arthur D. Little Associates estimated in 1986 that rent regulation in New York amounted to an annual subsidy of $754 million. White households received 95 percent of that sum, though they constituted only 56 percent of tenants; black and Hispanic households received just 2 percent. The study also found that one- and two-person households received 74 percent of the rent-regulation subsidy, while families with children got under 1 percent.

Basically, old white folk are the biggest beneficiaries of rent control and young people of color are disproportionately affected (cuz they have no old white folk to "inherit" a lease on controlled property from....)... and that's just the tip of the iceberg.

Vinod-at-Large,

I agree, the MTA mgmt deserve to fry as well.

Now that's what I like to hear. Except that I don't support the death penalty, so if you're cool with it perhaps we can compromise and reach common ground on LWOP. ;)

Sameer/RateDesi,

1. Any companies that are comparable to the MTA in their mismanagement should fire their CEOs, not give them 22 percent pay increases.

2. I was quoting the eminently Mutinous Bhairavi Desai simply to note the TWA's support for the TWU. In any event, her "why scab for the city" point stands.

3. Whether Pataki and Bloomberg have "stayed within the law" is a bit of a non-sequitur, and actually establishes very little without more argument on your part. I myself am a lawyer, but I certainly am not so enamored of law and lawyers to think that something is right or wrong simply because it's legal or illegal.

On your logic, at least the British stayed within the law when they arrested the thousands and thousands who participated in satyagraha during the 1930s? (And before you distort what I'm saying, no I'm not trying to equate Gandhi with Roger Touissant. That's not my point. I'm simply making a point about the relationship between law and morality.) That obviously didn't give them the moral high ground in any broader sense, and the fact that the MTA has the Taylor Law to shape the negotiating process doesn't give Pataki and Bloomberg any broader moral high ground either.

Especially given what little these two have done to support mass transit, and their refusal to get actively engaged in the negotiations to help avoid a strike in the first place. Heck, for months last year Bloomberg and Pataki spent more time on any given day actively pushing the MTA to permit the Jets to build their West Side stadium (which, full disclosure, would have wrecked my current neighborhood) and the Nets to build their arena in the Atlantic Yards area (which, full disclosure, would have wrecked my old neighborhood -- I just can't escape these stadium proposals). There were entire days when these two (and especially Bloomie's deputy mayor, Dan Doctoroff) did nothing other than work on these pet projects. But now, when the mass transit system upon which 7 million people depend lies in the balance, they can't be bothered to get more directly involved with the negotiations at all?

GC,

Finally, a comparison between the union leaders and the terr'ists! Well done, my friend. Long overdue -- the level of the discourse in these comments was really starting to sink, and I was starting to worry that people are not seeing the close resemblance between the TWU and Al Q'aeda.

Basically, old white folk are the biggest beneficiaries of rent control...

My former roommate's family has kept the same inexpensive, rent-controlled apartment in the city since before she was conceived, and before her mother was married-- ~40 years. The system is easily gamed.

... [Bhairavi Desai's] "why scab for the city" point stands.

Umm, because cabs are the main backup system during a subway and bus strike.

Regarding rent control... isn't it all but dead in NYC anyway? It's being phased out, at the very least. And I haven't seen rents drop as a consequence.

why don't the artistic types move out of the city and create their own cheap bohemia elsewhere?

Berlin is the new New York. Or maybe Chicago. Or... anyone up for Houston?

I don't have to go on Wednesday b/c that prof said we can mail him our work. But about 9 people showed up for my class tonight, and I missed my presentation (20% of my grade). I hope that prof is not gonna be tough (I've had her before, and she's fair).

---EMMA

Vinod,

As manish said the system can be gamed. But if some people stayed put when white flight left certain (now 'reclaimed') areas abandoned, well..it's fine by me that they're paying less rent. And while a few of these lucky lucky souls still exist, I find they're most often bandied about in apocryphal stories about why rent control is a horrible evil thing.

Anyway, bikepath is right. This is largely a moot point. Rents aren't dropping.

A few years ago I swallowed a 20% rent increase because the (rent-stabilized) apartment's lease holder left the city. The landlord found out, and even though I was there legally as a roomate and had paid security, last month, etc. they initially threatened to evict me within a week. I pointed out that they'd cashed the check for that whole month and got myself enough time to figure out that the neighbourhood (up by 125th St) was suddenly "OK" for the Columbia kids to live in so landlords couldn't wait to make space for them. 20% to live in the same place in a rent-stabilized building because the lease turned over. Oh, yeah...they fixed the mailboxes and called it a 'major capital improvement.'

I've moved into places that didn't have doorknobs (like, there was a circular hole in the wood of the door where the whole metal thing should be) and had the landlord tell me that it was my responsibility as a tenant to install one. Of course, the same landlord offered to messenger over an extra set of keys to a white friend of mine. (we compared treatment regularly.)

If you're poor and colored...If you look poor and colored, you are more likely to be gamed than be the one gaming in this city.

MD, artist types DID move out of the city and created their own cheap bohemia in Williamsburg, Washington heights, Long Island City, DUMBO, Park Slope, etc. Now those places are expensive too (good luck getting a one bedroon for less than$1500/month for about 350 sq feet), so artists are moving still further out. Well, I guess the literary Jonathans (Franzen, Safren Foer, Lethem) are still in Park Slope...but you know, good luck if your novel didn't sell as well.

(me? bitter? much? never!!!)

Anyway, back to the MTA...

Emma,
I'm sure you'll be ok. It was hell getting in today and getting out. The professor has got to be understanding. Ofcourse you should make up and find ways to do it. Are you OK with Woodside tomorrow if you need to go? It's on Woodside Avenue and 61st Street. If you walk down Roosevelt Avenue you won't miss it.

1) Start firing 100 workers a day on strike. Given the illegality of the strike, this is a golden opportunity to remove yourself of the worst malcontents.

This would be a dangerous thing to do. Irrespective of the pathetic and useless MTA workers we are all unfortunately used to they are still trained people with experience. It would be impossible to replace them fast enough and safely.

Back in 1918 NYC had the biggest train disaster in the United States history as a result of a similar move. 93 people died because a inexperienced train operator made a grave mistake in judgement. And he was a temp worker filling in for strinking transit workers.

The solutions unfortunately aren't that easy.

This strike must be crushed without mercy.

Dude...gc, when did you start channeling Emperor Palpatine?

sigh.. certain threads, once started, are mighty hard to drop... still, it's a refreshing departure from a lot of the standard SM discussion threads..

Cicatrix - the thing that startles me about your post is that nearly every problem you cite is routinely cited by economists (on both sides of the aisle) as the PRODUCT of rent control rather than the problem it solves -

• Rents aren't dropping.

  Correct - because while demand grows as a function of the booming NYC economy, supply i s stagnant as a result of ... rent control -

  Before rent stabilization arrived on the scene in 1969, New York built 35,000 dwellings a year on average. In the early seventies, the rate dropped to 20,000 a year, and a decade later, to 10,000. So far in the nineties, housing construction has crept along at a dismal pace of fewer than 8,000 units a year,

• A few years ago I swallowed a 20% rent increase because the (rent-stabilized) apartment's lease holder left the city. The landlord found out... 20% to live in the same place in a rent-stabilized building because the lease turned over

Right. Because under rent control, prices are determined by legal status - a factor which moves unpredictably and in weird step functions. Without it, it's determined by supply & demand which - even in a bubble market - moves more linearly.

• Oh, yeah...they fixed the mailboxes and called it a 'major capital improvement.'

A general decline in the "capital stock" and flimsy standards for what constitutes improvements are the direct result of rent control. Landlords aren't oblivious to market forces and only invest in capital improvements if it will increase rental income. For ex.

New York’s housing stock is in much worse shape than housing in other U.S. cities, large or small. The Federal Government’s American Housing Survey for the United States shows that New York City comes off badly by virtually every measure of housing quality, compared with cities in general and even with Chicago, another big city with an old housing stock and an underclass population. (See Table 2.)

On every index of housing quality—all of which are related to maintenance-New York fares badly; twice as many apartments in New York have cracked walls, broken plaster, holes in the floor, and exposed wiring than other American cities. A quarter of New York apartments have broken heating systems, compared with less than 10 percent in other American cities. Even compared to Chicago, New York’s rental housing is badly maintained.

• If you're poor and colored...If you look poor and colored, you are more likely to be gamed than be the one gaming in this city.

Once again, rent control -

HARLEY BROOKE-HITCHING, Equities Ltd.: I’m in private sector low-income housing. What rent control does to the racial structure of the city is horrifying. There are no middle-class black or Hispanic families moving into the Upper East Side because the rents of these apartments are so low that the white occupants do not move out.

PETER SALINS: The racial point you make is absolutely correct. Historically, minorities have been kept out of the best neighborhoods by simple prejudice. Moreover, the way you get the benefit of rent control is by staying in a good location for a very long time, and for a variety of reasons minorities have not been able to stay in one place for very long.

When there's a fundamental scarcity of supply, it gives the gatekeepers of that supply way too much discretion about how that supply gets used. If 15 people are all "baseline" eligible for your property and no matter who you choose, you're going to get the exact same $$$ out of them, all sorts of weird, unfair criteria goin into the final decision. The ultimate solution is to depower the suppliers by enacting policy to create more of them.

I think ultimately, the sentiment here boils down to whether or not you have some sort of Right to an apartment at some rent even if a landlord doesn't want to provide it at that price. I'm comfortable with an answer of "no" (whether you're an artist, or whatever). By contrast, advocates of rent control believe others should be forced to provide for them regardless of the consequences...

cicatrix - yes, I know about the Williamsburg et al part, but I was thinking bigger! Ya'll should move to the cheapest piece of land in all of fly-over country and build a city. Seriously. If I was ever Bill Gates rich I would totally give you artist types the means. Despite my rethuglican tendencies, I have a real soft spot for the artist types. The politics may make me laugh at times, but oh, wouldn't the world be a horrible place without the joy you bring. I so mean that, artist types. You are loved!

I don't know what you do with a city like NY to make it more affordable. The answer in Boston is pretty obvious (must not go on anti-Boston rant or siddharth m will show up......)

Build more and regulate less is probably the way to go in Boston, but how can you build more in NY and also, the families ain't coming back. The rest of the country is changing. What I saw when I went back to flyover country for Thanksgiving. Holy cannolis (this was the tenth fasted growing county in the country I was visiting, or something like that. I mean, holy cannolis. Had to be seen to be believed). Immigrants now go directly to the exurbs. I wonder what this will bring?

It's a pity that transit jobs cannot be outsourced to India - or else the union would have quickly woken up from the 1960's mentality and toned down their demands to keep the transit from going the GM way, whose stock hit a 23 year low yesterday due to healthcare and pension promises made decades ago.

However much I want Bloomberg to play hardball, I think he will cave in. Unions are one of the biggest political contributors, and no politician can afford to alienate them.

M. Nam

janeofalltrades
Irrespective of the pathetic and useless MTA workers we are all unfortunately used to they are still trained people with experience.

What's up with the Royal "We"? I've been using the NYC subway and buses for almost ten years and have NEVER dealt with an MTA employee that I'd describe as "pathetic" or "useless." I think it's hardly fair to dismiss them all as such.

Those people put up with a lot of crap in their day-to-day jobs and show a lot of patience in dealing with commuters (especially the obnoxious people that insist on holding the doors open while the conductor is trying to move the train). So while you're sitting in your nice cushy office, try taking a moment to consider that 1) you wouldn't last a day if you had to do their job (especially during rush hour), and 2) if they're so pathetic and useless, how come you're missing them now?

Vinod, you provide a lot of food for thought. But this really is a moot point since, again as bikepath said, rent control is being phased out. I can look up the numbers if you'd like but the number of extant apartments that are still under rent control drops every year.

I'm in favor of tightening rent control to limit inheritance and bringing rents up to keep the building turning a profit for the landlord. However, the problem with talking about market forces is that the term is used manipulatively, to cater to the wealthy.

As in, lets turn these warehouses into luxury condos starting at $10,000 a month because there are enough rich people in NY who'd like that. I'm not saying that's wrong, but "market forces" conviently ignores the low-income demographics all who'd love to pay equitable, resonable, profit-making prices small apartment with basic, non-fancy fixtures.

"Mixed Residential" housing is becoming a thing of the past, and that's a huge problem. There IS housing...People are building all over the place. It's jsut that the new housing is designed (and priced) for higher income demographics. And the problem with that is there are only so many uber-rich folk to go around.

After the real estate boom that accompanied the tech boom, developers started building to capitalize on the insane rents. A few years later, these huge lavish places stood empty for months and months and required serious advertising to fill because all that paper money kinda disappeared.

Greed leads to stupid decisions too. Self-interest isn't always what's best for the market.

*runs away before Adam Smith groupies show up to start the bitchslapathon*

That's the first -- and hopefully not the last -- time 'Adam Smith' and 'bitchslapathon' were used in the same sentence. The things Sepia exposes me to :)

This is becoming too much a ritual in this city--New Amsterdam being held hostage every three years by a Mickey Mouse state agency and its sometimes sometimes arrogant union. We deserve better.

A lion's share of the blame for this morass can be placed sorely on the mighty long feet of Governor Pataki. His indifference to the city (40% of the population of the state and God knows how much of the tax roll) is striking but not suprising. I'm not calling for secession just yet. But I think it's time the MTA be held accountable to the chief executive of the city and overseen by the city comptroller. I'd like to see the mayor appointing all the executives of the MTA board instead of the invisible wizard in Albany. They're a bunch of dopes because they can be.

Farehikes: Some are justified and some are not. Actually, the real and nominal cost of riding the transit system went down for most riders. A decade ago, the MTA introduced a unlimited Metrocard and free bus/subway transfers. So the actual pay-per-ride for most riders who commute to work five days a week actually went down, and down even further if your commute involved transfers. I almost can't remember the pre-Metrocard bad old days .
If was lucky enuff to be a union, I'd certainly want it to be led by a apocalyptic apocyphal general like Touissant. Or maybe not. I respect the tireless and thankless work that Ms. Desai has done for the rights of cab drivers in this city but I doubt many of her constituents symapthize wholeheartedly with the union (certainly not ANY of the ones I've spoken to). Why? B/C a retirement age of 55 is absurd. Not contributing towards your health insurance in this day and age is a luxury many of us don't have. I'd like to live in Sweden too but we have to live in the real world. Some MTA employees have difficult jobs in Dickensian conditions, some don't. Fix those problems (workers not being able to use restrooms, not being able to ask for vacation time) but don't think you're going to able to fully able to buck market realities. There are a huge variety of pay scales in the MTA (plus overtime) and for those without or denied education it's a path to the middle class but it's perfectly reasonable to consider economic realites. No ..really I'm not bitter at my annual increase which barely matches inflation whcih was certainly not MTA automatic but based on supposedly outstanding performance reviews. Really I'm not. MTA Executive salaries in this case may seem unseemly, but a fiscal red herring. We're not talking Ken Lay numbers here. Their negligent mismanagement is the issue. Where's a Bobby Jindal type superstar policy wonk when you need him?

Goes without saying the union movement in this country has been at the forefront of the good fight in history but let's save the dopey crocodile tears for the suffering union brothers. Perhaps I've met a unrepresentative hundred or so (skilled (on-the-job-training)) union guys on train platforms, in the grocery line, in bars, in jury dury, okay lemme stop bugging... mostly at bars but they all made out quite handsomely... certainly better than most..with great benefits and nary a student loan to pay. God Bless 'em.
Aight..time for the hour walk home.

What's up with the Royal "We"? I've been using the NYC subway and buses for almost ten years and have NEVER dealt with an MTA employee that I'd describe as "pathetic" or "useless." I think it's hardly fair to dismiss them all as such.

Those people put up with a lot of crap in their day-to-day jobs and show a lot of patience in dealing with commuters (especially the obnoxious people that insist on holding the doors open while the conductor is trying to move the train.

The average MTA employee that the average communter like me comes in contact with is downright rude and unfortunately when I'm the kind of commuter who has done nothing to contribute to it it sucks to be on the receiving end of the ire.

I'm sure they deal with a lot of assholes all day but that's part of the job. If you are in the business of customer service it's part of the territory. Your good customers do not deserve to be treated like shit because the bad customers are getting to you. In the private sector you get fired for treating your customers like crap and pulling the stuff some of the MTA workers pull.

Forget the visible ones. Ever seen the ones who work on the infrastructure? 1 to work, 3 to watch, 2 to supervise. And they have the power to do it because of the unions.

So while you're sitting in your nice cushy office, try taking a moment to consider that 1) you wouldn't last a day if you had to do their job (especially during rush hour), and 2) if they're so pathetic and useless, how come you're missing them now?

Woah this isn't about me vs them. LOL It's the whole city that is inconvenienced. Frankly I was for a day but I'm a healthy person. I prefer the LIRR to the subway any day and I can work from home. But it stinks for the rest of the city who is forced to put up with this especially the old and the young. They don't deserve it and it's a dangerous sitution to put people in considering the weather.

Secondly I have done their job and strongly believe in the philosophy that you should be good at what you do. This 'entitlement' shit is passe. If it's that bad they should go do something else.

people deserve decent pay and benefits no matter what you think of their job. if you're in the middle class and you happen to lose your job, you'll become really glad someone else struggled in order to provide some kind of safety net. it happens to quite a lot of people, even hard working people who do all the right things. these people are being villified. instead of complaining about people who get up at 5 am and get home at 7 pm and do really hard jobs for relatively little pay, why not complain about people who really are spoiled

people deserve decent pay and benefits no matter what you think of their job. if you're in the middle class and you happen to lose your job, you'll become really glad someone else struggled in order to provide some kind of safety net. it happens to quite a lot of people, even hard working people who do all the right things. these people are being villified.

I agree, irrespective of what people do they deserve respect and pay and benefits. But what the TWU is asking for is unreasonable and archaic to todays changing times. There are several benefits I support and hope they manage to get but the strike is holding the city hostage and it's extortion the way I see it.

Janeofalltrades,

It's extremely one-sided to say that the TWU is "holding the city hostage." Competent MTA management and political leadership would have avoided this strike -- for how long have they known that the contract would be up this month? And at this point, what the MTA is holding out for would save a paltry $20 million per year -- which, pace Gothamist, is "about the amount we think they siphon just by existing." (Adds Jen, "God, we hate the MTA's accounting so much.") I'm sure that on either of their two sets of books, the MTA can find that money, and in any event at this point they are costing the city considerably more in police overtime and the like.

And Pataki and Bloomberg are acting like petulant children, rather than grown-up elected officials who are paid to solve problems like this one. Responsible political leadership would be doing whatever it takes to get the parties back to the bargaining table and end the strike -- instead, billion dollar Charlie and our terminally bored governor are doing whatever they can to add gasoline and fan the flames with ridiculous rhetoric that, in Pataki's case, is probably aimed more at the New Hampshire primary than at trying to end the strike:

Governor Pataki, who is exploring a run for president, has come under fire from conservatives for some of the deals he brokered for unions while seeking their endorsements in the past. Now a number of conservative analysts have urged him to hang tough with the transit workers.

Even if they end up break this strike with brute force, using the Taylor Law as a club -- probably an illegal use of that law, by the way, since "one side cannot make pensions a condition of a settlement" under that law -- they will have poisoned the negotiating atmosphere for years to come with every municipal union. (And for that reason, contrary to one of the posts above, Pataki, Bloomberg, and the MTA have not "stayed within the law" any more or less than the TWU has -- a fair case could be made that they are the "thuggish" ones with "no respect for the rule of law.") But hey, as long as Grover Norquist and Stephen Moore like what they see a little bit better, I suppose that justifies making all of us walk for hours in the cold.

Honestly, these pple work for the government. My parents work for the government, and they get cushy benefits and also get a retirement age that is ridiculously young in today's economy. Transit workers get paid an average of $47,000/year, health benefits, and a PENSION. Unions were designed to prevent exploitation. How is this exploitation? If anyone is getting exploited, it would be the thousands of undocumented workers and immigrant workers (immigrants- like our ancestors, remember?)who get paid $10,000-$20,000 a year, get paid by the hour, live mostly in the outside boroughs, and are suffering the most from this strike. Does anyone realize how many innocent bystanders will lose their jobs due to this strike?

And at this point, what the MTA is holding out for would save a paltry $20 million per year

Actually, according to that New York Times article, the MTA is holding out for what would save only $20 million over THREE years. This is less than what the city will pay for extra police overtime during the FIRST TWO DAYS OF THE STRIKE ALONE. [Link.]

Can someone explain how the MTA's position makes sense? Seriously.

I take it that the city doesn't want to set a precedent of paying generous pensions, because the costs could snowball down the road. But is it really worth it?

thanks, bikepath -- read that one a bit too quickly.

The $20 million figure is deceiving...From the same Times article:

Mr. Dellaverson declined to spell out how much that proposal would save each year. "Pension changes always have small effects at the beginning and grow over time," he said. John J. Murphy, a pension expert and former executive director of the New York City Employees' Retirement System, said he computed that the authority's pension proposal would have a modest saving at first: $2.25 million in the first year, $4.8 million in the second year and $7.8 million in the third year.

But he said the plan would achieve significant savings, more than $160 million in the first 10 years, with some officials estimating that it would save more than $80 million a year after 20 years.

Mr. Dellaverson said it was important for the authority to try to control its pension outlays even in a year when it had a surplus. The authority's pension outlays for the transit workers have soared to $453 million this year, triple the amount in 2002.

But he said the plan would achieve significant savings, more than $160 million in the first 10 years, with some officials estimating that it would save more than $80 million a year after 20 years.

Given that the city claims the strike has cost hundreds of millions PER DAY to businesses, and has cost the city AT LEAST 20 million in police overtime costs alone, my question is: Why didn't these actual, present costs of hundreds of millions, outweigh those potential future costs, described in the quote above? (Esp. given that economists say present costs should be weighted more than future costs, as those present outlays would have grown substantially in interest over 20 yrs. if they had been banked) Was the city just being stubborn on principle or because of politics? Or has the city really saved money by taking a hard line?

I'm no economist and am not sure of the answers. Genuinely wondering.

The TWU rejected:
11% compounded raise for a 3 year deal because they wanted 24% over 3 years.
MTA agreeing to MLK Day off making 12 paid days off a year.
An independent consultant to oversee disciplinary actions.
ONLY new workers contributing 1% for health insurance!!
ONLY new workers to retire at 62 and contribute 3% of their salary to pension.

I'm no fan of the mismanaged MTA but the TWU is stuck in archaic 1950s mentality. Retire at 55 and pay nothing for insurance and pension...lol thats a joke!!