Archive for Transit Labor

In just 30 days from now, the current contract between the TWU and the MTA will expire, and while a strike seems rather unlikely, so too does a smooth resolution of the labor situation. The MTA, under Jay Walder, had pledged a net-zero increase in labor costs, and the authority’s long-term budget planning dictates such a result. Union leaders, on the other hand, realize such a commitment means firings or wage freezers for their members. It’s turning out to be quite a stalemate.

One of the key areas of concern for the MTA focuses around workrules. The authority wants more flexibility in defining jobs. There’s no reason why a station cleaner can’t also address routine maintenance concerns, and yet, as Pete Donohue reported yesterday, the TWU is pushing back on these issues. He writes:

The MTA is seeking dozens of work-rule changes it believes will increase productivity and reduce labor costs. Generally, it wants to break down previously negotiated barriers establishing the different pay rates and tasks for job titles like cleaner and station maintainer.

The Transport Workers Union is willing to negotiate reasonable contract changes, Local 100 President John Samuelsen said. Loading more chores on station cleaners may not fit that description, in his view.

“They don’t have enough cleaners in stations to keep them clean right now, which is why there’s a rat problem,” Samuelsen said. “Taking them away from their duties to do something else doesn’t seem to make sense,” he said. “They have the right to bargain over what they want — but that’s not something we’re interested in doing.”

Of course, as president of the union, Samuelsen won’t admit to any concessions in the pages of a major daily newspaper. They are going to come though one way or another.

As Donohue relates, asking cleaners to “change a light bulb or unclog the toilet” is but one in a series of work rule revisions the authority has requested. The management also would like to require bus drivers to help change tires and refuel their vehicles. The MTA wants to eliminate rest periods at terminals following end-to-end subway runs, and they want to cut the full-time staff who must work at least eight hours by 20 percent. These are no small demands.

Right now, negotiations are in the early stages, and both sides are angling for good press. The MTA though simply cannot afford labor increases. After losing out on a few hundred million dollars as state tax revenues fell short and the payroll tax was partially repealed, a labor increase would put further pressure on the authority’s bottom line. Bigger operational issues — such as system-wide OPTO and overtime reform — might have to wait it out as well. What the next thirty days may bring will have an impact on our transit system one way or another.

Categories : TWU
Comments (75)
“I’m not going to make any promises, but certainly the union doesn’t want to go on strike and has no intention of striking.” TWU President John Samuelsen

Talk about trial by fire. One day after starting as the MTA’s Executive Director, eventual CEO and Chairman Joseph Lhota is set to kick off negotiations with the TWU today, and already, he’s drawing praise from union leaders. Whether he can sustain that initial burst of good will may dictate whether or not the TWU strikes in mid-January as its contract runs out.

In an interview with Brian Lehrer this morning, TWU President John Samuelsen talked at length about the looming negotiations and his relationship with those in charge at the authority. Never one to miss an opportunity to bash the departed Jay Walder, Samuelsen spoke optimistically of the negotiations while stressing the hard line the TWU intends to toe.

“I’m more optimistic regarding having a labor/management relationship with Lhota. That was impossible under his predecessor,” he said. “I think Lhota has demonstrated already a willingness to open a dialogue with the union on a host of issues. I think it was the right thing to do for Lhota to reach out to the union and jointly sign a letter to the district attorneys in the five boroughs.”

As the talk turned to the negotiations, though, Samuelsen stressed how the TWU would not give into threats from management. “We’re not ready to do that,” Samuelsen said of a zero wage increase, “We don’t believe the other unions should have done that. We’re not in those circumstances, and we certainly won’t be bullied into accepting wage freezes by the threat of layoffs…We do not intend to accept zeroes or a wage freeze.”

Bullying seemed to be a common theme. Samuelsen noted how Walder had threatened the MTA with layoffs if they did not drop the three-percent wage hike, awarded to the TWU by an arbitration panel in 2009. Walder was forced to dismiss the workers when the wage hike went through, and Samuelsen claimed a dubious triumph. “Our folks are almost all back to work, and the riding public is still suffering for it,” he said of the service cuts. “We demonstrated last year that we’re not going engage in that type of bully negotiation and we’re not going to do it this time either.”

The key moment came toward the end of Lehrer’s interview when the WNYC host challenged the TWU president on a strike if the contract situation is not resolved by January. Samuelsen hedged. “I’m not going to make any promises, but certainly the union doesn’t want to go on strike and has no intention of striking. But for me to make a promise would be immature…I mean, premature,” he said with an amusing slip of the tongue.

Both the MTA and TWU are in a tough position during the negotiations. The TWU knows Lhota was brought in keep costs down and toe a hard line on wage increases. Lhota knows the TWU will not be forgiving in its ask. As negotiations begin today, two months in advance of a potential strike date, all eyes will be on these two leaders. Can we avoid another mid-winter subway worker walk-out? The ghosts of 2005 sure hope so.

Categories : TWU
Comments (31)

Over the past few weeks, as the MTA has unveiled its budget projections for the next few years while grappling with ways to fill a hole in its capital budget, debt has become us. State Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli issued a report again warning of the MTA’s debt bomb, and transit advocates have been sounding the alarm with more rigor. This week, the Transport Workers Union Local 100 joined the chorus.

The TWU, which has lend its support to the Occupy Wall Street protests — more on that over the next few days — issued a statement on the MTA’s ledger, and Channel 13′s Metro Focus blog highlighted it yesterday. “The New York City Transit Authority has been in debt to Wall Street for 50 years with no hope of repayment,” Kevin Harrington, acting vice president of Local 100, said. “Wall Street has hurt the transit system with their usurious loans, and a good portion of the Transit Authority’s budget is paying back the interest on these loans without even attacking the principal.”

As Alice Brennan and Alexander Hotz report, the MTA has paid off hundreds of millions in fees. A large group of underwriters have earned close to $40 million dollars by guaranteeing the MTA’s debt, and investment banks have earned substantial fees as well. As long as the state refuses to investment in subway and commuter rail infrastructure improvements and expansion efforts in the New York City area, though, the MTA is left with only Wall Street as a source of money. Yet again, as the TWU notes, the riders are the ones who come out behind.

Categories : Asides, MTA Economics, TWU
Comments (41)

The TWU's petition drive will persuade this rat to leave the subway. (Photo by flickr user Ludovic Burtron)

No one likes seeing rats in the subway. It’s one of those universal things about New York City because rats are disgusting, unpleasant to look at and dirty creatures with which we co-exist uneasily. If it were possible to get rid of them all, the MTA would in a heartbeat.

Lately, though, rats have become more prevalent underground. Transit has cut its cleaning budget, and garbage collection runs have become less frequently. As trash sits, rats take over. Now, though, the TWU wants the MTA to take action.

Yesterday, the Transport Workers Union Local 100 unveiled a new petition effort. They are asking riders to sign a letter that urges the MTA to “adopt a System-Wide Rat Eradication Initiative immediately.” The petition is available online, and TWU operatives were out and about on Wednesday. “We have a huge rat problem,” Kevin Harrington of the TWU said at Parsons/Archer in Queens yesterday.

As union members called for more cleaners, the MTA said they were working on, well, something. “We are working with the city in an effort to find more effective ways of addressing the rodent problem,” the authority said.

It’s hard not to applaud the TWU for this initiative, but there’s no small sense of irony here either. Because of restrictive work rules, the MTA can’t use existing station personnel — many of whom have little to do — to help clean the system. They have employees who sit in their booths but can’t sweep the platforms or help with trash collection. Instead, we have a regimented system of jobs, and with the MTA eying the dismissal of over 200 cleaners in the looming years, the stations will just get dirtier and thus more rat-infested.

Subway Rider, a commenter on Streetsblog, put it best:

They think that attacking, undermining and directing populist and politician anger toward the MTA is a great strategy for them. Yet, all this strategy has done over the last 15 years is undermine the public’s confidence in the MTA and make it easier for Albany politicians to steal funding and resources from TWU employees! The result of TWU strategy is that TWU workers get laid off, their salaries are frozen and cut, their work conditions deteriorate.

But even more significant: The TWU doesn’t seem to get that making the public hate the MTA is bad for TWU workers. As far as the public is concerned, TWU employees are the face of the MTA. It’s the TWU workers who are sitting there napping in bullet-proof glass boxes while garbage collects in piles around them. The public doesn’t get angry at Jay Walder and the MTA board for that. The public looks at that TWU worker sitting in his box doing nothing and thinks: Hmm? Really? Is that a good use of MTA resources? Why is that man sitting in a glass box while machines dispense MetroCards and no one picks up the rubbish or puts up proper signage in this station?

When the group advocating for a solution is part of the problem, it’s hard not to grow cynical.

Categories : TWU
Comments (29)

A pair of articles concerning the TWU and its touchy relationship with the MTA caught my attention yesterday. First, NY1 reported on a small labor protest involving health care. Allegedly, the MTA has violated its contract by cutting some union members’ health care benefits, and the TWU has filed a protest. “There are issues with prescriptions, issues with hospital stays. There is an across the board effort by the MTA to nickel and dime transit workers to death,” TWU President John Samuelsen said. “If they attack our benefits, we’re gonna attack back.”

The Daily News too covered what they termed a “flash mob” protest. According to Pete Donohue’s coverage, Monday’s mini-protest was the first in a concerted attempt to bring “unorthodox and unexpected” to the MTA. “This fight starts now,” Samuelsen said.

For its part, the MTA struck a somewhat conciliatory tone. “We look forward to sitting at the bargaining table to negotiate, in good faith, a new collective bargaining agreement with TWU Local 100,” the MTA said. The problem is one of timing: The MTA cannot fight a political fight for capital dollars while negotiating with the union while waiting for and adjusting to a new CEO and Chairman. They could use a union willing to hold back until everything else is settled, but that seems like an unlikely outcome right now. The fall will be an interesting one indeed.

Categories : Asides, TWU
Comments (2)

With turmoil atop the MTA and labor negotiations looming, the TWU is already firing salvos at its counterparts across the table. In an interview with the Daily News today, Local 100 President John Samuelson said his union would use any means necessary to achieve their ends.

“TWU Local 100 has a history of fighting for our livelihoods, and we’re going to dig in and fight by every means possible,” he said. “There’s been no discussion by the executive board of a strike. The leadership of the union has no intention of striking. But when New York City transit workers get knocked to the floor, and someone puts a foot on their throats, who knows what their reaction is going to be?”

The rest of Pete Donahue’s piece rehashes the typical union gripes. They’re not happy with layoffs, health care and benefit plans ans their salaries. There’s no mention though of the MTA’s economic reality. Rather these are the words of a union that wants one thing – money – and everyone else, especially the riders who will pay no matter what, be damned. It sure sounds like a fun situation for the next MTA head, eh?

Categories : TWU
Comments (30)

While the news of Jay Walder’s sudden resignature stunned transit advocates this afternoon and left politicians praising him for his two years of service, his primary antagonists — Local 100 of the Transport Workers Union — had a vastly different take on the departure. They aren’t sorry to see him go in the least.

In a statement issued this evening, the union waved their goodbyes. “Transit workers won’t miss Jay Walder and quite frankly will be glad to see him go,” they said. “He has been antagonistic to the union and the workers from his first day on the job. His attempt last year to blackmail the union into major pay and other concessions led to gratuitous layoffs. He ushered in unprecedented service cuts in both subway and bus service, with particular insensitivity to already underserved areas of Queens, Brooklyn and the Bronx.”

Walder and the TWU did not get along from Day One. Walder came to the MTA amidst a legal challenge against the TWU’s arbitration-awarded raises, and he fought them to the greatest extent of the law, losing at each level. Walder also instituted sweeping changes in staffing levels that led to the axing of many TWU members and had vowed to keep labor spending at current levels during the upcoming contract negotiations. That obviously would have meant more layoffs or no wage increases.

The TWU really let Walder have it in their statement. It continued: “He never grasped the notion that our bus and subway systems are the most basic and vital service afforded to New York’s working class. And he was ineffective in dealing with Albany to not only secure new funding for public transportation to avoid service reductions, but to protect the dedicated sources of transit revenue. He attacked his blue collar workforce and his own lower level white collar employees. But never looked to upper management on his “quest” for cost savings.

“He leaves New York City transit in worse shape than when he arrived less than two years ago. We will urge the Governor to appoint a new Chair who will view his workers as allies not the enemy, and a person who fully grasps the magnitude of the contribution of our public transportation to the economic vitality of New York.”

These are strong words from the TWU which just saw the biggest impediment to its next three-year contract resign. I’ll be discussing this and other Walder developments in a bit on the 11 p.m. news on NBC 4, and I’ll have more thoughts on the resignation later this evening.

Categories : TWU
Comments (54)

As the hot summer days melt away, the MTA and its unionized workers are rushing headlong toward a labor battle. The authority, as we know, wants to keep labor costs steady, cap what it views as runaway pension spending and, if possible, halt or curtail wage increases. The union wants the polar opposite. While the two sides recently worked together to push Albany to approve a Transit Lockbox bill, the fall negotiations will be long and bitter.

In the build-up to these negotiations, battle lines are being drawn, and Monday’s Daily News featured the first salvo. In what was frankly an odd piece, Pete Donohue highlighted the perils of being a transit worker. Starting with the story of a 1995 station booth torching and mentioning a recent attack, he noted the incidents of violence perpetrated against transit workers by irate customers. These included token booth torchings in 1979 and 1988 as well.

Meanwhile, the article mentions some long-term statistics as well. Since 1947, 239 track workers were killed on the job, Donohue reports. It also, he writes without citing actual numbers, “seems a day doesn’t go by without someone jumping or falling in front of a train entering a station.” It all builds to one conclusion: “Straphangers shouldn’t be outraged that transit workers will at least ask for a cost-of-living increase. There should be outrage that the MTA will make a strong push to deny them one.”

If only it were that simple. This labor battle isn’t really about cost-of-living increases or worker safety. It’s going to be about worker productivity, job flexibility and personnel staffing levels. It will be about securing maximum efficiency from dwindling numbers of workers, and if the MTA is able to wrest the concessions it wants from the union, it will be far more likely to consider that cost-of-living wage that Donohue holds in such high esteem. (Anyway, as Larry Littlefield noted in the Streetsblog comments, it would help the argument to at least explore how transit workers’ wages have increased vis-a-vis other workers over the past few years. That’s an argument missing from the early discussions.)

So what then exactly are the real issues? Regular SAS readers will now them well. The lasting image of station agents is that of a worker fast asleep in a deserted station. The MTA will likely want to expand the role of those remaining station agents. Should they be required to leave their booths? On the flip side, what extra safety precautions can the MTA can guarantee? The overarching concern though is one of use: Do we even need as many station agents as we have?

Next come concerns over staffing levels. Do trains need a conductor and a driver? When will New York City embrace OPTO? Why have two people do the job of one? In a similar vein, why are the individual labor roles so limited? People who clean stations don’t clean trains and vice versa. The MTA will look to exact more productivity out of its labor force.

Finally, what of escalating pension costs? Should the MTA expect to sustain a slew of workers who can retire at 55 with full benefits but then live for another 25-30 years? The agency isn’t operating with much fiscal leeway, and if it has to pay a current labor force and a retired labor force, operating budgets are going to suffer.

In the right context, a cost-of-living adjustment and more safety precautions should be non-issues, and in that sense, Donohue is right on the money. Negotiations, though, are a constant give-and-take, and until both sides recognize that reality, the divide between them may be a deep one indeed.

Categories : Transit Labor
Comments (34)

Remember the story of Edward Meehan? He’s the bus driver who has been suspended 15 times by the MTA for a series of infractions including speeding and running red lights. The MTA finally moved to fire him two weeks ago after he was caught using a Staten Island express bus for less-than-wholesome meetings with local women, and of course, his union filed an appeal.

Well, the story ends well: Meehan’s firing has been upheld by an arbitrator. Meehan, says the arbitrator, engaged in “outrageous behavior.” “Discharge is the only appropriate penalty,” the decision says. Justice, after 15 suspensions. Seems like a sound process to me.

Categories : Asides, Transit Labor
Comments (4)

Earlier this week, when the Republican-controlled State Senate voted to repeal the payroll tax, I accused them of playing politics poorly with the MTA. I’ve already explained why Sen. Lee Zeldin’s fiscal claims are pure fantasy, and I’m not the only one eying this measure with skepticism.

In The Post today, Nicole Gelinas takes the Senate to task for missing what she feels are the right issues. First, Zeldin’s charges that the MTA could save $1.4 billion seem to resemble nothing approaching reality, and second, she wants to see state leaders getting tougher on wages and employee benefits. I’ll excerpt extensively for the purposes of discussion:

On Wednesday, Senate Republicans fulfilled a longtime promise, voting to slash the tax roughly in half: Their plan would exempt small businesses and schools come January, then end the tax in the suburbs over two years, while reducing it by a third within the city. But the bill has no chance in the Assembly; all the GOP has done is remind us that the shift of party control of the Senate only changes the sound of the grandstanding. The Republicans are no more likely to stick up for taxpayers and riders against public-sector unions than were the Democrats.

Sure, Sen. Lee Zeldin, the freshman Long Islander who has pushed hardest for the bill, sounds good. He says correctly that the MTA can be more efficient, sell off real estate and explore some privatization. But the MTA is already doing the first two: Headcount is down 4,066 people since 2008. Even if it cuts 4,000 more, it would still face a $660 million annual deficit by 2014.

Plus, Zeldin and colleagues are tiptoeing around the elephant in the room: Albany has no idea where to get the $9.9 billion needed for the next three years’ worth of investments in rail cars and buses, plus construction projects like bringing the Long Island Rail Road into Grand Central. Zeldin notes gamely that MTA Chairman Jay Walder can save bucks on capital. But even if Walder saved 20 percent, Albany would need to come up with nearly $8 billion. That’s an extra $520 million a year in debt costs.

The senators claim some of their tax repeal is pain-free. But this is fantasy: They’d give the MTA $100 million in revenues from New York’s carbon cap-and-trade plan — money that may well not materialize. And they’d restore state aid to the city, with the provision that Gotham devote $150 million to transit. That’s moving money around.

If the GOP were serious, it would address union-labor costs. In three years, MTA pension and health costs will rise 30 percent. It’s not just a city issue; suburban railroad workers enjoy benefits not available in the private sector. But in Wednesday’s debate, senators talked everything from MTA “mob infiltration” to “criminal accounting” to whether tax-paying is “patriotic.” Nobody said that the MTA’s workers should pay more for health care, saving $150 million, or that pensions for new workers should be less generous.

On a three-year wage freeze, Zeldin was less than firm, telling me that “I would support just about anything that the MTA and the unions agree to, provided it’s fiscally responsible.” He said that pressure should come from the popular governor, since “to do something that impacts large unions, it can’t be just one senator leading by the chin.”

GOP lawmakers, as usual, are gung-ho on the tax issue. But on the union medicine needed, they profess that it’s the MTA that has to come up with ideas. The MTA, in turn, knows not to ask for anything anti-union that Albany doesn’t support.

Democrats, who were too busy discussing Fernando Ferrar’s mustache, have been no better, she says, but that’s seemingly beside the point. No one in Albany is willing to push either the MTA or its unions to make some badly needed concessions.

Now, I’m not a stridently anti-union guy usually, and I’m certainly not as against organized labor as Gelinas and the Manhattan Institute are. Yet, it’s clear that the MTA has a labor problem. It cannot keep doling out wage raises and full pensions while the rest of its financial picture declines. It cannot become a welfare institution that cannot provide adequate transportation service because too much of its budget is tied up in employee compensation. Fiscal responsibility will start with better payroll measures.

Ultimately, the MTA should be looking at ways to streamline operations through OPTO, through overtime control and through better collaboration across departments. It’s slowly getting there, but it’s going to need political support to do so. Will the Governor step up? Will the Senate? Will anyone?

Categories : Transit Labor
Comments (36)
  • Extended Stay

    Featuring a wide range of sophisticated furnished apartments throughout the city and surrounding areas, ExecuStay can help you enjoy a New York extended stay that's both productive and relaxing.

  • Corporate Apartments

    As a resident of ExecuStay New York corporate apartments, you'll find that getting around is a snap, thanks to the many MTA subway lines, buses and yellow cabs.