Archive for TWU
Union, MTA square off over work rules changes
Posted by: | CommentsIn 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.
Samuelsen: TWU has ‘no intention of striking’
Posted by: | CommentsTalk 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.
TWU: MTA debt a Wall Street problem
Posted by: | CommentsOver 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.
From the TWU, a petition against rats and irony
Posted by: | Comments
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.
From the TWU, opening salvos in a long war
Posted by: | CommentsA 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.
TWU Prez: ‘We’re going to dig in and fight’
Posted by: | CommentsWith 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?
TWU ‘won’t miss Jay Walder,’ ‘glad to see him go’
Posted by: | Comments
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.
NY’s highest court declines to hear MTA’s wage hike appeal
Posted by: | CommentsThe New York Court of Appeals, the state’s highest court, has declined to hear the MTA’s appeal of arbitration-awarded raise for its unionized workers, The Daily News reported this afternoon. This decision effectively ends the MTA’s long-standing attempts to convince the state judiciary to overturn the binding arbitration award, and it will result in a three percent wage increase for TWU members retroactive to mid-January. “This is a huge victory for transit workers,” TWU Local 100 leader John Samuelsen said to The News. “This finally ends an unnecessary ordeal the MTA put its own employees through after an arbitration award gave us the raise.”
The legal battles the MTA has fought over this raise have been well documented on this site. I’ve always believed the MTA had a duty to pursue an initial attempt to getting a judge to reconsider the arbitration award, but with this final appeal, the authority had little chance of success. Fiscal hardship is not a viable grounds for overturning an arbitration award, and the MTA has expended considerable resources on this case. Either way, it’s over now.
Quick Hits: Trash trains, TWU negotiations, LI Bus
Posted by: | CommentsI’ve been pretty busy lately with less time than I’d like to devote to the site. I haven’t had much time to do much long-form reporting over the last few wees, but there are still a series of newsworthy happenings. Let’s run them down.
Profiling the train that collects the trash
After much hand-wringing over the cleanliness of eating on the subway, Pete Donohue took a ride on the garbage collection train for his Daily News column this week. Deep in Brooklyn, Donohue hopped the Southern, one of eight garbage trains currently in use and rode one of the 9:30 p.m.-to-5 a.m. shifts. Transit crews, he reports, pick up 90 tons of garbage per day, and perhaps that’s why rodents are so numerous underground.
Rife: Keeping an eye on the looming labor negotiations
Up in the Hudson Valley, Judy Rife of the Times Herald-Record has her eye on the looming negotiations between the MTA and the TWU. MTA CEO Jay Walder has vowed to maintain a “net zero” increase in the cost of labor spending as the union contracts come due, and Rife wants to hold Walder to his promise. “There can’t be any increase in the value of the contract, but raises are still possible if they’re counter-balanced by other savings,” MTA spokesman Aaron Donovan said to her. This is clearly a story I’ll be following this year.
Inside the Long Island Bus battle
In the Our Towns section in The Times today, Peter Applebome profiles the LI Bus debate. The fight between Nassau County Executive Edward Mangano and the MTA is well-trodden territory for SAS readers, but essentially, the county wants the MTA to foot the operations costs for Long Island Bus despite agreeing to fund the bill itself. The MTA has proposed cutting more than half of the bus routes, and Mangano keeps making noises about privatization despite extreme skepticism.
Politicians and activists are watching this fight to see how it’s resolved. “Simply put, County Executive Mangano is dreaming,” Kate Slevin, head of the Tri-State Transportation Campaign, said last week. “Let me make this clear — no other system in the country does what Mangano wants to do. Most county governments with private systems provide much more in the way of government funding, not less.”
On lawsuits, raises and rational economics
Posted by: | CommentsIf you had a 10 percent chance to save $80 million, how much would you pay to do so? What if you had a 25 percent chance to save $300 million? In a traditional economic model, the right answers are $8 million and $75 million respectively. Why then are Pete Donohue and the Daily News so surprised by the MTA’s legal bills?
In his column today, Donohue slams the authority for “paying hired-gun lawyers more than $540 an hour to deny token booth clerks earning $18 an hour a modest raise.” The MTA, he notes, is trying once again to overturn the third year of raises awarded to the TWU by an arbitration panel in 2009. After an unsuccessful lawsuit and appeal to stop the first set of raises, the MTA racked up a legal bill of nearly $700,000 after claiming a victory would have saved them close to $300 million.
Riders, of course, are “baffled” by what one man called “a clear example of the MTA wasting hundreds of thousands of dollars of public money on something they agreed on anyway.” Yet, they shouldn’t be. The MTA, which can’t really afford to dole out more money in raises, can save $80 million, and if it feels its chances of winning — admittedly slim due to the precedence of courts upholding binding arbitration awards — are worth the expenditures, then it’s a cost that makes economic sense. Despite Donohue’s portrayal of the challenge as a class issue, it is simply one of economics through and through.
That said, the real issue here concerns the bigger picture. Later this year, the MTA and TWU will again sit down to negotiate a new contract, and while the MTA won’t accept an arbitration offer so quickly this time, they do plan to dig in for a long fight. It might make more sense to save those labor bullets for later in the year and avoid this uphill cost. The MTA may be doing its legal due diligence, but this is a battle it will likely lose in court while courting bad press as the larger labor war with more at stake looms on the horizon.









