Working Life's ongoing special section devoted to holding the Cafta Fifteen accountable.
Buy the Wal-Mart documentary for $12.95
« Pitting Workers Against Each Other | Main | Second Day Analysis of Transit Deal »
December 28, 2005
The Transit Deal
So, we have a deal. Just in time for the New Year. And the question is: how did the transit workers do?
On the one hand, Transit Workers Local 100 president Roger Toussaint comes out on top on the issue that sparked the three-day strike--there will be no give backs on pensions. Workers with 25 years on the job can still retire with a full pension at 55 and they will contribute just 2 percent of their wages to the defined benefit plan (meaning, a pension that pays out a guaranteed amount each month--which, in my book, is a real pension plan).
But, the contract does have a new bad element--health care costs will now fall on the workers in a new financial hit to their pockets. They will have to pay 1.5 percent of their wages towards health coverage. This immediately drains a part of the 10.5 percent hike over three years. And it's a terrible precedent for the rest of the public employees. And it continues the slow but sure erosion of wages and benefits (and I'll toss in the small but important point that the contract will now expire in January of 2009, not December 2008, giving the union less leverage if they are forced into giving back on pensions three years from now--and I will bet my last dollar that the demand on pensions will be even harsher then; if you think the billionaire mayor, who has no clue what regular people go through to make ends meet, was over the top in using coded language during the strike--referring to the strkers as "thuggish"--what do you think he'll do and say if the transit authority goes after pensions in 2009 when he's just one year away from leaving City Hall to go back to spending his fortune?).
I don't know that Toussaint had a choice at this point. It's unlikely that he could have taken his members back out on strike--particularly after he was undercut by his own international union, the Transport Workers Union, and, as many labor activists in the city felt, was not given the kind of 100 percent backing from the rest of the city's labor leadership. Overall, the financial piece of this deal is not terrible, if you look just at the three-year period. But, long-term, I think it is yet another weakening of the idea that people deserve to earn a decent enough living to provide for their families security.
Obviously, the final point, lest I forget, is: now, can we begin to discuss the idea of Medicare For All? It is the only solution to resolve the health care crisis, which, again, has proven to be a financial albatross.
December 28, 2005 in Labor | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451b76269e200d8345b49a969e2
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference The Transit Deal:
» Bush hoping to win more battles in 2006 from Unpartisan.com Political News and Blog Aggregator
President Bush, bruised by months of setbacks, enters the new year hoping to win congressional battl [Read More]
Tracked on Dec 28, 2005 6:31:50 PM
Comments
now, can we begin to discuss the idea of Medicare For All? It is the only solution to resolve the health care crisis, which, again, has proven to be a financial albatrossI whole heartedly agree. There is no reason why health care should even be a bargaining issue. It is a moral and societal issue to be dealt with at that level. Not an issue to be dealt with individually and bargained away.
You've got my support!
Posted by: Marc | Dec 28, 2005 9:55:21 AM
Thanks for the wrap-up; I was a little lost as to how to call the settlement.
Wouldn't it be a good idea for the workers to mobilize legislative reform of the Taylor laws between now and as soon as possible? Would that be a realistic aspiration?
So much of the spoils in these fights are seated in public opinion. How can the workers mobilize media?
Posted by: liberal elite | Dec 28, 2005 3:43:57 PM
Liberal elite:
Your's is an easy question to answer--though the answer itself is hard to put in place: Stop giving the established media so much of your time, money and attention.
This may sound like a shameless pitch, and in a way I suppose there's some truth to the pitch part (though I'm not plugging the name of the publication, now am I?), but one of these days organized labor leaders have to stop playing ball with the corporate hacks in the nation's big media. Try supporting alternative media ventures (and no, I'm not talking about those so-called alt weeklies, most of them are run by corporations too)and while you're at it, start your own newspaper or radio station/show locally.
Most importantly, go out and talk to people about what's really going on. Use the same tactics organizers use in the field. There's nothing like a little conversation.
In unity,
Brendan
Posted by: Brendan | Dec 28, 2005 6:33:48 PM
Sometimes I'm in line behind a customer
playing lotto. The clerk asks something like
"lump sum or monthly payments".
The right answer is "lump sum".
Take the money and run.
Monthly payment defined benefit plans, public or
private, are dinosaurs. If possible, take the
pension in a lump sum ASAP and run !
Posted by: Afree Marquette | Dec 28, 2005 10:43:28 PM
Three cheers for Roger Toussaint and the members of the Transit Workers Local 100. They had the guts and willingness to draw the line in the sand regarding pension security and won the battle. The issues around health care are far more complicated and will require a unified and concerted effort on the part of organized labor if the concept of “Medicare for All”, will ever become a reality.
I was, however, troubled by the seeming lack of effective information dissemination on the part of organized labor in this action. Bloomberg and his anti-union, and anti-worker, sentiments were all over the mass media. And, it was effective. Most people I have spoken to about this campaign supported it if they were also in a union. However, non-union people were almost one hundred percent opposed to the strike and considered the striking workers “greedy” and “selfish”, while acknowledging that their own employment benefit packages were nowhere near as good as those being fought for by Local 100 members. And although I’m in the Philadelphia, PA area, this strike had national implications. But once again, organized labor seemed unable to effectively use the mass media to provide legitimacy to the strike.
It just seems to me that no matter what the issue; Medicare for All, Pension Security, Living Wage, The Wal-Martization of America, if organized labor isn’t able to mount effective mass media campaigns to deliver our message to the American people, and especially to non-union workers, we are dead.
John Foster
GCC/IBT Local 4C
Posted by: John Foster | Dec 28, 2005 10:58:45 PM
This settlement was a lousy deal for TWU workers. Basically, workers and commuters got the SHAFT.
Brendan is right, we have to stop feeding the corporate owned media our time.
Posted by: qrswave | Dec 29, 2005 1:34:24 PM
Thanks for the support, qrswave. If anyone is interested, we have a short article on the contract that shows how some of the TWU workers feel about the deal:
http://newstandardnews.net/content/index.cfm/items/2715
And--so sorry to do this but it is important--if you are so inclined, please help keep independent reporting alive by becoming a TNS member.
In unity,
Brendan
P.S. Good luck in the Senate race, Jonathan. I've been trying to get a few folks who live in NYC to volunteer for your campaign becasue I wish I could.
Posted by: Brendan | Dec 30, 2005 2:34:00 PM
Thanks for the support, qrswave. If anyone is interested, we have a short article on the contract that shows how some of the TWU workers feel about the deal:
http://newstandardnews.net/content/index.cfm/items/2715
And--so sorry to do this but it is important--if you are so inclined, please help keep independent reporting alive by becoming a TNS member.
In unity,
Brendan
P.S. Good luck in the Senate race, Jonathan. I've been trying to get a few folks who live in NYC to volunteer for your campaign because I wish I could.
Posted by: Brendan | Dec 30, 2005 2:34:21 PM
The failure to effectively use media during this strike is not a surprise. I believe Labor's biggest weakness is not using message projection BEFORE getting into serious negotiations. Media and political action are the two other legs of what I believe is the four-legged stool (legal and internal union activism are the other two)that Labor needs to use in a coordinated and strategic way as a foundation for effective negotiations. Unfortunately, too many Labor Leaders are inclined to only look inward and then end up reactive and behind the curve when it comes to using (manipulating?) the media as part of a bargaining strategy. Instead of using the media to define the negotiations and control the message too many leaders miss the opportunity and then end up playing defense. Not a good place to be. I have carved out a good niche business, coming out of the Labor Movement,by helping labor leaders to get over their aversion to the media and instead use both paid and "free" media more effectively. More strategic thought needs to be devoted to this aspect of strategy and it appears to me, from this most recent example and others, that there is still a lot more work to be done.
Posted by: Bob | Jan 2, 2006 11:59:41 AM
From a distance, it's difficult to determine whether the TWU strike was a win, lose or draw for transit workers and for labor in general. But I do have an observation based on the coverage I've seen and the comments I've read.
Militant as the rank and file of TWU is, their leadership appears not to have learned some key lessons of the past several years. You rarely win a strike alone. And you need to prepare alliances within labor and the community at large long before you post a picket line.
In California, this was dramatically manifested in the UFCW strike a few years back. A traditional "power strike" resulted in a multi-month war of attrition. The strikers had sympathy from shoppers--but had laid no groundwork in the community at large or in the labor movement. The rest of the labor movement and the community came in after the strike was underway and helped salvage a settlement--but it was a settlement that favored management greatly and from which the UFCW has not (and may not) recover from.
In contrast, HERE in LA (and in San Francisco) have fought a protracted battle that has engaged labor, religous groups and political allies over several years. Internal organizing and limited job actions have been complemented by an organized boycott of employer hotels and public demonstrations/actions in support of workers. A brief strike in San Francisco was followed by an employer lockout that was ended by public pressure. In LA, a settlement was reached after millions in business was lost by the hotels with the impending loss of millions more from the pullout of the National Education Association convention last July. San Francisco continues to fight on.
To briefly summarize: Striking is the easy part. Winning strikes usually requires an effort to engage the broader community with an understanding of why this fight is just and benefits our class as a whole.
Posted by: Doug | Jan 4, 2006 1:40:14 PM
Saw you on Brian lerher Live, at 2am.
Wish to contribute, though I am an independent
you have my vote. I work for the transit authority
and would like to distribute anything. I've never been
active(politically).I've talked with a handful of
co-workers and to a person we all wish to impeach
Bloomberg, but where is the political mechanism
to set it up
and follow it through.
Posted by: Stanley Mocko | Jan 16, 2006 12:28:59 AM
The comments to this entry are closed.
