Well, the fuckers actually went on strike. My roommate owes me a beer.
I spent the day working from home—a great luxury, I know—which was not the picnic it sounds like, since I had to download the company software and it made my computer completely wig out, meaning everything I did took at least six times as long as it normally did. And now my back hurts because I've basically been sitting in this chair all day. How did I do this for four years, again?
To be honest, I have a hard time sympathizing with either side in this situation. On the one hand, I don't trust the MTA as far as I can throw a subway car, and who the hell asked them to spend their surplus on holiday discounts, anyway? I have to buy a Metrocard one way or the other. I don't think I've even noticed whether I've gotten any discounts or not, and it's certainly not any big incentive for me to buy more cards or keep patronizing the MTA in the future. ("Gee, the MTA isn't giving me a break for the holidays—think I'll go take a cab instead.") And it's not as if the MTA has engendered any goodwill over the years with, you know, regular and efficient train service, clean stations and cars, working PA systems, tight security, and transparent finances. I also am a good little liberal, and I try to support unions whenever possible, because it's important for workers to band together so they don't get screwed over by The Man.
On the other hand. Come ON, people. The average salary for a transit worker is $55,000 a year? (Bus drivers are sitting pretty at $63,000.) They want 8 percent yearly raises? They want to retire at age 50, and not to have to contribute anything toward health insurance, ever? Yes, I understand that they're exaggerating for the sake of principle, and that they'll accept less than 8 percent at the end of the day. I was in a union that almost went on strike once over stalled negotiations, so I know how these things go. And like I said, blah blah blah MTA is full of bastards and it's a tough job that gets little respect and blah blah whatever. Still. Up until a few months ago, I was working three jobs and still not making $55,000 a year, and for a while I was paying for my own health insurance on top of that. I've never NOT contributed toward the cost of company health insurance, not even when I was in a union. The thought of retiring at 50, or even 55? That's a laugh. And I'm one of the lucky ones. There are people who support their families on daily or hourly wages. How do you think a strike affects them? If this strike goes on too much longer, it could wind up costing the city as much as—or more than—September 11 did. Well, actually, I take that statement back (mostly because I pulled it out of my ass, and I don't want to be held to it), but it's just interesting to me that after all these years trying to recover from the damage done by a terrorist attack, we're suddenly suffering from another sudden and drastic economic setback, only this time it's being inflicted on the city by New Yorkers themselves.
And by the way, you think a three percent raise is too small? How about getting laid off? I'm not going to do the math, but off the top of my head, I'd say that losing your salary comes out to oh, let's say less than getting a three percent raise. Don't you think that the transit workers should be worried about losing their jobs entirely? I mean, what do the token-booth clerks DO these days, anyway? They won't sell you tokens or Metrocards; they just send you over to the vending machine. They may give you a map, if they have any. Otherwise, they seem pretty skilled at sitting there quietly, watching teenagers jump the turnstiles, and pressing the button to open the special gate. Oh, and they have to write on the white board. That's something.
Look, I don't mean to sound entirely unsympathetic toward the transit workers. They do have lousy jobs. They do work for an unfeeling, monolithic, badly run organization that's deep in the pocket of state politicians. They have every right to want the best deal possible for themselves and future generations of transit workers. I understand that it's troubling to have benefits—no matter how cushy—taken away from you, as the MTA originally wanted to do by, for example, raising the retirement age from 55 to 62. And unions are incredibly important; they do a lot of good. But just because you work in the public sector and have traditionally enjoyed great benefits doesn't mean you get a free pass for doing serious economic damage to the vast majority of riders (not to mention small business owners) who make far less than the workers who are going on strike. A wise man once said, with great power comes great responsibility. Take a stand, by all means yes, but at the end of the day, everyone has to compromise. Everyone. The MTA made some major concessions. It seemed as though there was progress. Why couldn't the TWU keep talking?
I blame Toussaint, who seems like a total blowhard; and to a certain extent, Pataki, who can't be bothered to deal with the strike because he's running for president but who created this pension mess in the first place. Soooo, I'm still conflicted. The MTA's coming in with that last-minute demand that workers contribute six percent to their pension funds seems a little weird, to say the least. (Side note: I have zero idea how much I contribute to my pension fund. Maybe I ought to find out.) In my defense, nobody else can agree, either. Take a look here.