transit strike

well, i've spent the last 5 days worrying about whether there's going to be a transit strike, planning for such an event and listening to my boss (who lives 3 blocks from work) and others complain about how these people make plenty of money and have no right to strike, given that they don't seem to be exploited. and you know what?
they almost had me convinced.


but now the strike actually came, as i couldn't believe it actually would, until i went to bed last night thinking that it might actually be a reality. not 100% sure of what i was going to do, i ended up having a pretty easy time of it, ditching my plan of takign the LIRR to jamaica and back to penn and then catchign the special shuttle run by my hospital from 34th to 68th. instead, my roommate, who works for the parks department, got me a ride with her in a parks car that someone drove from prospect park up to their offices at 106th and central park, and then i just had to walk down from 96th st. it actually worked out really well for all of us- i got the ride, and i made the fourth person in their car, which allowed us to take the brooklyn battery tunnel into manhattan and we flew right through the tunnel and up the fdr; otherwise they would have to have gone through queens and up and around on the triboro, which supposedly had mad traffic. my worst tzuris was the fact that I picked this day, of all days, to forget my ipod headhones at home. we should all be so lucky for the duration of the strike.

i'm still a little bit torn, given that this incredibly powerful union is causing all of this trouble for workers who make a lot more money than many new yorkers, these being those also likely hardest hit by the strike (i.e. those payed by the day or the hour, not salaried). while i don't agree with bloomberg's bullshit claims that their actions are "morally reprehensible," i do wonder if they couldn't have just settled for binding arbitration.
i wish i was more knowledgable and understanding of the details of the issues, though, because i don't even know that much about things like arbitration, how they work, how things would have turned out for the MTA and our train conductors if that had been chosen as an acceptable solution.

The concerns I've been hearing are echoed in the comments posted on the transit workers union's blog, where many angry "anonymous" folks have been venting. However, a number of strikers and supporters have responded, also in the comments, raising good points like:

A question to all who condemn the strike should be: would you take this
job, at their pay and conditions?

And:

how about when you go to work, is there anybody taking a piss a few feet from you or maybe some pervert playing with himself. how about your bosses do they write you up for wearing scarves in the winter time or maybe take you off the job because your top button on your shirt is not buttoned?

Some of these same issues are raised today in a NYTimes article, in which Dr. Marian Swerdlow, an author and former train conductor says:

"The working conditions are more physically onerous, the treatment by managers
more disrespectful, and the abuse from the public more hurtful, than any other
group of public workers in the city experiences."

Also from the Times article, Dr. Snyder, an associate professor of journalism and media studies at Rutgers University in Newark:

"Transit workers, because of the schedules they work and the conditions they
work in, are often in industrial environments that most New Yorkers have left
behind a long time ago," said . The idea that a motorman has to scramble to
find a place to urinate on a busy day is not something most of us face on the
job."

The article's premise is that the TWU has both unique motives and power, because of the nature of the jobs and the power they have to fuck up the city without destroying it. While I agree with the anonymous commenter from the TWU blog who questioned whether critiques of the strike would fill their shoes for a day of working in the tunnels, I don't know if the extent of Swerdlow's remark can really be proven. While en masse, they may have to deal with some of the harshest least sightly things, I'm sure there are plenty of other government workers in equally bad conditions, with equally bad treatment. [Please correct me if I'm wrong.]

Much to my suprise, the Daily News' Juan Gonzalez has pointed out that this strike had been planned in impeccable detail, and was ready to go forward last week. The additional days only bought Touissaint more time to organize the strike and perhaps some slight bit of positive publicity, making him seem like more of a flexible guy. [Except I don't really buy Gonzalez's argument on that last point; I think the union seems even more unreasonable now, becasue the 4 days led to a better offer by the MTA, which they rejected, looking perhaps less flexible than ever.]

The intervening days since Thursday, did, however give Touissant and the TWU the ability to recruit support from other unions into their cause, although I think it would be totally absurd if any other unions including Metro-North or LIRR struck in "solidarity." Yes, I feel morally reprehensible for putting the word solidarity in quotations, and maybe it's my newly-salaried, rapidly-bourgouisifying-ass talking, but I don't see what that would accomplish. The strike obviously can't go on forever, although things will get REALLY fucking interesting if it lasts through Christmas or longer, and I don't see what additional striking workers will do except mess up everyone's lives, and cost both the city, the union and the workers lots of money. In the words of the fictitious (read: obscure West Wing reference coming) Dalton Millgate, "Screw the fruit loops, Sam."

But I was really in denial about all of this actually happening, and thus am surprised that it was really so well orchestrated by Touissant. I keep feeling surprised that they actually seem to be happy, that they are inflicting all of this on the city. While, it's not worthy of the extensive fines, it is very annoying, and the fines are still there for the union, and I don't see why they should be cheering, beyond being an example of the mob mentality. I didn't understand before how the city gets all of those workers to pay the steep fines, but then I felt very dumb when someone explained to me very simply that the union pays and then takes it out of their paychecks. which brings me to my next point- my unease with the fact that the board of the union gets decide on this strike for the thousands of members, some of whom may have practical or ideological objection to the strike. so, i've heard vague bits and pieces on websites, message boards and by word of mouth, about the ability of individuals to show up for work and strikebreak. having subscribed to the TWU's email list for updates a few weeks back, this evening i received a message from them (apparently the email list is supposed to only be for union members) with the following attached flyer:

"A message to any TWU Local 100 Member who is thinking of crossing the picket line from your 34,000 striking brothers and sisters: Think before you act. Is it worth it to lose your Union soul? Is it worth it to make 34,000 life-long enemies? Is it worth it to stab your co-workers in the back? In your heart, you know the answer is NO. Don't Do It."

(certain parts of which were written in huge, scary big block bold letters of at least font size 45.)

I will continue to ponder what I think of that. Meanwhile, more info available at Gothamist.
Good night from one of the Upper East Side, where I'm camping out at a friend's.