This strike will get out of control fast if something isn't done. What do our NY posters (Dio, et al.) think and whats it like in there???
I worked from home today. I'll probably do the same tomorrow and thursday. Starting Friday, I'm off until next year. So it doesn't hit me very hard.
What do I think of the strike? I think it sucks. People would rather work, and be able to get to work. But as you might guess, I'm pro labor. 3% raises each year is a lousy offer, and the MTA is acting like it's great. Cost of living increase last year was 4.1%, I believe. I dont' know abotu you, but I wouldn't sign any contract that ties me into raises for three years that are already lower than the the cost of living increases. Moreover, the only reason the Unions original demand (8%) looks ridiculous is by comparison to raises in other sectors, which are themselves depressed. It's a zesty deal being offered by the government for people who serve the city in no less an important capacity than fireman, cops or teachers. These people must be supported and well paid, or else the city suffers. They are the backbone, and if that backbone isn't making enough to live decent middle class lives, and they're made to work to be 62 to retire, the city will suffer. You don't make cops work until they're 62. You can't demand it of subway workers, who deal with shtein all day to serve the city. I support the strike and the unions.
Well, you asked.
If the CTA here in Chicago went on strike, i don't know what i'd do since i don't own a car or jetpack.
Philly survived the strike a couple months ago. yeah, I know it's not NY.
Thx for perspective Dio :yay :yay
I work in Jersey City and most of my co-workers live in NYC. It does suck, but Dio is right. The MTA was/is trying to farg the workers. The problem is, as with all service workers in NYC, its tough to pay them a middle class wage because middle class in NY is double that of almost anywhere else in the US (California is up there too).
the pay increases in philly have resulted in less service (cut buses and trains) and higher rates.
Quote from: Mad-Lad on December 20, 2005, 05:10:16 PM
If the CTA here in Chicago went on strike, i don't know what i'd do since i don't own a car or jetpack.
Buy and use a bicycle? ;) Do not forget to buy a rain suit as well if you do.
Quote from: Diomedes on December 20, 2005, 05:03:56 PM
I worked from home today. I'll probably do the same tomorrow and thursday. Starting Friday, I'm off until next year. So it doesn't hit me very hard.
What do I think of the strike? I think it sucks. People would rather work, and be able to get to work. But as you might guess, I'm pro labor. 3% raises each year is a lousy offer, and the MTA is acting like it's great. Cost of living increase last year was 4.1%, I believe. I dont' know abotu you, but I wouldn't sign any contract that ties me into raises for three years that are already lower than the the cost of living increases. Moreover, the only reason the Unions original demand (8%) looks ridiculous is by comparison to raises in other sectors, which are themselves depressed. It's a zesty deal being offered by the government for people who serve the city in no less an important capacity than fireman, cops or teachers. These people must be supported and well paid, or else the city suffers. They are the backbone, and if that backbone isn't making enough to live decent middle class lives, and they're made to work to be 62 to retire, the city will suffer. You don't make cops work until they're 62. You can't demand it of subway workers, who deal with shtein all day to serve the city. I support the strike and the unions.
Well, you asked.
I'm getting a 3.5% raise next year and last year got a 3% raise. The year before was 0% with only a bonus. Tell me again why a subway operator deserves 8%?
From NY Times: "The union originally called for 8 percent annual raises, but late in the day it indicated that it would accept smaller increases if the authority agreed to decrease disciplinary actions against employees by 25 percent. The union did not say how much it was willing to trim its demand....Going into yesterday, the authority had offered two raises of 3 percent in a 27-month contract. On pensions, the authority wants to raise the retirement age for newly hired employees to 62 after 30 years of service, while the union wants to lower it to age 50 after 20 years of service. At present, transit workers can retire at age 55 after 25 years of work, with a pension equal to half their annual pay; the average is $55,000, including overtime."
Yeah, cry me a river, Nancy.
Quote from: Philly_Crew on December 21, 2005, 08:13:45 AMI'm getting a 3.5% raise next year and last year got a 3% raise. The year before was 0% with only a bonus. Tell me again why a subway operator deserves 8%?
From NY Times: "The union originally called for 8 percent annual raises, but late in the day it indicated that it would accept smaller increases if the authority agreed to decrease disciplinary actions against employees by 25 percent. The union did not say how much it was willing to trim its demand....Going into yesterday, the authority had offered two raises of 3 percent in a 27-month contract. On pensions, the authority wants to raise the retirement age for newly hired employees to 62 after 30 years of service, while the union wants to lower it to age 50 after 20 years of service. At present, transit workers can retire at age 55 after 25 years of work, with a pension equal to half their annual pay; the average is $55,000, including overtime."
Yeah, cry me a river, Nancy.
The fact that you are getting zesty raises doesn't require that they get zesty raises, too. Maybe you should be pissed at yourself for accepting such lousy pay, rather than at the TWU.
And while I have gotten only 3.5% raises the last 2 years, I have significant vertical ability. And a one step promotion will increase my salary on the range of 10%.
These guys will never see a promotion, or a substantial increase in pay along those lines.
pay raises should be based on job performance, not contractually predetermined.
ever try and ask a question to someone taking subway tokens? yeah, these miserable people deserve 8% a year.
if you agree with their fight for more money, and when they get the 8% a year, there should be no complaining when the transit rates go up on a semi-annual basis.
and how many years did you sacrifice in school to put yourself in that position MMH?
Quote from: Wingspan on December 21, 2005, 10:00:55 AM
ever try and ask a question to someone taking subway tokens? yeah, these miserable people deserve 8% a year.
:-D the philly subway token people are pure evil.
Quote from: MURP on December 21, 2005, 10:17:12 AM
Quote from: Wingspan on December 21, 2005, 10:00:55 AM
ever try and ask a question to someone taking subway tokens? yeah, these miserable people deserve 8% a year.
:-D the philly subway token people are pure evil.
fargin hate them. i was an independant contractor when i lived in philly and id ask for receipts when i'd buy tokens for the week. id always get a shtein ass attitude from one of those iceholes.
Welcome to my world, Noo Yawkers and Merry Christmas! ;)
Quote from: Wingspan on December 21, 2005, 10:00:55 AMever try and ask a question to someone taking subway tokens? yeah, these miserable people deserve 8% a year.
All the time. They answer my questions just fine. Maybe you should stop asking stupid questions?
Quote from: Wingspan on December 21, 2005, 10:00:55 AMif you agree with their fight for more money, and when they get the 8% a year, there should be no complaining when the transit rates go up on a semi-annual basis.
They are already increasing at that rate, and the MTA has a billion + surplus.
Quote from: T_Section224 on December 21, 2005, 10:03:45 AM
and how many years did you sacrifice in school to put yourself in that position MMH?
Sacrifice? Gimme a break!
You social darwinists drive me nuts.
it funny they said on cnn today that heads were completely lost up there cause a lot of people have never been above ground to travel...thus when they had to walk instead of train they had no idea where to go...looked like the mall parking lot in dawn of the dead
Quote from: Diomedes on December 21, 2005, 12:07:42 PM
Quote from: Wingspan on December 21, 2005, 10:00:55 AMever try and ask a question to someone taking subway tokens? yeah, these miserable people deserve 8% a year.
All the time. They answer my questions just fine. Maybe you should stop asking stupid questions?
Quote from: Wingspan on December 21, 2005, 10:00:55 AMif you agree with their fight for more money, and when they get the 8% a year, there should be no complaining when the transit rates go up on a semi-annual basis.
They are already increasing at that rate, and the MTA has a billion + surplus.
why didnt you comment on the first line of my post which led to the parts you quoted? the parts saying that i think all pay raises should be based on merit and job performance?
if you get a crappy worker, who never shows any improvement, or cares to show improvement...why should they be just gaurenteed a pay raise every year.
in 5 years of doing a crappy job..slacking off...with no improvement of service, what makes that person deserve an 8% per year increase?
I'm thinking the 3% to 4% per year merit-basec increases are pretty much the norm for non-management jobs in the private sector. And the days of automatic cost-of-living raises are long gone. Regardless of whether that is good or bad, it is what it is, and I doubt there will be much sympathy from the typical private-sector worker.
Quote from: Diomedes on December 21, 2005, 08:53:28 AM
Quote from: Philly_Crew on December 21, 2005, 08:13:45 AMI'm getting a 3.5% raise next year and last year got a 3% raise. The year before was 0% with only a bonus. Tell me again why a subway operator deserves 8%?
From NY Times: "The union originally called for 8 percent annual raises, but late in the day it indicated that it would accept smaller increases if the authority agreed to decrease disciplinary actions against employees by 25 percent. The union did not say how much it was willing to trim its demand....Going into yesterday, the authority had offered two raises of 3 percent in a 27-month contract. On pensions, the authority wants to raise the retirement age for newly hired employees to 62 after 30 years of service, while the union wants to lower it to age 50 after 20 years of service. At present, transit workers can retire at age 55 after 25 years of work, with a pension equal to half their annual pay; the average is $55,000, including overtime."
Yeah, cry me a river, Nancy.
The fact that you are getting zesty raises doesn't require that they get zesty raises, too. Maybe you should be pissed at yourself for accepting such lousy pay, rather than at the TWU.
So you get to retire at 50 after 20 years of service? How can you ask to decrease disciplinary actions against employees by 25 percent?
Here are some more facts since you ignored the ones in my earlier post:
--Transit workers pay exactly zero out of their paychecks for health care benefits.
--The average salary of a unionized New York City Transit employee is $48,000. The salary of a New York City police officer with five years experience is $44,100.
They should go to arbitration, as dictated by law.
Quote from: DutchBird on December 21, 2005, 03:53:02 AM
Quote from: Mad-Lad on December 20, 2005, 05:10:16 PM
If the CTA here in Chicago went on strike, i don't know what i'd do since i don't own a car or jetpack.
Buy and use a bicycle?
DON'T BUY A BIKE!! YOUR NEIGHBORS WILL STEAL IT!
If they don't like the pay, let them seek employment elsewhere. Of course, this is coming from a guy that earned five raises in 5 quarters.
This one's getting even nastier.
Jail Threat Ups Ante for NYC Union Heads (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051221/ap_on_re_us/nyc_transit_strike)
Wah, I have to walk to work. Wah.
I went in to the office today. Took me about an hour-more or less normal-to get there, because I left around 10:30 a.m., after the crush. Took Metro North from the Williams Bridge stop.
Coming home was another story. Took 2 1/2 hours. The lines were only barely controlled by the cops and MTA workers, but the individuals I saw were doing their best. Too bad they didn't have a better plan to distribute information about what was happening. The line I stood in wound serpentine back and forth, and had two tails for a while. Grr.
But whatever. We made it.
Regarding merit pay increases, they're bullshtein. How do you incentivize a subway trash collector? This labor does not admit of contant improvement. You either do the job, or you don't. If you do it, then the city is grateful for your necessary service, recognizes that it's a thankless job in a dark hole, and pays you enough to raise a family. Or at least it should.
The money is there. It's there for the teachers, fireman, and cops too. The people in power just won't give it up. They'd rather we set upon one another. Set the slaves against the crackers, and everyone forgets massa.
Quote from: Diomedes on December 21, 2005, 07:48:24 PM
I went in to the office today. Took me about an hour-more or less normal-to get there, because I left around 10:30 a.m., after the crush. Took Metro North from the Williams Bridge stop.
Coming home was another story. Took 2 1/2 hours. The lines were only barely controlled by the cops and MTA workers, but the individuals I saw were doing their best. Too bad they didn't have a better plan to distribute information about what was happening. The line I stood in wound serpentine back and forth, and had two tails for a while. Grr.
But whatever. We made it.
Regarding merit pay increases, they're bullshtein. How do you incentivize a subway trash collector? This labor does not admit of contant improvement. You either do the job, or you don't. If you do it, then the city is grateful for your necessary service, recognizes that it's a thankless job in a dark hole, and pays you enough to raise a family. Or at least it should.
The money is there. It's there for the teachers, fireman, and cops too. The people in power just won't give it up. They'd rather we set upon one another. Set the slaves against the crackers, and everyone forgets massa.
Whats the deal that ends this and is fair to everyone ??? Fireman and cops need shorter retirement as you can't run up sixt floors in a burning building dragging a hose at 62 :P
Nor should you be a first responder in a tunnel at 62. The deal that ends this is the one that gives the labor more than anyone thought they could get. 4% raises would be a huge shift in favor of people, as pathetic as that figure is.
Also, I'd like to say that, like the blackout and 9/11, people were generally very civil to each other. I don't think you have to live in NY to appreciate the sense of citizenry it enjoys. There's a kind of "we're all in this shteinhole together" ethic that pervades, and we all make it through in the end. Most of us. farg the others.
Quote from: Diomedes on December 21, 2005, 08:30:23 PM
Nor should you be a first responder in a tunnel at 62. The deal that ends this is the one that gives the labor more than anyone thought they could get. 4% raises would be a huge shift in favor of people, as pathetic as that figure is.
Also, I'd like to say that, like the blackout and 9/11, people were generally very civil to each other. I don't think you have to live in NY to appreciate the sense of citizenry it enjoys. There's a kind of "we're all in this shteinhole together" ethic that pervades, and we all make it through in the end. Most of us. farg the others.
Well said :yay :yay :yay :yay
Quote from: fansince61 on December 21, 2005, 08:32:59 PM
Quote from: Diomedes on December 21, 2005, 08:30:23 PM
Nor should you be a first responder in a tunnel at 62. The deal that ends this is the one that gives the labor more than anyone thought they could get. 4% raises would be a huge shift in favor of people, as pathetic as that figure is.
Also, I'd like to say that, like the blackout and 9/11, people were generally very civil to each other. I don't think you have to live in NY to appreciate the sense of citizenry it enjoys. There's a kind of "we're all in this shteinhole together" ethic that pervades, and we all make it through in the end. Most of us. farg the others.
Well said :yay :yay :yay :yay
Yep. I got out yesterday and went home for the holidays.
I really have no sympathy for the TWU people striking. They're uneducated people making 55k a year on average, like mentioned earlier, is more than the teachers of NY, and can retire with full pension at 55. And like Bloomberg keeps saying, their strike is illegal.
Quote from: Diomedes on December 21, 2005, 07:48:24 PM
Regarding merit pay increases, they're bullshtein. How do you incentivize a subway trash collector? This labor does not admit of contant improvement. You either do the job, or you don't. If you do it, then the city is grateful for your necessary service, recognizes that it's a thankless job in a dark hole, and pays you enough to raise a family. Or at least it should.
Okay, I see your point, so I'll meet you in the middle there, and suggest that it's fair for these people to get an automatic COLA of something in the 3.5% range, similar to what the typical private-sector worker gets in a merit system. But then they also need to start kicking in for health care, like the rest of us.
Sounds to me like the MTA needs to be blown up. From the NY Press:
"The MTA has made a lot of ugly news in the last few years—a threatened strike, contentious fare hikes, a $13.5 billion debt reorganization and persistent allegations of corruption. But the most portentous blow to the authority came just a few weeks ago, in a scandal that was widely reported but the scope and meaning of which have yet to be seriously explored publicly.
The story began when the MTA's security director, an ex-cop with a sterling reputation named Louis Anemone, went public with complaints that his efforts to investigate corruption within the MTA were being hindered by the MTA leadership. Anemone claimed that he and deputy Nicholas Casale had uncovered a pattern of bid-rigging and cost overruns that cost the Authority $100 million.
When the two sought a meeting with George Pataki to demand an independent investigation, the governor's answer was an unceremonious EXPLETIVE DELETED: Not only did he refuse Anemone's request, but he deadpanned that he had "absolute confidence" in the MTA leadership.
Pataki had plenty of reasons to have confidence in the MTA leaders. According to New York State Election commission data, eight of the MTA board members, including Chairman Peter Kalikow and Vice Chairman David Mack, donated a total of $135,670 just to George Pataki's campaign in the last election cycle.
...
The MTA is a Pataki operation. And the MTA scandal should be a Pataki scandal.
"The MTA...is a shadow government," says Democratic Assemblyman Richard Brodsky, who's been organizing hearings on reform of the MTA. "Its finances are off budget. It's just not subject to the normal oversight of democratic institutions."
...
This neverending flow of borrowed money, coupled with the network of obvious financial and personal relationships, accomplishes two things: It makes incumbency nearly irresistible, and dissent and oversight—as recently demonstrated—almost impossible.
Louis Anemone and Nicholas Casale weren't the first MTA whistleblowers, but they've certainly been the loudest.
Three years ago, then-inspector general of the MTA, Roland Malan, sent a letter to then-MTA chairman Virgil Conway complaining that he had been hampered in his investigation into a $97 million contract to renovate the Midtown tunnel. That contract had been won by Silverite Construction, which had donated hundreds of thousands of dollars through various channels to Pataki and Republican candidates. Shortly before his term ended, he closed his investigation, and no indictments were ever handed down in the case.
"I closed the investigation because I didn't want my successor to be in the same position I was in," says Malan, who is now retired and lives in Washington state.
...
Art Harmon was an auditor for MTA projects in the 80s who claims that he uncovered millions of dollars in waste before he was fired and his audits were terminated. He found a few friendly ears to take up his case after his dismissal—former Queens councilwoman Julia Harrison once sent a letter to Pataki on his behalf, demanding an inquiry—but ten years later, he is still trying to find an audience for what he thinks are urgent grievances.
...
Assemblyman Brodsky, who is pushing a bill that would create an independent auditor of the MTA, puts it bluntly: "The books are closed," he says.
The MTA's unique quasi-governmental legal structure makes its finances even more impenetrable than your average publicly traded corporation. The authorities have evolved over the years. Once upon a time, a bridge was built, it paid for itself in tolls, and that was it. Then there were innovations in the structure of authorities that allowed high-earning projects to pay for the losers. Nowadays the MTA as a whole doesn't even completely pay for itself: It can borrow money for its own projects, and through "service contract" bonds, part of its debt can be paid off by general tax revenue. Despite this, its books are more or less closed, both to voters and to investors."
http://www.nypress.com/16/16/news&columns/feature.cfm
Fox News..strike over :yay
They should be fired and the union ctushed, like RWR did with the air traffic controllers.
Quote from: stillupfront on December 22, 2005, 05:06:48 PM
They should be fired and the union ctushed, like RWR did with the air traffic controllers.
There was/is only one Renaldus Magnus...knowone else has the clarity to see issues for the people :yay
Quote from: fansince61 on December 22, 2005, 07:06:25 PM
Quote from: stillupfront on December 22, 2005, 05:06:48 PM
They should be fired and the union ctushed, like RWR did with the air traffic controllers.
There was/is only one Renaldus Magnus...knowone else has the clarity to see issues for the people :yay
That is the sad truth.
Reagan was a bad man. I piss on his memory.
in other news, from the New York Times front page today (Steven Greenhouse reporting), the new contract is pretty much what the TWU wanted, with some reasonable concessions to the MTA (paying some of their health cost for example, as
Sus argued they should.)
QuoteHe was excoriated on tabloid front pages [the insidious liberal media, again!! - Dio] and by the mayor and governor. As thousands streamed across the Brooklyn Bridge on a frigid night during last week's transit strike, someone in a car yelled out his name, prefacing it with a curse.
But now, a day after details of an agreement between the transit workers and the Metropolitan Transportation Authority were spelled out, Roger Toussaint, the union's president, seems to have emerged in a far better position than seemed likely just a few days ago.
Mr. Toussaint, whose back appeared to be against the wall last week, can boast of a tentative 37-month contract that meets most of his goals, including raises above the inflation rate and no concessions on pensions. Indeed, several fiscal and labor experts said yesterday that Mr. Toussaint and his union appeared to have bested the transit authority in their contract dispute.
The authority did not come away empty-handed, however, as it obtained a major concession: For the first time, the 33,700 transit workers will pay a portion of their health insurance premiums.
But if there is a real winner in the walkout that hobbled the city at the height of the holiday season, it is the union members who went out on strike, and the man who led them.
"It's a good contract for the union in that it does keep in place, for the most part, benefits that are extremely favorable to them," said Steven Malanga, a senior fellow with the Manhattan Institute, a conservative research organization, who called last week for firing the strikers. "For them, you can say this is a great deal."
When Mr. Toussaint appeared before television cameras at 11 p.m. on Tuesday to announce the settlement, he commented little except to read an impressive list of new worker-friendly provisions: raises averaging 3.5 percent a year, the creation of paid maternity leave, a far better health plan for retirees, a much-improved disability plan, the adoption of Martin Luther King's Birthday as a paid holiday, and increased "assault pay" for bus drivers and train operators who are attacked by passengers.
Then Mr. Toussaint announced a big surprise: Some 22,000 [about two-thirds of TWU members -- Dio] workers will each receive thousands of dollars in reimbursements for what are considered excess pension contributions; for several years, these workers paid more toward their pensions than other workers. For those workers, that money will easily offset the fines of slightly more than $1,000 that most of them face for taking part in the illegal strike. The union itself could still face a $3 million fine that a judge ordered because of the 60-hour strike.
"The union did especially well, all things considered," said David L. Gregory, a labor relations expert at St. John's University. "Toussaint got everything he needed, and he also got what he needed in terms of the bigger picture. With the strike, he mollified the radical left in his union and helped placate the middle of his rank and file who were demanding to be treated with dignity and respect."
All this is not to say that the transportation authority did not achieve some of its major goals. By getting the union, Local 100 of the Transport Workers Union, to agree to have subway and bus workers pay 1.5 percent of their wages toward health premiums, the authority took an important step to rein in soaring benefit costs. That provision is expected to save the authority $32 million a year. Not only that, the union agreed that its workers' contribution toward their health premiums might increase if the authority's health costs continued to climb.
At first glance, the authority seems to have embarrassed itself over pensions, the issue for which it appeared to draw its firmest line in the sand.
To bring its fast-rising pension costs down to earth, the authority first pushed to raise the retirement age for future employees, to 62 from 55, and then demanded that future workers contribute 6 percent of their wages toward their pensions. Finally, after Mr. Toussaint said he would never sell out the union's "unborn," the authority pulled its pension demand off the table - a move that state mediators proposed to persuade the union to end its walkout.
more at New York Times website. (not gonna link, cuz you gotta sign up to get access.)
Quote from: Diomedes on December 29, 2005, 12:15:15 PM
Reagan was a bad man. I piss on his memory.
You really know how to get me going.
I won't fall for the bait, but will tell you that Ronald Reagan was a GIANT of a HUMAN BEING. Without a doubt the greatest president in our nation's history.
You arguing with him = you taking the bait. :P
Quote from: Sgt PSN on December 29, 2005, 04:20:02 PM
You arguing with him = you taking the bait. :P
But I am not getting upset.
Quote from: stillupfront on December 29, 2005, 04:09:57 PMRonald Reagan was a GIANT abortion of a HUMAN BEING. Without a doubt the worst president in our nation's history, except for George W. Bush.
Fixed.
Quote from: stillupfront on December 29, 2005, 04:23:36 PMBut I am not getting upset.
Keep telling yourself that, fascist. You've already proven a propensity to believe what you hear over and over, so the future looks good..
Quote from: Diomedes on December 29, 2005, 11:04:54 PM
Quote from: stillupfront on December 29, 2005, 04:09:57 PMRonald Reagan was a GIANT abortion of a HUMAN BEING. Without a doubt the worst president in our nation's history, except for George W. Bush.
Fixed.
Quote from: stillupfront on December 29, 2005, 04:23:36 PMBut I am not getting upset.
Keep telling yourself that, fascist. You've already proven a propensity to believe what you hear over and over, so the future looks good..
I am a facist because I believe that the man who SINGLE HANDEDLY won the Cold War, restored the National Pride lost during the failed Carter Administration, and radically simplified and made more fair the Federal Tax system a Giant and the greatest president in our history?
You're a fleshpop.
Don't forget bribing Iran with weapons to hold on to American hostages!
That was truly one of our finer hours.
The invasion of Panama was right up there. Add in supporting South American death squads generally. Democracy was okay according to Reagan, but like W., only if the people elect a ruler who will sell them out to American business. Reagan stood for social darwinism and giving breaks to the already extremely wealthy. He was a nightmare. It's too bad Hinckley didn't get the job done.
Nevermind that he was running the country while showing strong symptoms of Alzheimers. For once, when a president said "I don't recall," he may not have been lying.
Quote from: Diomedes on December 30, 2005, 05:07:29 PM
The invasion of Panama was right up there. Add in supporting South American death squads generally. Democracy was okay according to Reagan, but like W., only if the people elect a ruler who will sell them out to American business. Reagan stood for social darwinism and giving breaks to the already extremely wealthy. He was a nightmare. It's too bad Hinckley didn't get the job done.
Nevermind that he was running the country while showing strong symptoms of Alzheimers. For once, when a president said "I don't recall," he may not have been lying.
You forgot the invasion of Grenada and the bombing of Libya.....it's called not taking crap from your lessers.
Giving breaks to the wealthy is called "trickle down economy" and it's a sound policy that works a hell of alot better than the Welfare state created by FDR and his heirs.
Quote from: Diomedes on December 21, 2005, 08:53:28 AM
Quote from: Philly_Crew on December 21, 2005, 08:13:45 AMI'm getting a 3.5% raise next year and last year got a 3% raise. The year before was 0% with only a bonus. Tell me again why a subway operator deserves 8%?
From NY Times: "The union originally called for 8 percent annual raises, but late in the day it indicated that it would accept smaller increases if the authority agreed to decrease disciplinary actions against employees by 25 percent. The union did not say how much it was willing to trim its demand....Going into yesterday, the authority had offered two raises of 3 percent in a 27-month contract. On pensions, the authority wants to raise the retirement age for newly hired employees to 62 after 30 years of service, while the union wants to lower it to age 50 after 20 years of service. At present, transit workers can retire at age 55 after 25 years of work, with a pension equal to half their annual pay; the average is $55,000, including overtime."
Yeah, cry me a river, Nancy.
The fact that you are getting zesty raises doesn't require that they get zesty raises, too. Maybe you should be pissed at yourself for accepting such lousy pay, rather than at the TWU.
Okay, so maybe Concretefield is good for your general well-being. After seeing this post, I was so pissed that I found another job offer. Problem is that I'm not so sure I want to take it. I would be supervising more people but would increase my salary about $6,000 with the good possibility of an annual 20% bonus. The downside is if I leave the state, I would no longer have the stability and security, terrific benefits (defined benefit pension plan) and low stress environment. The new job would be more money, hours and responsibility but would also have greater opportunities for advancement (probably assistant controller withing 3 years). Since I probably wouldn't have been motivated to even look for another job without :CF , I figured I would get some input.
$6,000 sounds like more than it is broken down after taxes and doled over a year's worth of paychecks. Doesn't seem like big enough of an increase to justify uprooting the family, unless you think you'd flat-out love the job and the people you'd work with.
Consider the opportunity. I recently left a "low stress" job for more money, opportunity, and more hours and am miserable. If the opportunity is what you are looking for, go for it...but be honest with yourself.
I'll just add to that by saying-- as I told BB before he took the job he now hates ;)-- I took a job that was further away, for more hours and some "opportunity" that offered some more money...and it was just a horrible, horrible move. Quality of life comes first, every time.
I would not be moving my family. The commute would increase from 15 minutes to probably 25 minutes in the worst traffic. I understand the $6,000 not being that much but the opportunity of the 20% bonus would sure be nice. We don't currently have any bonuses. 10% of the bonus is how the company does, 5% how the particular line does and 5% is how you personally perform. The new job has increases of 4% and I have averaged between 2.5%-3.5% with the state.
I currently like my job and the people I work with. I think I would like the people I would work with at the new job. Butcher's Bill, do you regret the move if you are miserable? Is there a good chance you will be able to move up to a more rewarding position?
Well, if the commute would be good, and the money is better...that's a different beast. But would you be able to manage the hours effectively in the new gig...that's the question you need to answer.
Quote from: Zanshin on January 19, 2006, 10:14:41 AM
Well, if the commute would be good, and the money is better...that's a different beast. But would you be able to manage the hours effectively in the new gig...that's the question you need to answer.
I would be going from a 40 hour set week to a 45 hour week with the possibility of working 50-55 hours/week during the busy season from late January to early April. Talked with the wife who is supportive either way. If I make more and we have another child, it would allow her to go from working 3 days/week to 2 days/week or 3 days/week for 6 hours. More Mom time is great but less Dad time stinks. Money can't buy time but it sure helps paying off the mortgage. Gthistle, what is the worst thing about your new job? The length of the commute? Since we both have young families, I think we can relate on wanting more time for the family.
I am going over to the new job this afternoon and sitting with the person I would be replacing for about 2 hours. This should give me a good feel if I think the work will be challenging/meaningful. I do enjoy working for the state and helping the public.
Ohhhh, I'm not in that gig anymore. But I was for about a year.
Long story short, it was just a really bad fit with their corporate culture. I managed a staff that was used to working until midnight or one in the morning for no reason other than that's what they thought was expected. I'm in early, but I sort of expect that my team can get the work done during the day. And if they can't, we need more resources....but it was a mid-sized company, trying to act like a big company...but they were ten years behind the times. It was shirts and ties every day, and timeclocks for everyone to punch...and everyone was in cubicles. Just a rotten atmosphere.
Add to that a commute that BLEW, and it was just a recipe for disaster. The corporate culture is a HUGE thing. For me, I want to do a good job, but I also want flexibility and the ability to spend time with my family without being singled out as the slacker. I ended up being asked to go back to the company I left to start up a new deparment, which REALLY bailed me out. Another lesson in never burning bridges.
Quote from: Philly_Crew on January 19, 2006, 07:20:42 AM
Quote from: Diomedes on December 21, 2005, 08:53:28 AM
Quote from: Philly_Crew on December 21, 2005, 08:13:45 AMI'm getting a 3.5% raise next year and last year got a 3% raise. The year before was 0% with only a bonus. Tell me again why a subway operator deserves 8%?
From NY Times: "The union originally called for 8 percent annual raises, but late in the day it indicated that it would accept smaller increases if the authority agreed to decrease disciplinary actions against employees by 25 percent. The union did not say how much it was willing to trim its demand....Going into yesterday, the authority had offered two raises of 3 percent in a 27-month contract. On pensions, the authority wants to raise the retirement age for newly hired employees to 62 after 30 years of service, while the union wants to lower it to age 50 after 20 years of service. At present, transit workers can retire at age 55 after 25 years of work, with a pension equal to half their annual pay; the average is $55,000, including overtime."
Yeah, cry me a river, Nancy.
The fact that you are getting zesty raises doesn't require that they get zesty raises, too. Maybe you should be pissed at yourself for accepting such lousy pay, rather than at the TWU.
Okay, so maybe Concretefield is good for your general well-being. After seeing this post, I was so pissed that I found another job offer. Problem is that I'm not so sure I want to take it. I would be supervising more people but would increase my salary about $6,000 with the good possibility of an annual 20% bonus. The downside is if I leave the state, I would no longer have the stability and security, terrific benefits (defined benefit pension plan) and low stress environment. The new job would be more money, hours and responsibility but would also have greater opportunities for advancement (probably assistant controller withing 3 years). Since I probably wouldn't have been motivated to even look for another job without :CF , I figured I would get some input.
My thought is this:
I am getting older (44) and at this stage of my life I am looking toward a retiremen not t
Quote from: Philly_Crew on January 19, 2006, 07:20:42 AM
Quote from: Diomedes on December 21, 2005, 08:53:28 AM
Quote from: Philly_Crew on December 21, 2005, 08:13:45 AMI'm getting a 3.5% raise next year and last year got a 3% raise. The year before was 0% with only a bonus. Tell me again why a subway operator deserves 8%?
From NY Times: "The union originally called for 8 percent annual raises, but late in the day it indicated that it would accept smaller increases if the authority agreed to decrease disciplinary actions against employees by 25 percent. The union did not say how much it was willing to trim its demand....Going into yesterday, the authority had offered two raises of 3 percent in a 27-month contract. On pensions, the authority wants to raise the retirement age for newly hired employees to 62 after 30 years of service, while the union wants to lower it to age 50 after 20 years of service. At present, transit workers can retire at age 55 after 25 years of work, with a pension equal to half their annual pay; the average is $55,000, including overtime."
Yeah, cry me a river, Nancy.
The fact that you are getting zesty raises doesn't require that they get zesty raises, too. Maybe you should be pissed at yourself for accepting such lousy pay, rather than at the TWU.
Okay, so maybe Concretefield is good for your general well-being. After seeing this post, I was so pissed that I found another job offer. Problem is that I'm not so sure I want to take it. I would be supervising more people but would increase my salary about $6,000 with the good possibility of an annual 20% bonus. The downside is if I leave the state, I would no longer have the stability and security, terrific benefits (defined benefit pension plan) and low stress environment. The new job would be more money, hours and responsibility but would also have greater opportunities for advancement (probably assistant controller withing 3 years). Since I probably wouldn't have been motivated to even look for another job without :CF , I figured I would get some input.
My thought is this:
I am getting older (44) and at this stage of my life I am looking toward a retiremen not too far in the future. I have numerous friends who work in the public sector and are reaching their 20 year anniversary. While I have invested fairly well over the last several years, I still envy their pension plans that include lifetime health benefits. I expect to retire in my early to mid 60's. They will be able to retire at least 10 years before me. At my age that is a huge plus. It really is something to consider.
NY transport workers vote down contract (http://today.reuters.com/news/newsarticle.aspx?type=domesticNews&storyid=2006-01-20T214227Z_01_N20341370_RTRUKOC_0_US-TRANSPORT-NEWYORK.xml&rpc=22)
QuoteUnion leader Roger Toussaint told a televised news conference the contract failed to win ratification and it was "back to the drawing board." He gave no indication of whether another strike could be called.
Quote from: QB Eagles on January 20, 2006, 06:49:59 PM
NY transport workers vote down contract (http://today.reuters.com/news/newsarticle.aspx?type=domesticNews&storyid=2006-01-20T214227Z_01_N20341370_RTRUKOC_0_US-TRANSPORT-NEWYORK.xml&rpc=22)
QuoteUnion leader Roger Toussaint told a televised news conference the contract failed to win ratification and it was "back to the drawing board." He gave no indication of whether another strike could be called.
Hopefully they will jail the leaders, fire the strikers and hire replacements.
Quote from: stillupfront on January 19, 2006, 04:33:00 PM
My thought is this:
I am getting older (44) and at this stage of my life I am looking toward a retiremen not too far in the future. I have numerous friends who work in the public sector and are reaching their 20 year anniversary. While I have invested fairly well over the last several years, I still envy their pension plans that include lifetime health benefits. I expect to retire in my early to mid 60's. They will be able to retire at least 10 years before me. At my age that is a huge plus. It really is something to consider.
Thanks for the advice gentlemen. I decided to stay with my current position. SUP, we have to serve 30 years for full retirement and don't get lifetime health benefits. We get to stay on the group health policy, but contribute more to the premiums. Maybe we need a union :crazy