Jacki’s whereIstand Blog

To me, this is a fine example of governance.  From the NYT:

The abolition of the law was announced without fanfare, in a terse, one-sentence communiqué from the Élysée Palace.

"Under the proposal of the prime minister and after having heard the presidents of the parliamentary groups and the officials of the parliamentary majority, the president of the Republic has decided to replace Article 8 of the law on equality of opportunities by a mechanism in favor of the professional integration of young people in difficulty," the communiqué said.

To replace the defunct youth labor law, senior lawmakers from Mr. Chirac’s party presented a much weaker draft law to Parliament today.

The new proposal would give employers financial incentives to encourage the hiring and training of young workers, and give job seekers more guidance and increase internships in professions where jobs are relatively plentiful, including restaurants, hotels and nursing.

There will be temporary subsidies or tax breaks for companies hiring unskilled young workers permanently. The cost of these measures, about $363 million a year, would be financed through an increase in tobacco taxes.

          (emphasis added).

whereIstand Tags

• [open thread]

The NYT reported today that the TWU removed its web log, which provided a forum for the public to express its views on the strike, because it became "so clogged with messages comparing the workers to monkeys and calling them ‘you people.’" 

This just days after Mayor Bloomberg referred to the Union Leadership as behaving "thuggishly" by striking in violation of the Taylor law.  I wrote an earlier post about the Mayor’s comments but I elected not to comment on their racially charged nature.  Was the Mayor aware that his comment could be construed the way it has been by black leaders and the TWU membership?  I suspect not.  If for no other reason, racially dividing NYC over the Transit Strike would not work in the Mayor’s favor.  What’s more frightening to me, is the possibility that the term, "thuggishly" may not have been part of the Mayor’s original speech.  Was the Mayor speaking extemporaneously when he referred to the TWU as thuggish?  A simple search in the dictionary should lead any speech writer away from the term thuggish to describe a union heavily comprised of people of color.  As I mentioned earlier in the week, would the Mayor refer to the Teacher’s Union as "thuggishly turning their backs on New York City." 

We have heard from the Union Membership that to them, this strike is about the MTA failing to show its workers it respects them.  I am not sure whether the MTA respects its employees but by the comments made by some this week, it looks like the City and the public may not. 

whereIstand Tags

• Whom do you support?

in an interview today stated that were it not for the MTA’s demand that new employees contribute 6% of their wages to their pension over ten years, the TWU would not be on strike. 

whereIstand Tags

• Does the TWU have legitimate reasons for going on strike?

in a press conference regarding the transit strike, referred to the TWU as "thuggish."   A strange term to use to describe the Union membership.  Webster’s defines the term, "thug" as a brutal ruffian or assassin.

It’s true that the TWU is violating the Taylor law, so the Union’s decision to strike can be coined "criminal."  But thuggish seems extreme.  Would the Mayor refer to the Teacher’s Union as "thuggish?"

The TWU is taking a bashing in the press today.  Their parent union distanced itself from the Local by releasing a statement that it did not support the Local’s decision to strike in violation of Judge Jones’ preliminary injunction.  The parent union is reported to have provided funding to the Local for advertising before the strike.

Reports in local NYC papers indicate the Union leadership has taken steps in the event of a prolonged strike, including arranging for "secret leadership" in the event TWU Local 100 President Roger Toussiant and others in the union leadership were "not around."  Presumably, the Union is making arrangments in the event the Union leadership is held in criminal contempt of the preliminary injuction. 

Earlier today, Judge Jones fined the TWU $1 million for each day of the strike.

The negotiations broke down last night when the MTA made its final offer of a 10.5% salary increase over three years with a 4% increase in pension contributions from employees over the next ten years.  The remaining sticking points are the retirement age, health benefits for new employees and changes to the disciplinary code.  Some consider the Union’s salary demands unreasonable. 

Notably, the MTA reported a $1 billion surplus this year, while commuters faced a staggering decrease in the number of booth operators in subway stations and fare increases.

whereIstand Tags

• Does the TWU have legitimate reasons for going on strike?