(San Francisco) Muni sickout causing delays across city
Source: San Francisco Chronicle
A sickout by Muni workers over a labor contract caused major service disruptions Monday morning, with cable cars canceled, express buses converted to locals and about two-thirds of coaches, trolleys and trains not making it onto the streets.
... The sickout comes amid displeasure over a proposed labor agreement that was the subject of a vote Friday by Muni operators. The outcome of the vote wasn't immediately known, but officials with Transport Workers Union Local 250-A had voiced concerns about the Municipal Transportation Agency's offer.
Under the proposal, the agency says, Muni workers would get 11.25 percent raises over two years, but they would pick up a 7.5 percent pension payment now paid by the MTA.
The contract would push operator pay to about $32 an hour July 1, making Muni drivers the second-highest-paid transit workers in the country, according to the MTA.
Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Muni-sickout-causing-delays-across-city-5522044.php
seveneyes
(4,631 posts)Just jack up the Muni rates to cover whatever increase the workers want for compensation. The Muni customers will either support them or they will find other means.
cosmicone
(11,014 posts)and can barely afford the fares as is.
taught_me_patience
(5,477 posts)Auggie
(31,634 posts)"Muni workers, like all San Francisco city employees, are prohibited from striking." There's a reason for that.
Fuck them.
alp227
(32,419 posts)So convenience to commuters > workers' rights?
What is going ON at DU?
Auggie
(31,634 posts)Reagan was trying to bust unions. And fuck him too.
NYC Liberal
(20,324 posts)Many people RELY on public transportation to get to their jobs. They can't get to work, or they show up late: they get fired. What about THEIR rights? They're workers, too.
Psephos
(8,032 posts)Gormy Cuss
(30,884 posts)Fuck unions. Who needs them? Workers always get a fair shake without collective bargaining.
Auggie
(31,634 posts)What good is an arbitration agreement if it's not honored?
Gormy Cuss
(30,884 posts)because some day it may be their turn to ask other union members to back them up too.
KamaAina
(78,249 posts)Gormy regaled her FB audience the other day with the tale of a hot assembly race out her way (Concord), in which one of the candidates is a "BART union hater". I gently reminded her that transit employees in NYC, as in SF, are prohibited from striking, yet are still unionized.
Gormy Cuss
(30,884 posts)And transit employees in NYC , Boston and other metros with strike limits resort to the same device MUNI is using here because they can't actually strike. A sick-out can't last for long. A strike can continue until both sides get serious at the bargaining table.
Barring strikes tips the scales in favor of management.
CreekDog
(46,192 posts)Gormy Cuss
(30,884 posts)So had they been able to strike it would have given commuters a heads-up.
The other thing to remember that the arbitration process in lieu of ability to strike is a bad deal for labor. The arbitration process assumes that management's offer is sound unless the unions can prove otherwise.
CreekDog
(46,192 posts)She already took me to the woodshed. But thanks for playing.
I did not post her real name. Or mine, for that matter; you are one of a handful of DUers who knows it, maybe the only one who knows both. And I'm pretty sure I can trust you not to troll her. And as I told her, in the unlikely event I do find anyone trolling her, I will squash them so badly they will wish they had angered Pitt instead.
CreekDog
(46,192 posts)is this where we post our comments to a Facebook thread?
you should know better.
besides, why the hell do we have to support a prospective BART board member that the unions oppose?
which candidate do you think disability organizations would support? the anti-union one? doubtful.
KamaAina
(78,249 posts)I was offering it for informational purposes only. I do not support that prospective BART member.
As a matter of fact, we do have an issue with one particular union, SEIU-United Healthcare Workers, which is placing a detrimental mandatory training issue on the November ballot, but otherwise, you are correct; we generally do view labor as allies.
Gormy Cuss
(30,884 posts)Creeky wasn't part of the discussion and I've PMed him to clear that up.
Would still prefer that you hadn't posted it but you are aware of that.
Starry Messenger
(32,374 posts)I'm sure the drivers take no joy in it. They wouldn't have taken this step without serious reasons.
CreekDog
(46,192 posts)but when there is no outlet for frustration with a contract, you get these kinds of things.
a contract is an agreement not to strike during the term as long as the contract is adhered to.
being a MUNI operator has got to be one of the most challenging jobs out there. driving buses through San Francisco? it's hard enough to drive a car in San Francisco. making sure people don't get caught in the doors of streetcars? nightmare.
and all that for a salary that can't rent a house in San Francisco.
KamaAina
(78,249 posts)For those of you outside the Valley of All Things Tech, Lyft and Uber are ridesharing services that use smartphone apps to connect riders with people who basically use their private cars as taxis.
Jesus Malverde
(10,274 posts)Wait 30 minutes for a bus only to have one pass by that refuses to stop. Bit of a joke really.
My favorite story was the bus driver who would take his bus and go deliver cocaine clear across town no where near his route.
http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/matier-ross/article/Drug-probe-corners-Muni-driver-Police-think-bus-3313493.php
MUNI sucks
KamaAina
(78,249 posts)CreekDog
(46,192 posts)are you suggesting that all sick days at MUNI are illegitimate?
Jesus Malverde
(10,274 posts)CreekDog
(46,192 posts)it sounds like you can't answer your own question.
Jesus Malverde
(10,274 posts)You seem confused, I didn't ask any question.
KamaAina
(78,249 posts)a hundred more vehicles are on the street today, but it's still a mell of a hess.
http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Muni-sickout-continues-for-2nd-day-5524556.php
Tactically, I'm not sure about this. I thought they made their point rather emphatically yesterday.
AC Transit, the bus operator in the East Bay (Oakland, Berkeley and environs) faced a similar situation last year, when the drivers hated the contract the leadership came back with. So what did they do? They voted it down by a large margin. The parties returned to the bargaining table, and an acceptable contract was reached. So why isn't that happening here?
http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Muni-sickout-causing-delays-across-city-5522044.php
Union officials have complained that the standard is too high. In a statement on the union's website last week, Local 250-A President Eric Williams called the arbitration procedure "a lopsided and unfair process. The membership must take a stand, which will be communicated through your vote."
Humph. Looks like those notoriously liberal SF voters put the union in a bind. If they vote the contract down, the case goes to an arbitrator* who is instructed to side with management unless the union proves its case to some overwhelming standard.