Awesome article.

Posted by: David Reich at December 23, 2005 11:19 AM

Stop playing the race card. The people hurt the most from this illegal strike were working class minorities.

Posted by: PJ at December 23, 2005 11:47 AM

"Working class minorities" hurt by this strike? Tell me another one. The TWU was standing up for ALL workers.

For the past few years, management everywhere has been steadily taking away everything we've spent the last century fighting for. They've only gotten away with it because we're no longer organized. The TWU showed us that this process can be opposed---a lesson that Bloomberg, et al, clearly did not want anyone to learn.

Posted by: Paul Sharp at December 23, 2005 12:44 PM

Since when is thug racist?

Posted by: CW at December 23, 2005 12:56 PM

The fact is, very few people nationwide get paid what the TWU workers get for employees of their skill level. They retire at 55, much earlier than most typical bus drivers, cleaning people, etc. They little or nothing for healthcare and contribute a miniscule amount to their pension at a time when the average worker has pension at all.

Despite these facts, no one is disputing their right to negotiate a fair deal for themselves. However, they were not within their legal right to strike. They agreed to this condition when they became civil employees in the first place. It is a condition of their employment. If they didn't like that condition, they should have sought other employment in the private sector.

Are they terrorists? No. But do New Yorkers have the right to be angry at the TWU? You bet.

Posted by: tp at December 23, 2005 12:59 PM

"The TWU was standing up for ALL workers" ???
Wrong. The TWU was only looking to get more money and more cushy benefits for themselves, while hurting those who are not fortunate enough to work in a unionized job by preventing them from even getting to their jobs. This had nothing to do with solidarity with any other group. It was a selfish act from beginning to end.

Who really relies on public transportation? Certainly not "management," it's the worker trying to get by that needs it.

Toussaint should be ashamed of himself for trying to compare this strike with the civil rights movement. Rosa Parks (RIP) is likely turning in her grave hearing her name and accomplishments used in such vain...

Posted by: PJ at December 23, 2005 1:26 PM

Fuck you if you try to turn this into a racial issue.

If you work for the city, I don't give a crap what color your skin is -- as long as you show up to your job and do it well. If you don't, I have no love for you.

Someone who puts their own greedy self-interest ahead of their duty to the public, ahead of the LAW, and doesn't give a damn who gets hurt by their actions: is there any way the term "thug" does NOT apply?

Posted by: Rootbeer at December 23, 2005 1:40 PM

First of all, I'm tired of hearing about how the strike was "illegal." So the most corrupt agency in NYC got a law passed in its favor at some point, so what? Sometimes the only ethical thing to do is break a law, and yes this is like Rosa Parks. (And I have no doubt that Rosa was looking down and cheering on the strikers.)

Second of all, the strike was wholly, completely, 100% the fault of the MTA. It was the MTA who insisted that negotiations were over, and who (as Wayne Barrett said) caused the strike by "[d]ropping that stink bomb on the table a couple of hours before midnight." A strike is the only option that labor has.

Third, the transit workers' pay, relative to other workers in the country, should always be weighed with a few other considerations: the most obvious being New York's cost of living. Do workers in Cleveland or Boise have rent/bills that are even half as high asin New York? Anyone trying to suggest you can raise a family in New York and provide an education for your kids on $55,000 is insane. As for benefits, what the workers have gotten in this instance is there for all workers to unite and get. The MTA shamelessly tried to grab them back while it's running budget surpluses and raising fares.

Fourth, the media's attempts to demonize the workers, and create enmity between them & other workers, is a disgrace ... as is the lockstep attempt by commentators here.

Posted by: JBT at December 23, 2005 2:23 PM

The mayor's hate speech and contempt for black union workers was revealing. I imagine I will be attacked and called a "shartza" for daring to out white jewish racism.

It is also tragic to witness this rich prick bigot of a mayor issue a press release for the white worker who died during the work stoppage and the mayor's silence regarding the 2 TWA workers who also died as well.

So much for "united we stand" I dare to state the obvious in America black folks will always be this country's scapegoat and domestic terrorists when we dare to stand up for our in alienable rights...

Posted by: Greg Thrasher at December 23, 2005 2:28 PM

It's been said on these and various pages, that Bloomie would not refer to a white union with such coded language - we hear this all the time: someone would NEVER do or say this about so-called white people - but right above - in this very article, we're told that there's a long history of criminalizing unions - and then there's mention of the longshoremen - a union, I'd bet, that's more white than not. The disconnect is with the language: words like thug or nigger are acceptable when tattooed on Tupac's gut or repeated over and over on any rap record (usually with pride), but when a white guy like Bloomberg uses the word thug, some how this is a racial affront, reminding me of the "niggardly" crises of a few years back: white people seek a literal reading, while people of color look beneath the skin, so to speak, finding racial ghosts hiding in dark corners. I believe, when backed into a corner - such as defending the abandonment of your city during a freezing cold week a few days before Christmas -- leadership of color goes for the easy mark - dragging out the racist card, predicting what would've been said had the Union not been majority people of color - speculating, always speculating what a person meant when they said this or that, based, of course, on the color of their skin... It's a shame that the issue has become the same old crap that dominates every conversation about NY politics: race - for this is not about race, it's about standards of living and the dying gasps of the Unions, but let's pretend Bloomie is really like Bull Connors, and let's pretend the union members - with their thick benefits and early retirement, really are like slaves forced to work on the MTA plantation, and let's pretend that Al Sharpton really has a constituency - albeit one that's never been able to put him into any public office - that way we won't talk about painful issues such as the killer costs of health care or the raping of pension plans or the absurd costs of living in our own city!

Posted by: jeffrey at December 23, 2005 3:00 PM

Retire at 55? Ample Pensions to live on? Health care benefits? What an outrage!

An outrage, that is, against those who would oppose such rights which all workers should enjoy in this so-called "greatest" country in the world.

The envy underlining many of the comments against the TWU herein is evident. Is this country so ignorant of its history that it can't recall the many union members who spilt their blood on these streets paved with gold to gain for all workers a 40 hour work week, pensions & insurance, given out begrudgingly due to the pioneering unions who did the heavy lifting.

Why not limit all workers in NYC to a 50, no make it 75, thousand dollar annual salary? What worker in the city, no matter how exalted they may feel, possibly justify making a salary higher than that?

Shame on billionaire Bloomberg, who conveniently found himself in Brooklyn instead his Upper East Side residence during the strike, which would have made the "hardship" of his walk to work a bit more painful & real.

Those who fell for this canard put forth by Bloomberg & the media, who decried the workers as criminals, thugs, terrorists and against the people, should hang their heads low. They have been bamboozled by that unholy trinity of Bloomberg, Pataki & the MTA.

Do they believe these politicos, not the working class, have made New York City the world capital it is? If so, then the New York I grew up in has truly lost its soul.

Posted by: Dennis Dzamba at December 23, 2005 4:10 PM

You've already lost the game by your self-victimization. I love how so many "victims" also love to jealously lash out at Bloomberg for being rich. If you had the intelligence to actually read, maybe you'd see that Bloomberg actually earned his money by working hard and taking risks, not through extortion like a strike. And as if being rich was a sin. I don't see anyone lashing out at Dick Parsons, Magic Johnson, or Bill Cosby for being rich.

I'm not trying to say that there's no racism out there, there's plenty. But it comes from blacks and hispanics just as much as it comes from white people.

Posted by: PJ at December 23, 2005 4:15 PM

It just said again that, New York isn’t for sale!!! This phrase came up during Ferrer’s champion for mayor against Bloomberg for a second term. The question then is can it be bought??? The “thugs”(as Bloomberg called them) answered just that. By halting a system (far more than just trains and buses) where nut and bolt all add to the total and right-a way the billionaire’s staffs began sending in reports on dollar amount slipping while the legislators are busy raise the price tag per day and place them on the sidewalk so the “walking people” can see them. The word “thugs” came out a billionaire’s mouth was not merely a reflection on how he looks down on what he might consider the troublesome poor category, rather a word like that cries out from a billionaire shows how definitively a money institution is loosing ground, to “thugs”. I stay my analysis short for now. Someone should work on an editorial on “Billionaire v.s. Thugs”, or I will. ‘Course, some of you will hand me another argument right-a way, “People v.s. Thugs”, by then we will have more to write about, so will the so called automation as a solution come up again to undermine the power of human once for all, more to write and more to argue.

Posted by: Davis Scoot at December 23, 2005 4:16 PM

This strike has revealed so much to me. People really believe that there should be a certain category of people that exist solely to meet their needs? A servant class? A slave class?

The nerve of people. Your average person has enough of their own personal considerations. Why would I put the needs of my family and personal life above your "ease of transportation needs". I'm supposed to be selfish? There's not a damn thing wrong with being selfish when I choose to put my daily bread above your convenience. How dare they!

And greed! I won't be able to work into my old age. To be provided for in my latter years shouldn't be a luxury.

Good health care is a right that all human beings should enjoy, period end of story. That's what we should all be fighting for. Just because your choose to settle for less my asking for the bare minimum demands is now about greed?

Don't get me started, damn it!

Posted by: Michelle at December 23, 2005 4:51 PM

MTA and George Pataki are the real crooks, deceiving the public "Cooking the books" with 2 sets of books. Governor George Pataki appoints the Board of the MTA, Pataki and MTA Chairman Peter Kalikow are cronies. MTA is not punished for cooking the books, instead, the MTA raised the fare from $1.50 to $2 in 2003.

At the news conference on Thurs (Dec 22, 2005), one reporter asked why no one questioned the MTA keeping 2 separate books, one book to justify fare hike in 2003, the other book is the real one with tons of surplus. Mayor Bloomberg did not answered the question at all. Something fishy is going on.

Posted by: YY at December 23, 2005 4:59 PM

Amazing whenever one dares to address the racial aspect of white society that person is attacked as being a victim and playing the 'race card". I will not be a good colored negro and sit buy while you penis envy bigots make a living off of my personhood..not now not ever..

Pay me or Slay me....

Posted by: Greg Thrasher at December 23, 2005 5:54 PM

As a minority, I didn't see the issue as a racial one at all. What I found offensive was Toussaint's claim that the TWU cared about its ridership. I don't like Bloomberg but I concede he made a valid point. This strike was about middle class union members earning 60K, hurting many working class NYers who earn half that. There is NO justification for that. The needs of the city outweigh the desires of the few.

In regards to the Taylor Law, TWU members know before they accept the job that they do NOT have the right to strike. If that is a right they can not forfeit, then they should find another job. It's a simple as that. I think the Taylor Law should be amended to state that if you walk, you get fired. Forget the indiviual fines on the membership. You lose your pension and you lose your job.

For those who think that the MTA is 100% at fault. We all agree that the MTA is the most corrupt agency in the city and their leadership should be thrown in jail. However, the MTA is a state run agency. It is NOT a profit sharing company. The MTA exists to serve the people of NY, not the TWU. The TWU are NOT entitled to any surplus the MTA might have. That money belongs to the taxpayers and the riders. If anyone has a claim to that money, it is US!

The TWU struck because they don't care about the riders. If the MTA conceded on all the issues, they would have used that to raise the fares even more. $3 or $4 fares in the next 5 years? The TWU doesn't care about the riders because the TWU doesn't have to pay those fares to access the transit system. You and I will have to pay the fares...they don't.

What I don't understand is how the TWU feels that they are entitled to big pay raises and generous benefits without offering any productivity increases in return. Let's be honest here. Any Junior High School drop out can sweep a floor and man a token booth. Whatever happened to the notion that a certain level of skill begets you a certain level of income? Why these minimally skilled guys earn more than some teachers, firefighters, and cops goes to show you how skewed this system has become and how outrageous their demands are. Cops aren't geniuses either but at least they are required to have at least 60 college credits.

34,000 union members CAN NOT negatively affect 8 million people's lives like this. There is NO justification. Anyone who supports them is either a union member themselves or can not grasp the big picture on how it ultimately affects the riders and the taxpayers.

Simple solution. If you feel "abused" and "humiliated" at work, then get another job. If you lack the skills to get another job, then go and acquire those skills. There are NO victims here except the people of NY. How about taking control of one's own destiny and stop whining about your cushy union job. You would think these guys were indentured servants with the exaggerated language they use to complain about a 60K a year job.

Posted by: Roger at December 23, 2005 6:33 PM

Reading this stuff from Australia - fascinating how people envy those in a union.

Hey its US law that makes it hardr to organise.

" Union-envy" is something the boss creates by this law to divide and conquer.

Posted by: andrew casey at December 23, 2005 6:46 PM

To: Greg Thrasher
maybe you should "sit buy" and take your "personhood" over to a basic English course.

Sorry, I know this is off the subject, but your lack of skill with language doesn't add to your persuasive ability. Maybe you should draft your message in MS Word first and use the grammar check. Just a tip.

Posted by: PJ at December 23, 2005 10:41 PM

PJ,

I remain amazed how white folks who lack the skills to challenge my truths resort to trival maters like grammar and spellcheck to attack me..I do not used spell check in a chat forum unlike you I have no need to impress others with bullshit..oh yeah you can be my human spellchecker if you so desire.. Just a tip BTW..lol,lol,lol

Posted by: Greg Thrasher at December 23, 2005 11:23 PM

Yes 'PJ' you should do that yourself. Attacking grammar is the lowest form of debate. "Just a tip" is a sentence fragment, btw.

Posted by: Jeff at December 24, 2005 7:32 AM

The worst form of accusers are the academics who simply read into things too much and miss the point entirely. Nick Powers is a total reverse racist and has found a way to trump up his insecure ideas about race in New York with this article. I wouldn't call it left, right, pro-twu, pro-city -- I think a good word for it is garbage arguements. Similar to Touissants responses. Don't pay this article any mind. The transit system simply cannot stop because the union wants to. I don't care about pensions and union labor rights at this point. When my deadlines and rent payments are due, it's not Bloomy to blame -- it's the ignorance of a mass union consciousness bred on nepotism and reverse racism. They are rude, nasty and overpaid and Nick Powers is scum.

Posted by: retardo montalban at December 24, 2005 7:36 AM

Anyone who argues that "wages can't go up without productivity going up" is clearly a corporate brainwashee to begin with. Right, lemme see if I've got it straight: rent can go up ... prices can go up ... even the cost of a subway ride can go up (by 100% in ten years, in fact), but a transit worker's wages cannot go up.

Posted by: MM at December 24, 2005 11:35 AM

Greg Thrasher-
Were you implying by your penis envy comment that white members of society have smaller have a smaller penis?
In your anger against being oppressed by a "racist society" you yourself have contributed to the perpetuation of that society by making racist comments on an internet discussion. What a damn shame.

Posted by: Travis at December 24, 2005 5:48 PM

So much love, so little time.

Posted by: Nicholas Powers at December 24, 2005 11:45 PM

It seems that race is considered a topic of discussion as long as white folks are the ones the ones introducing it.

It's quite obvious by the harshness at which some were criticized, the ease by which certain words were thrown that race is clearly apart of this very subject. The very fact that there are stark differences along racial lines in regards to who backs the union and who doesn't is as clear as day (NY1 poll). We see things differently.

As for me, being a black man in NYC, knowing many transit workers, while I roam the halls of corporate america, why should I admonish transit workers for "at least" having a pension to fight for as we in white collar workers gave up our pensions years ago? It's as if many of my so-called fair minded collegues are jealous that they have things once granted to us.

And while these minority transit workers are viewed in the same mold as rappers and nba ball players being called "thugs", I'm apt to say that these coded euphemisms are a repeatative part of a concealed venacular that cloaks those from saying how they really feel while saying how they really feel. We're not crazy for reading between the lines, just honest.

And while we're on the subject of honesty, I honestly can't understand how an MTA "in need" several months ago decided not to take the highest bidder for their railyards on the westside as Bloomberg and company chased dreams of the West Side Stadium. Funny something worth over $1 Billion was readily made available for $700 million by the MTA. All while their workers received little in terms of compensation for their actual work, as the MTA raised fares which collectively hampered our wallets.

I don't know. It seems like common sense goes out the window when a black person is the one telling this to folks when wanting his just deserts.

I'm not surprised....

Posted by: albert at December 25, 2005 1:39 AM

Racist my ass. This strike was about GREED pyure and simple. The Greed of the TWU. No other place in America are transit Workers paid so highly and have so many benefits and so much protection from its union. Trousaint and the TWU just wanted more money, and benefits because the MTA had a surplus. The strike was "illegal" and actually akin to blackmail. Why else would it be called for the week before Christmas when there are so many people in the city using public transportation besides the regular commutters. And ENOUGH of the RACE CARD. its too played out. It doesn't matter if you are Black or White. Its not like the TWU member make Minimum Wage and no benefits. they are handsomely paid and enjoy VERY VERY good benefits. Race had nothing to do it. I for say they shoudl all be fired from Trousaint on down to the person who sweeps the station. The TWU tried to hold the city hostage pure and simple. They deserve every fine and even leagle action.

Posted by: Lyle at December 25, 2005 6:32 AM

Ever since the Reagan years, there has been a concerted effort by government, local and federal to beat down the Unions and demonization is part of this process. If this were in the early 1900’s Bloomberg would have called out the National Guard and they would have been shot-remember The Ludlow Massacre and Matewan. Most of us owe a lot to the unions. Health and retirement benefits were pioneered by unions such as the UMWA . Worker health and safety laws were pushed for by the unions along with the 40 hour work week and overtime. They helped to bring about child labor laws and minimum wages. So in the broad sense they are standing up for all of us. “Unions play a pivotal role both in securing legislated labor protections and rights such as safety and health, overtime, and family/medical leave and in enforcing those rights on the job. Because unionized workers are more informed, they are more likely to benefit from social insurance programs such as unemployment insurance and workers compensation. Unions are thus an intermediary institution that provides a necessary complement to legislated benefits and protections.” From Economic Policy Institute http://www.epinet.org/content.cfm/briefingpapers_bp143

Posted by: Chris at December 25, 2005 3:17 PM

The racial disconnect is certaintly not a new reality for any issue in NYC yet when race is noted in labor or economic venues the topic becomes not only more lethal but the depth of racism is incredible. The mayor's hate speech and contempt for black union workers is not any different than the distain workers get from white patrons who trashed them 24/7, the mayor's bus stop however was a very expensive display of race driven dynamics..

BTW seeking respect and equity is not illegal nor a crime those backward and myopic underdeveloped new yorkers who attacked workers with racial venom and hate theme labels should be ashamed of themselves...

Posted by: Greg Thrasher at December 26, 2005 11:36 AM

If the TWU are guilty of violating the Taylor Law, so is the MTA. The workers who walked violated Sec. 210 (Strike penalty- 2 days loss wages for every day of strike. Three day strike, six days lost wages.) But the media "glossed" over the fact the MTA broke the law too, Sec. 201 (Pension CANNOT be part of contract negotiations.) In football, that would be called "offsetting penalties". Now maybe Gov. Pataki's "... No one's above the law" speech applies to the folks he appointed, or just the working class.

Oh, and we all know that Rupert Murdock's Post is as anti-union as it gets. But ever wonder why the paper goes out of it's way to demonize the TWU and blow kisses to the MTA? Maybe it has to do with the MTA's "gift" of the old Walnut Depot, now the home to the NY Post's printing plant. "Fair and balanced"... my @$$!

Posted by: Fishbone at December 26, 2005 11:45 AM

People arguing both sides are wrong, but for a reason no one here has mentioned. Indeed, it's a reason that's rarely if ever mentioned outside of such publications as The Nation, CounterPunch or The Progressive. Here it is: The boundaries of the debate about the economy have been, over the past thirty years, pushed so far to the right that no one sees the key issue.

I cannot imagine Samuel Gompers, Eugene Debs, Mary Harris "Mother" Jones or any of the other great union organizers of the past buying ANY of the arguments posted here. Anti-union for the obvious reasons, pro-union for the reason that the TWU didn't push HARD ENOUGH. Harry Bridges made the ILWU one of the best paid unions in the nation because, as he put it to the dock owners, "we're all in this to make money."

The key mentioned above is the acceptance by the anti-TWU posters and - to my surprise - tacit acceptance of some of the pro-TWU posters that the union broke the law. This implies that the law is legitimate. IT IS NOT! The only genuine power a union has is the power to strike. Without that threat a union is a paper tiger, and management knows it. I don't give a damn if the union is private or public - the right to strike is inviolate and self-evident.

As much as I hate to admit it, Reagan's firing of the PATCO strikers in '81 was a political masterstroke, if a vile one. He bluntly let it be known that wiping out a union was perfectly ok by destroying a union that, like the TWU, didn't have the legal right to strike.

Others have pointed this out, but I think it bears repeating: No unions, no rights. No 40 hour work week; no overtime; no paid vacation; no benefits of any kind whatsoever. And yet people continue to scapegoat unions. Place the blame for your aching feet where they belong: On managment. Those who do otherwise are fools, gleefully tying the noose around their own necks.

Posted by: Rob Anderson at December 27, 2005 8:28 PM