Question re:Taylor Laws and the NY transit strike... (1 Viewer)

[todd s]

Just curious. I heard the union can't strike because of the Taylor law. Will this really stop them? How does the law effect the unions? I remember reading that during the last strike. Whatever benefits they got..were eliminated because of the fines the unions and members were hit with. Thanks!

 

[LewB]

I believe that the Taylor law prohibits state/city employees like transit/fire/cops/garbage from going on strike. I believe that the leaders are subject to fines and or prison.
I heard 1 more VERY compelling reason for them not to go on strike against the state/city from a report on NBC TV in NYC.
Seems that if they go on strike, the MTA somehow gets the right to stop collecting union dues out of the paychecks of the members on behalf of the union. It will be up to the union to figure out how to collect members' union dues.
The reporter said that 'insiders' considered this the most compelling reason for the union not to go on strike.
I googled 'taylor law' and got this, amongst others.

 

[Chu Gai]

Didn't stop anyone though did it?

 

[MichaelBA]

They struck, the bastards! Now I gotta walk 22 blocks and three avenues from Penn Station just to get to work... and in 10 degree wind chill too! ARGH!

For info about the Taylor Law, see THIS and THIS.

 

[Joe Fisher]

You have my sympathy Michael. I suffered through a 51 day bus strike here in Westchester County, NY earlier this year and I know what you are going through. Hopefully it won't last long. Good luck to all in NYC.

 

[Ted Todorov]

Long live VPN -- I would have biked to work, but not in the 10 degree wind chill.

Unfortunately, now that it's happened, I'm afraid heels will be dug in, and it will last a while. What a Christmas present :frowning:

Ted

 

[todd s]

Just curious. I was away when the strike was settled. Who blinked first...Union or MTA? And what was the settlement?

Thanks!

 

[Jay H]

I think the Union and the MTA shook hands on a virtual agreement when the transit workers returned to work, but the TWU members still had to officially approve (i.e. vote) on the agreement as shook upon by the head of the TWU and the MTA. The current scoop is that there is a vocal minority(?) that wants the rest of their union members to vote down the agreed contract that the heads of the TWU and the MTA shook on back in december. Now the head of the TWU is downplaying the statements made by it's own members and saying that it's only a minority and doesn't reflect the majority of the TWU members.

I forget what the exact stickling point the TWU members had against the contract but it has to do with the money for the pension and where it's coming from. One source is tax-free whereas the other source, the income would be taxed and so far, they can't guarantee where the money for the pension is going to come from.

Jay