Fire them all.

[Zebo]

Selfish Sanitation Department bosses from the snow-slammed outer boroughs ordered their drivers to snarl the blizzard cleanup to protest budget cuts -- a disastrous move that turned streets into a minefield for emergency-services vehicles, The Post has learned.

"They sent a message to the rest of the city that these particular labor issues are more important," said City Councilman Dan Halloran (R-Queens), who was visited yesterday by a group of guilt-ridden sanitation workers who confessed the shameless plot.

And people are dying because of their actions

A blizzard baby delivered inside the lobby of a snowbound Brooklyn building died after an emergency call of a woman in labor brought no help for nine excruciating hours.

The baby's mother, a 22-year-old college senior, was recovering Tuesday night at Interfaith Medical Center, where her newborn was pronounced dead at 6:34 p.m. on Monday. That was 10 hours after the first 911 call from the bloody vestibule on Brooklyn Ave. in Crown Heights.

http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2010/12/29/2010-12-29_help_arrives_too_late_to_save_baby.html
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/sanit_filthy_snow_slow_mo_qH57MZwC53QKOJlekSSDJK#ixzz19bQfsQH3


I bet with 17% unemployment you'd have no problem getting people will to plow New York Streets.

 

[PeshakJang]

Charge them with gross negligence homicide. Since it was a conspiracy to further their own financial agenda, charge them all under RICO and put them all in jail.

 

[Scotteq]

OOhhh...



Using RICO against the Unions!?!?



Now, *THAT* would be a sh*tstorm of epic proportions!

 

[PeshakJang]

OOhhh...



Using RICO against the Unions!?!?



Now, *THAT* would be a sh*tstorm of epic proportions!

Modern unions fit the definition of criminal organizations... I don't see any problems with it.

 

[Greenman]

Everyone that participated should be canned. The tragedy is that no action will be taken.

 

[matt0611]

Public sector unions are parasites in this country. Talk about greed at the public expense.

 

[Scotteq]

Modern unions fit the definition of criminal organizations... I don't see any problems with it.

I totally see the angle.

I do understand it has been done before.



But...


yeah.....


Epic Sh*tstorm

 

[Jhhnn]

Heh. One Repub councilman, endorsed by the Tea Party, makes claims and accusations based on what he says are anonymous sources, and the usual Righties are all over it like stink on shit.

Scapegoat, anyone?

I'm sure that the recent layoffs had nothing to do with it, nothing at all.

 

[PeshakJang]

Heh. One Repub councilman, endorsed by the Tea Party, makes claims and accusations based on what he says are anonymous sources, and the usual Righties are all over it like stink on shit.

Scapegoat, anyone?

I'm sure that the recent layoffs had nothing to do with it, nothing at all.

As President Obama likes to say, "Until we see evidence that it didn't happen, it happened."

 

[Scotteq]

The New York Times mentions it only in passing:


http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/30/nyregion/30response.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&ref=nyregion&src=me

The Metropolitan Transportation Authority entered the holiday weekend with modest concerns about the weather. On Friday, it issued its lowest-level warning to subway and bus workers. Indeed, it was not until late Sunday morning, hours after snow had begun to fall, that the agency went to a full alert, rushing to call in additional crew members and emergency workers. Over the next 48 hours, subways lost power on frozen tracks and hundreds of buses wound up stuck in snow-filled streets.

By 4 p.m. Sunday, several inches of snow had accumulated when Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg made a plea for help at his first news conference about the escalating storm: he asked people with heavy equipment and other kinds of towing machinery to call the city’s 311 line to register for work. A full day had gone by since the blizzard warning had been issued.

This week, as Mr. Bloomberg conceded that the city’s response to the blizzard had been inadequate, many theories, in both shouts and whispers, have been offered to explain the shortcomings: the Sanitation Department had undergone staffing cuts; the ferocity of the snowfall and the power of the accompanying winds had presented extraordinary challenges to the city’s snow plows; angry sanitation workers had sabotaged the efforts; city residents had ignored common sense and wound up stranding their cars in streets across the five boroughs.

On Wednesday, the mayor and his commissioners pledged to get at the truth. Once the streets have been cleared, they said, all aspects of the response will be analyzed, and changes, if necessary, will be made.

“I could stand here and list maybe 10 or 12 items and say this is what my problem was or that’s what my problem was,” John J. Doherty, the sanitation commissioner, said at a news conference with Mr. Bloomberg. “The mayor has pointed out there will be a postmortem on this storm. I’m not here to make excuses right now.”

 

[Scotteq]

On the other hand... The New York Post just put up an article saying that Governot Paterson wants a probe into the slowdown accusations:

Gov. Paterson calls for snow slowdown probe

By BRENDAN SCOTT
Post correspondent

Last Updated: 10:19 AM, December 30, 2010

Posted: 8:57 AM, December 30, 2010

More Print ALBANY – Outgoing Gov. David Paterson called this morning for a criminal investigation into allegations that a slowdown by budget-squeezed plow operators contributed to the city’s blizzard woes.

The Post reported today that a group of guilt-ridden sanitation workers confessed their protest plot to City Councilman Dan Halloran (R-Queens). The workers were fuming over recent job cuts and cutbacks, the councilman and other sources told The Post.

“This would be a very, very serious breach,” Paterson told WOR 710-AM on his, adding that it "would be better for there to be an investigation about the allegations."

"I just think the whole thing would be outrageous, if it’s actually true.”

Miles of roads remained treacherously unplowed as of last night, days after the blizzard dumped nearly two feet of snow on the city. Paterson, who lives in Harlem, said the snarl has left New Yorkers “scratching their heads” since the city handled a similar storm so well last year.

“That always gives way to a lot of rumor and innuendo, which I think we should probably table until there are facts to back that up,” Paterson said. The governor, nonetheless, said any slowdown could be considered criminal.

“I would have to look through the criminal law to find exactly which one to prosecute people under,” Paterson said. “But criminality is a heightened sense of wrongdoing and there are examples of people whose lives were threatened severely.”

Paterson will hand over the Executive Mansion mansion to Gov.-elect Andrew Cuomo tomorrow night.

brendan.scott@nypost.com



Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/...slowdown_qtaITjcrRg5kMILU1zz95N#ixzz19bq5Z1e0

So - while not admitting anything - the story is receiving the (outgoing) Governor's attention.

 

[CitizenKain]

Modern unions fit the definition of criminal organizations... I don't see any problems with it.

I'm sure if you have massive brain trauma that would make sense.

 

[GuitarDaddy]

Yep, anyone found to have participated in the sabatoge/work delay should be fired and brought up on criminal manslauther charges.

 

[Jhhnn]

Yep, anyone found to have participated in the sabatoge/work delay should be fired and brought up on criminal manslauther charges.

Yep- you've already accepted the basic (uncorroborated) premise, that a slowdown did indeed occur.

You do realize that this kerfuffle is just another example of Repub methodology- a single accusation becoming "fact" from the acts of repetition and context stripping?

Iraqi WMD's ring a bell?

 

[Zebo]

Modern unions fit the definition of criminal organizations... I don't see any problems with it.

I don't know about that but when you are expected to perform in times of trouble i.e. when you really earn your pay, striking should be criminal.

Imagine if cops & FF decided to strike when 9/11 happened?

 

[Scotteq]

Modern unions fit the definition of criminal organizations... I don't see any problems with it.

OOhhh...



Using RICO against the Unions!?!?



Now, *THAT* would be a sh*tstorm of epic proportions!

I don't know about that but when you are expected to perform in times of trouble i.e. when you really earn your pay, striking should be criminal.

Imagine if cops & FF decided to strike when 9/11 happened?

Did a little checking, and RICO definitely has been used against Unions. But that doesn't necessarily mean it's applicable in this case.

http://ricoact.com/ricoact/index.asp

A large percentage of potential RICO claims are undermined by the following considerations:



A RICO claim cannot exist in the absence of criminal activity. The simplest way to put this concept is: no crime - no RICO violation. This rule applies even in the context of civil RICO claims. Every RICO claim must be based upon a violation of one of the crimes listed in 18 U.S.C. § 1961(1). The RICO Act refers to such criminal activity as racketeering activity. RICO claims cannot be based upon breach of contract, broken promises, negligence, defective product design, failed business transactions, or any number of other factual scenarios that may give rise to other claims under the common law. This being said, a RICO claim can be based upon violations of the criminal mail and wire fraud statutes. The mail and wire fraud statutes are very broad. Some creative lawyers have succeeded in arguing that the mail and wire fraud statutes have been violated by fact patterns that superficially appear to give rise only to claims of negligence, breach of contract, and other actions giving rise to common law rights. If a RICO claim is based only upon violations of the mail or wire fraud statutes, however, courts are likely to subject the claims to stricter scrutiny. Courts look more favorably upon RICO claims based upon true criminal behavior, such as bribery, kickbacks, extortion, obstruction of justice, and clearly criminal schemes that are advanced by the use of the mails and wires.


RICO addresses long-term, not one-shot, criminal activity. Not only must a RICO claim be based upon criminal activity, but the criminal acts must constitute a "pattern" of criminal activity. A single criminal act, short-term criminal conduct, or criminal actions that bear no relationship to each other will not give rise to a RICO claim. The United States Supreme Court has ruled that criminal actions constitute a "pattern" only if they are related and continuous. In order to be "related," the criminal acts must involve the same victims, have the same methods of commission, involve the same participants, or be related in some other fashion. A pattern may be sufficiently continuous if the criminal actions occurred over a substantial period of time or posed a threat of indefinite duration. The former patterns are referred to as closed-ended patterns; the latter patterns are referred to as open-ended patterns. Accordingly, even if you have been injured by a criminal act, you will not have a RICO claim unless that criminal act is part of a larger pattern of criminal activity.

SO - Even if the slowdown were the case. To bring a RICO case, the (government) would have to show that not only was the behavior illegal, but that behavior was also part of an ongoing routine *and* that behavior was dictated by the Union bosses, rather than a spur of the moment act by (a few of) it's members.


A pretty tall order, IMHO.




Having said that: (If True), it's a really really shitty stunt to pull.

 

[Red Dawn]

If true those who organized it should be brought up on charges... that is if it's true.

 

[PeshakJang]

You do realize that this kerfuffle is just another example of Repub methodology- a single accusation becoming "fact" from the acts of repetition and context stripping?

Iraqi WMD's ring a bell?

Chamber of Commerce ring a bell?

 

[Modelworks]

Yep, anyone found to have participated in the sabatoge/work delay should be fired and brought up on criminal manslauther charges.

Ethically I wish there were repercussions, but legally you can't do anything about it.

As things get worse people go with the 'me first' mentality . Oil prices are increasing and that will put further strain on people.

Fire departments have let homes burn down because the house did not pay the fees for the community. If you look at any country where the economy declined severely this is common. In the USSR when it was falling apart it was common to have to pay someone like police an extra sum just to get them to file a report.

As far as the law is concerned it is legal to see someone laying on the ground bleeding to death and you are not required under law to help them. You can stand right next to them and laugh until they die if you want and legally there is nothing that can be done. The law doesn't require the public to help anyone else.

 

[PeshakJang]

As far as the law is concerned it is legal to see someone laying on the ground bleeding to death and you are not required under law to help them. You can stand right next to them and laugh until they die if you want and legally there is nothing that can be done. The law doesn't require the public to help anyone else.

Generally true, but tort law does have some applicability: "Duty to Rescue"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duty_to_rescue

In the common law of the United States and other anglosphere countries, there is no general duty to come to the rescue of another.[1] Generally, a person cannot be held liable for doing nothing while another person is in peril.[2][3] However, such a duty may arise in two situations:

A duty to rescue arises where a person creates a hazardous situation. If another person then falls into peril because of this hazardous situation, the creator of the hazard – who may not necessarily have been a negligent tortfeasor – has a duty to rescue the individual in peril.[4]

In the United States, as of 2009 ten states had laws on the books requiring that people at least notify law enforcement of and/or seek aid for strangers in peril under certain conditions:

Bolded part could be applicable... the officials didn't create the snow, but they intentionally created the hazardous conditions by neglecting to perform their duties. Criminal negligence is "careless, inattentive, neglectful, willfully blind, or in the case of gross negligence what would have been reckless in any other defendant.", which fits what was done, and since their negligence allowed another to die, it is defined as negligent homicide.

 

[Modelworks]

Bolded part could be applicable... the officials didn't create the snow, but they intentionally created the hazardous conditions by neglecting to perform their duties. Criminal negligence is "careless, inattentive, neglectful, willfully blind, or in the case of gross negligence what would have been reckless in any other defendant.", which fits what was done, and since their negligence allowed another to die, it is defined as negligent homicide.

They didn't create the hazardous conditions though because they made nobody go out in the conditions. If people stayed where they were a reasonable person would assume those people would be safe. There has to be limitations on how far out a person considers the options when making decisions. If there was not, then someone could be prosecuted for not delivering gas on time because they wanted more money and the ambulance not making it to the scene of an accident because of it causing a death.

 

[Jhhnn]

Chamber of Commerce ring a bell?

False equivalence sound familiar? It should.

Another standard tactic of Right Wing blowhards.

 

[PeshakJang]

False equivalence sound familiar? It should.

Another standard tactic of Right Wing blowhards.

There you go... when reality doesn't fit a liberal ideology, reality must be wrong.

And you are right... they aren't equivalent. The majority of the world thought Iraq had WMDs, and had evidence to support it. Still haven't seen that evidence about the chamber of commerce, but His Greatness made a claim, and the liberal world echoed it with fury as The Truth.

 

[PeshakJang]

They didn't create the hazardous conditions though because they made nobody go out in the conditions. If people stayed where they were a reasonable person would assume those people would be safe. There has to be limitations on how far out a person considers the options when making decisions. If there was not, then someone could be prosecuted for not delivering gas on time because they wanted more money and the ambulance not making it to the scene of an accident because of it causing a death.

Well the whole question of "reasonably foreseeable consequences" is subject to what a reasonable person would think, or a group of 12 in this case.

I personally think it is reasonably foreseeable that refusing to plow the streets would prevent emergency responders from responding to life-threatening situations. What if there had been a major fire downtown, and streets that normally would have been plowed were not, causing a dozen people to die due to no emergency response?

It would simply be a matter of what you could see happening, the chances of that happening, and the consequences of that happening... then seeing if 12 people think the party is negligent.

 

[nobodyknows]

If true those who organized it should be brought up on charges... that is if it's true.

+1