this mta strike in NYC

[talyn00]

http://www.forbes.com/business/feeds/ap/2005/12/16/ap2397896.html

this article also states average wages

 

[isasir]

Hmm, let see if I can get this quoting structure correct...

Originally posted by: T2k

Originally posted by: isasir
I read your article T2k, and the piece that stuck out to me was the following:

Proposals for that money include spending $450 million to pay down some of a $2.2 billion in underfunded MTA pension plans; spend $100 million on security improvements throughout the system; and $50 million on service enhancements, including increasing cleaning programs, said MTA Executive Director Katherine Lapp.

That $450mil. would directly benefit the workers,

Well, not exactly: notice the *underfunded* part. it'd simple ease the pain of the MTA.

If the pension remained underfunded, wouldn't that mean that they'd be unable to pay it all out to the workers? (much like these issues of running out of money in social security) If yes, then it really isn't easing MTA pain, since they can only distribute whatever funds they have, I'd assume.

the security improvements would benefit workers and riders

Bull. It's to prevent another 9/11, nothing else because Bush, after doing the mouthwork, technically took money from here, contrary to his promises about helping this City .

It still benefits the workers and riders, regardless of what Bush did. It's money that isn't there right now.

and increased cleaning programs likely means hiring more workers, another benefit to the union.

Ummm how is that logical?

More workers means more people paying union dues, and more employees in a union is more leverage for a union.

While these proposals were just that, proposals, I wonder why the TWU still insisted on asking for more?

They DID NOT. This article from July and vastly different from MTA's first offer which included CUTS.

Now correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't the surplus and the contract two separate things? Sure they're tied together since the surplus is something the workers want a part of. However, a contract really should be more about what is fair for the workers, factoring in everything (INCLUDING projected deficits for MTA in future). 4% pay raises I feel is fair, since it keeps up with inflation. It just so happens though that the TWU is using this surplus as a bargaining chip to get more than they normally would/should.

 

[PUN]

Originally posted by: T2k

Originally posted by: talyn00

Originally posted by: T2k

Originally posted by: PUN
read NY Times, if too literate, go with Daily news or NY post

Tsk tsk tsk... you and NYT? Perhaps the Sports section...

(TBH a yearly 8% would be waaay too high, everybody knows it.)

Obviously you did not know.

 

[T2k]

Originally posted by: sniperruff

Originally posted by: T2k
Who's spreading this "high salaries' BS here? High salaries in blue collar? Who's saying this nonsense?
High salaries at MTA - yes. VERY HIGH.

Steel workers and electrical unions? What are you talking about? TWU INCLUDES the constractional workers as well (ie track Dept).

i've read that the average starting salary on google news being $47k - $55k.

I think it's definitely not the starting salary. Besides that $40K in NYC after tax etc is pretty far from a good salary, I think (dunno the tax, thx God I make more, so I'm just guessing) it could be around 20% lower after tax in this range. Anybody?

Considering a lot of college graduates get about $35k if not lower...

I'm tired of this... no offense but what graduate gets only 3% yearly raise over the next 20 years, hmm?
And also what college grads we're talking about? Sorry to say this but the knowledge level you can get in most of our colleges doesn't worth jackshit compared to foreign grads (yes, I'm an immigrant myself).

it is a generous salary for a stinky, but not very physical-demanding job.

I don't think so: getting $30K after tax and getting a fixed 3% raises over decades is pretty ****** offer itself, if you ask me, let alone the stinky job.
I'd take the $35K starter with much higher possible raises over decades at any day if I'd be about to start over my life.

 

[Zim Hosein]

Originally posted by: talyn00
http://www.forbes.com/business/feeds/ap/2005/12/16/ap2397896.html

this article also states average wages

Train operators, station agents and cleaners earn between $47,000 and $55,000 a year before overtime.

:Q

From my personal experience, the cleaning crew at my local subway stop do their job and I can't complain about them, but the station agents & operators are rude and if they had a regular retail job, they would be fired IMO.

 

[PUN]

Originally posted by: isasir
Hmm, let see if I can get this quoting structure correct...

Originally posted by: T2k

Originally posted by: isasir
I read your article T2k, and the piece that stuck out to me was the following:

Proposals for that money include spending $450 million to pay down some of a $2.2 billion in underfunded MTA pension plans; spend $100 million on security improvements throughout the system; and $50 million on service enhancements, including increasing cleaning programs, said MTA Executive Director Katherine Lapp.

That $450mil. would directly benefit the workers,

Well, not exactly: notice the *underfunded* part. it'd simple ease the pain of the MTA.

If the pension remained underfunded, wouldn't that mean that they'd be unable to pay it all out to the workers? (much like these issues of running out of money in social security) If yes, then it really isn't easing MTA pain, since they can only distribute whatever funds they have, I'd assume.

the security improvements would benefit workers and riders

Bull. It's to prevent another 9/11, nothing else because Bush, after doing the mouthwork, technically took money from here, contrary to his promises about helping this City .

It still benefits the workers and riders, regardless of what Bush did. It's money that isn't there right now.

and increased cleaning programs likely means hiring more workers, another benefit to the union.

Ummm how is that logical?

More workers means more people paying union dues, and more employees in a union is more leverage for a union.

While these proposals were just that, proposals, I wonder why the TWU still insisted on asking for more?

They DID NOT. This article from July and vastly different from MTA's first offer which included CUTS.

Now correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't the surplus and the contract two separate things? Sure they're tied together since the surplus is something the workers want a part of. However, a contract really should be more about what is fair for the workers, factoring in everything (INCLUDING projected deficits for MTA in future). 4% pay raises I feel is fair, since it keeps up with inflation. It just so happens though that the TWU is using this surplus as a bargaining chip to get more than they normally would/should.

Yes, they did use that as a bargaining tool and that's where they lost our support.
They should've stuck with the corresponding inflation raise and demanded strongly for the benenfits. They got what they wanted but their ridiculous initial offer makes them no better than the MTA management

 

[Night201]

Originally posted by: Don Rodriguez
its completely ridiculous.

i work on wall st. i'm from NYC. my boss ridiculued everyone from NYC saying oh don't b ea pussy if you have to walk 50 blocks do it like a man. meanwhile he lives in jersey and takes a cushy private bus from his house. little does he know i run my department by myself and without me they're crippled :evil grin;

What's your bonus going to be like this year (ballpark figure)?

 

[PUN]

Originally posted by: T2k

Originally posted by: sniperruff

Originally posted by: T2k
Who's spreading this "high salaries' BS here? High salaries in blue collar? Who's saying this nonsense?
High salaries at MTA - yes. VERY HIGH.

Steel workers and electrical unions? What are you talking about? TWU INCLUDES the constractional workers as well (ie track Dept).

i've read that the average starting salary on google news being $47k - $55k.

I think it's definitely not the starting salary. Besides that $40K in NYC after tax etc is pretty far from a good salary, I think (dunno the tax, thx God I make more, so I'm just guessing) it could be around 20% lower after tax in this range. Anybody?

Considering a lot of college graduates get about $35k if not lower...

I'm tired of this... no offense but what graduate gets only 3% yearly raise over the next 20 years, hmm?
And also what college grads we're talking about? Sorry to say this but the knowledge level you can get in most of our colleges doesn't worth jackshit compared to foreign grads (yes, I'm an immigrant myself).

it is a generous salary for a stinky, but not very physical-demanding job.

I don't think so: getting $30K after tax and getting a fixed 3% raises over decades is pretty ****** offer itself, if you ask me, let alone the stinky job.
I'd take the $35K starter with much higher possible raises over decades at any day if I'd be about to start over my life.

don't forget, you cannot get a job with 30k after tax with benefits with high school degree
One of my assistant applied for a job at MTA and their difficult exam questions were:
If Train A is travelling at 35miles/hr and Train B at 25miles/hr, which train will arrive at the next station first?

 

[PUN]

T2K
on a 40K salary, 20% tax would immediately get you flagged by IRS

 

[T2k]

Originally posted by: PUN

Originally posted by: T2k

Originally posted by: PUN
When MTA employees are clearly overpaid with great benefits, there are plenty of rooms for Cuts. MTA is throwing fair amount of raise and competitive benefits.
Like many others have said, this is a public matter and such ridiculous amount of raise should only goto underpaid city employees, like NYPD, UFT, etc

As I said above, I can't take stupid/false/empty phrases seriously, so keep up the lipservice, nobody cares, believe me.

If you cannot defend your argument, please stay off the subject without bluntly accusing someone. You CLEARLY have NO IDEA of what's going on in this city, nevermind this country. I ask you again, what do you do for living?

After you proved you're completely and hopelessly clueless on salaries in NY, why do you think I can tell you anything?

It's out there, anybody can check your silly claims... or you want me to do it publicly?

Fine, let's see your original post:

Teachers with College education with Masters make around 30K a year

You don't have a Master's, right?
FYI: teachers' salaries are widely different in private and public schools.

Pharmacist makes around 45-55K a year
Physical Therapist makes 35-45k a year
Chiropractor makes 45k a year.
MTA employee (high school drop-outs) makes 45-55k: their duties include, opening and closing doors, handing out tokens/metrocards, sweeping the floor and tracks, emptying out the garbage, driving a bus.

Just two examples...

Pharmacist:
http://www.payscale.com/salary-survey/vid-9622
http://www.payscale.com/salary-survey/vid-36670
http://www.payscale.com/salary-survey/vid-3314

Physical Therapist:
http://www.payscale.com/salary-survey/vid-3321
http://www.payscale.com/salary-survey/vid-221374

Embarrassed enough? Should I continue?

 

[PUN]

LOL looking at payscales for avg salaries? Are you still in school? I love how these newbies come on this board with a simple link from their parents internet claiming higher salary. I have over dozens of colleagues who are pharmacist and physical therapist in NYC and their avg salary is no more than 45k.
Please stop living in your dreams and wake up to your reality.


Teachers salary don't WIDELY vary among public schools.

 

[PUN]

T2K
what do you do for living?

 

[talyn00]

Originally posted by: PUN
LOL looking at payscales for avg salaries? Are you still in school? I love how these newbies come on this board with a simple link from their parents internet claiming higher salary. I have over dozens of colleagues who are pharmacist and physical therapist in NYC and their avg salary is no more than 45k.
Please stop living in your dreams and wake up to your reality.


Teachers salary don't WIDELY vary among public schools.

all the salaries he listed are the median salary, not the average

 

[meltdown75]

this thread needs a stickAY dawg

 

[PUN]

My friend recently placed a job opening for another physical therapy with doctoral degree for 38k with benefits. Over 30 showed for an interview.

Now, what gives MTA garbage disposal unit higher salary? Please don't quote how much raise a PT gets, I know a 20year exp PT with under 60k salary.

 

[T2k]

Originally posted by: isasir
Hmm, let see if I can get this quoting structure correct...

Originally posted by: T2k

Originally posted by: isasir
I read your article T2k, and the piece that stuck out to me was the following:

Proposals for that money include spending $450 million to pay down some of a $2.2 billion in underfunded MTA pension plans; spend $100 million on security improvements throughout the system; and $50 million on service enhancements, including increasing cleaning programs, said MTA Executive Director Katherine Lapp.

That $450mil. would directly benefit the workers,

Well, not exactly: notice the *underfunded* part. it'd simple ease the pain of the MTA.

If the pension remained underfunded, wouldn't that mean that they'd be unable to pay it all out to the workers? (much like these issues of running out of money in social security) If yes, then it really isn't easing MTA pain, since they can only distribute whatever funds they have, I'd assume.

My point was it's NOT a new benefit - it's an old, missing necessity they have to fix.

the security improvements would benefit workers and riders

Bull. It's to prevent another 9/11, nothing else because Bush, after doing the mouthwork, technically took money from here, contrary to his promises about helping this City .

It still benefits the workers and riders, regardless of what Bush did. It's money that isn't there right now.

No, it's not. It clearly benefits for us, the commuters.

and increased cleaning programs likely means hiring more workers, another benefit to the union.

Ummm how is that logical?

More workers means more people paying union dues, and more employees in a union is more leverage for a union.

My question is why would increased cleaning mean more workers?

While these proposals were just that, proposals, I wonder why the TWU still insisted on asking for more?

They DID NOT. This article from July and vastly different from MTA's first offer which included CUTS.

Now correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't the surplus and the contract two separate things? Sure they're tied together since the surplus is something the workers want a part of. However, a contract really should be more about what is fair for the workers, factoring in everything (INCLUDING projected deficits for MTA in future). 4% pay raises I feel is fair, since it keeps up with inflation. It just so happens though that the TWU is using this surplus as a bargaining chip to get more than they normally would/should.

[/quote]

MTA never offered 4%. They offered 3-3.5% yearly (multiple sources) and TWU was OK with that but insisted on unchanged retirement rate which seemingly MTA agreed as their final word - then they suddenly introduced another final word, with 4% CUT for every new worker.

 

[T2k]

Originally posted by: PUN

Originally posted by: T2k

Originally posted by: talyn00

Originally posted by: T2k

Originally posted by: PUN
read NY Times, if too literate, go with Daily news or NY post

Tsk tsk tsk... you and NYT? Perhaps the Sports section...

(TBH a yearly 8% would be waaay too high, everybody knows it.)

Obviously you did not know.

It's not me who couldn't get even very simple facts straight...

 

[talyn00]

Originally posted by: T2k

Originally posted by: PUN

Originally posted by: T2k

Originally posted by: talyn00

Originally posted by: T2k

Originally posted by: PUN
read NY Times, if too literate, go with Daily news or NY post

Tsk tsk tsk... you and NYT? Perhaps the Sports section...

(TBH a yearly 8% would be waaay too high, everybody knows it.)

Obviously you did not know.

It's not me who couldn't get even very simple facts straight...

hrm are you messing around with the quote tags, cause its not correct....i didn't post

(TBH a yearly 8% would be waaay too high, everybody knows it.)

 

[PUN]

Originally posted by: talyn00

Originally posted by: T2k

Originally posted by: PUN

Originally posted by: T2k

Originally posted by: talyn00

Originally posted by: T2k

Originally posted by: PUN
read NY Times, if too literate, go with Daily news or NY post

Tsk tsk tsk... you and NYT? Perhaps the Sports section...

(TBH a yearly 8% would be waaay too high, everybody knows it.)

Obviously you did not know.

It's not me who couldn't get even very simple facts straight...

hrm are you messing around with the quote tags, cause its not correct....i didn't post

(TBH a yearly 8% would be waaay too high, everybody knows it.)

 

[T2k]

Originally posted by: PUN
LOL looking at payscales for avg salaries? Are you still in school? I love how these newbies come on this board with a simple link from their parents internet claiming higher salary. I have over dozens of colleagues who are pharmacist and physical therapist in NYC and their avg salary is no more than 45k.
Please stop living in your dreams and wake up to your reality.

Pal... I'm around 40. You are one clueless person.

And I don't hold anything against your apparently not too highly praised pharmacist friends and their low salaries. It's very simple: if there are plenty of below-than-average or average pharmacists, then they will end up on the corner Ph and their wages will go down. If he thinks he should get better, then go on! Take a higher paid job if he can. Pure and simple.

Teachers salary don't WIDELY vary among public schools.

I think you have a reading disorder - as usually, I'm asking you to read again the original post.

 

[Hacp]

Originally posted by: T2k

Originally posted by: Hacp

Originally posted by: talyn00

Originally posted by: Hacp

Originally posted by: T2k

Originally posted by: Hacp

Originally posted by: T2k

Originally posted by: PUN

Originally posted by: T2k

Originally posted by: Atomicus
What I don't understand is the TWU's inability to understand the crippling effect of striking for higher wages.

1) loss of revenue because you aren't providing service for the days on strike
2) loss of wages due to fines (illegal striking, dumb@sses)
3) increase the MTA's overall debt and forcing another fare hike to ensure they can scratch even


You know what would be funny? If us New Yorkers boycotted the MTA. Not practical, but ironic and in their face. :|

No, it's you who's missing the point:

1. MTA has a billion in surplus, profit yet they didn't bulge.

2. Loss of revenues easily can be made up from 2x the loss of wages.

3. Loss of wages has nothing to do with MTA - that just precisley shows how determined they are which whows how bad their situation can be.

I think you are the one who is missing the point here.
MTA's 1 billion surplus belongs to consumers NOT MTA employees. These uneducated monkeys don't and will never realize that. MTA kept 2 books and raised the fare and they were able to have large sum of surplus. They admitted wrong doing and decided to lower the fare to $1 for the holiday season for us, the consumers. MTA monkeys had to cry and claim that it's their money?!?! that's ridiculous

You really need to read up a lot on the subject before I can take your comment seriously...

Ok answer this. The MTA is facing a projected 1 billion dollar defecit in 2007. How will they pay for the increased salaries in 2007?

OK, answer this: is this the same type of projection when they projected similar losses for this year, ending up with $1B surplus?

THey did not project 1 billion in losses for this year. They projected a coulpe hundred million. As previously stated, this year the MTA got lucky. The city of new york got lucky also. Intrest rates fell. The MTA has a couple of lucrative real estate deals. They got in the black.

Now, do you expect that this will happen every time for the next 4-5 years? That something unexpected comes in and saves the MTA from defecit? I don't.

You still haven't answered my question. What will the MTA do to pay for the increased salaries when they have a projected 1 billion+ defecit?

The answer to that is simple, larger deficit, and increased taxes.

How does the MTA tax the riders? How does the MTA do that? Also, a larger deficit for the MTA means that it will have more debt to pay off in the future. Does the MTA want to be like the US is today? Paying billions of dollars on INTREST RATE payments for the National Debt? If the MTA goes down that road, it will never fix its problems. The MTA needs to go into the black, period.

The basic problem is that disgusting sinister sneaky Pataki pulled the plug years ago, let alone Giuliani's cut. MTA is NOT a profit-oriented corporation yet they act like it should be.
Public ciy transportation is NOWHERE ON THE WORLD can be a profit-oriented corporation. It is the duty of NYS/NYC to ensure the working mass transit system for its population, for affordable price. That's why you pay taxes (particularly high ones in NYC).

MTA is not a profit oriented corporation. But they DO HAVE A BUDGET. What happens when they get in debt? They have three choices. Ones is that they could ask the state for money. NOT GOING TO HAPPEN. The state has been cutting its funding to the MTA in recent years. The second is the borrow. That will increase the future debt even more. The final is to increase fairs. That won't stand with riders.

 

[Hacp]

Originally posted by: T2k

Originally posted by: PUN
MTA proposed 3%, 4%, 3.5% increase over 3 years.
TWU wants 8% per year?
so my question is where do you get 8% increase in wage to justify the GREAT Inflation you are talking about?

I'll repeat: where did you hear/read 8% a YEAR?

8% was the number that the TWU came up with to start negotiations off.

 

[T2k]

Originally posted by: PUN
My friend recently placed a job opening for another physical therapy with doctoral degree for 38k with benefits. Over 30 showed for an interview.

Now, what gives MTA garbage disposal unit higher salary? Please don't quote how much raise a PT gets, I know a 20year exp PT with under 60k salary.

That's a worthless PT. Simple as that.

 

[PUN]

Originally posted by: Hacp

Originally posted by: T2k

Originally posted by: PUN
MTA proposed 3%, 4%, 3.5% increase over 3 years.
TWU wants 8% per year?
so my question is where do you get 8% increase in wage to justify the GREAT Inflation you are talking about?

I'll repeat: where did you hear/read 8% a YEAR?

8% was the number that the TWU came up with to start negotiations off.

not even worth reasoning with this 40 y/o virgin

 

[Hacp]

Originally posted by: T2k

Originally posted by: PUN
read NY Times, if too literate, go with Daily news or NY post

Tsk tsk tsk... you and NYT? Perhaps the Sports section...

Please, personal insults will not help your cause.