Transit strikes should be OUTLAWED - NF

[Dutchy]

I'd fire them all. Everyone of them. 350 bus drivers holding a city hostage so they can get what they want. It is just blackmail and I wouldn't stand for it.

 

These people need a major reality check. I would break the union. Someone in some Canadian city needs to do this. They have way too much power.

[Harrison]

...especially when i watch friends who barely finished highschool make more than i do in trades etc.

 

Hear ya there Doc. And if they have their own business they have quite a few tax breaks and write offs etc...

[bbog]

If I didn't laugh I would cry everytime I read another "union" story. Our businesses and politicians need to find the guts to put an end to the sense of entitlement. If this wasn't such a gravy train why are so many desperate to get a union job?

[Paully]

Suck it up and get back to work...

[LeXXington]

I don't have an issue with union's they demand money, company can decide if they want to pay or not. I can choose to go somewhere else if the strike.

 

Any Goverment employee should not have the right to get an union unless they agree to competition. Funny how they won't allow this.

 

Couple more years the only people employed will be the goverement union guys. Wait is that not what happend in Russia?

[Woodsman]

What about Firemen, Police, Nurses..they can't strike and they do ok.

 

As I said earlier they have the above have the right to binding arbitration.

Give the bus drivers the same & there would be no strike. That's all there asking for if the city & union can't come to an agreement.

To say "You can't strike" but "also you can't have arbitration" is complete Bull. It's either one or the other.

It's obvious that the city is trying to play "the out of control union card" while not trying to settle the issue & invoke public outrage. This will backfire in the long run.

It's time to tell your local politicians to either have the city go back to the table or agree to binding arbitration. Without one of these 2 options the strike will never be settled.

Edited November 16, 2009 by Woodsman

[walleyejigger]

wow, why are you assuming that the union wants to go to arbitrarion because it will not be fair and they will get what they want. Ever think that maybe the city is trying to make them take it up the rear, and they're looking forward to arbitration for a fair deal. Of course not just make up your own propoganda. Salary isn't the only part of a job.

 

All i'm reading here is a crapload of jealousy. If the job is so easy and not worthy of anything then feel free to apply and get that "cushy" job. I wont be there.

 

Until a full story comes out to the public on each unionized strikes (show me the entire contract, language and all, not just what either side wants to tell us about, which will never happen) people should think twice before judging.

 

Sounds to me like people are having hard time dealing with the fact that ppl who may or may not have less education than you are making a better buck than you. Grow up and deal with it Sally.

[Dara]

This is gonna get locked isn't it

[Dutchy]

This is gonna get locked isn't it

 

Probably

[Woodsman]

This is gonna get locked isn't it

 

Why because people on the forum disagree? As long as the posters do not violate forum rules why lock it? If someone violates the forum rules I say delete their post and discipline them alone. I see no problem with a discussion on a topic that all may not agree on.

 

Pro Patria: Rick

Edited November 16, 2009 by Woodsman

[Guest ThisPlaceSucks]

I don't always take the side of the employee ESPECIALLY when it comes to the "entitled" culture of government employees.

 

 

hahaha!

i DEFINITELY got into the public sector for the money!

 

[splashhopper]

wow, why are you assuming that the union wants to go to arbitrarion because it will not be fair and they will get what they want. Ever think that maybe the city is trying to make them take it up the rear, and they're looking forward to arbitration for a fair deal. Of course not just make up your own propoganda. Salary isn't the only part of a job.

 

All i'm reading here is a crapload of jealousy. If the job is so easy and not worthy of anything then feel free to apply and get that "cushy" job. I wont be there.

 

Until a full story comes out to the public on each unionized strikes (show me the entire contract, language and all, not just what either side wants to tell us about, which will never happen) people should think twice before judging.

 

Sounds to me like people are having hard time dealing with the fact that ppl who may or may not have less education than you are making a better buck than you. Grow up and deal with it Sally.

 

 

Not sure who this is aimed at... but I will respond

 

The lead negotiator for the union said : he "was looking forward to arbitration" last week.. He was on the local am talk radio show that i heard him say it.

The guy ( Pat Hunniford) can't get his numbers ( wages and benefits etc) straight from talk show to talk show..

 

He thinks if they go to arbitration that it is a slam dunk they will get what "other cities " are paying their drivers...

How fair is that if we are compared to cities with 2-10 times the population base( see tax base)?

 

this "arbitration" is not very arbitrary

 

The city has posted their offer to the union online >> http://www.ltconline.ca/

 

The bus drivers want "parity" with the EMS teams here in London... and "feel" they are entitled to the same benefits package for their jobs. Listen to the talk shows when the Union representative calls in... it's almost laughable how they represent themselves.

 

In the posts that I have on this thread, I have not made an issue with what they are making..

I AM making an issue of their "bargaining" tactics... which holds an ENTIRE CITY ( the bus riders and their NEW drivers now) HOSTAGE...

 

The city will eventually cave in.. we know that in our logical brains... but at what cost and to whom and how ?

The mayor came on the same talk shows and shared her disdain for the "arbitration " process as well.

 

I say,, lets figure out how to settle this ASAP in town... or lets fire every damned one of em and take on this "arbitration system " once and for all..

 

London could be a leader in this FARCE and I will do whatever I have to do to get my daughter to and fro from University.

 

And, in today's paper:

 

THE DISPUTE

 

* London Transit

 

Wages/benefits: Offering six, staged wage hikes worth 8.3% during a three-year contract plus some benefit improvements.

 

How top pay would change: For drivers, to $25 an hour from $23.08 now; for skilled workers, to $29.02 from $26.81.

 

Bottom line: Including benefits, the offer would cost an extra $2.7 million during three years.

 

* Amalgamated Transit Union

 

Wages/benefits: The union had sought a 15.2% wage hike for drivers during three years and 12% for skilled workers. Including benefit improvements the union wanted, the LTC says it would cost an extra $6 million during three years.

 

Bottom line: The union says LTC drivers are paid less than drivers in some smaller Ontario cities, and workers' benefits lag civic employees in London. The LTC employees, which include about 340 drivers and 110 other workers, voted overwhelmingly against the last offer.

Edited November 16, 2009 by splashhopper

[splashhopper]

Why because people on the forum disagree? As long as the posters do not violate forum rules why lock it? If someone violates the forum rules I say delete their post and discipline them alone. I see no problem with a discussion on a topic that all may not agree on.

 

Pro Patria: Rick

 

 

i agree ..

[Woodsman]

The mayor came on the same talk shows and shared her disdain for the "arbitration " process as well.

And she's done this on every labour dispute including police & firefighters. Whats new?

I say,, lets figure out how to settle this ASAP in town... or lets fire every damned one of em and take on this "arbitration system " once and for all..

To settle it quickly I agree.

As I have seen this similar comment in this thread more than once; Re:"or lets fire every damned one of em and take on this "arbitration system " once and for all.." if anyone believes this is even an option they are either hiding their head in the sand or living at home with mommy as they are not even capable of wiping their own rear end. That is why this is known as a legal strike.

London could be a leader in this FARCE and I will do whatever I have to do to get my daughter to and fro from University.

This makes me to believe that your view point is completely influenced by your personal situation only.

 

Rick

Edited November 16, 2009 by Woodsman

[splashhopper]

And she's done this on every labour dispute including police & firefighters. Whats new?

 

To settle it quickly I agree.

Re:"or lets fire every damned one of em and take on this "arbitration system " once and for all.." if anyone believes this is even an option they are either hiding their head in the sand or living at home with mommy as they are not even capable of wiping their own rear end.

 

This makes me to believe that your view point is completely influenced by your personal situation only.

 

Rick

 

you are one funny guy Rick....

 

The mayor at least comes to the talk shows and brings a reasonable voice to these negotiations... she is well know for being reasonable..

 

 

Not sure what the personal attacks to me are about though...

 

My view point is partially based on my personal situation with my daughter, yes.

It is also largely based though on a union that can take 75- 80,000 daily riders ( and now their personal drivers) HOSTAGE.

[Dutchy]

This makes me to believe that your view point is completely influenced by your personal situation only.

Rick

 

Maybe it is, maybe it isn't but the point he makes is correct. Holding an entire city hostage while turning down an offer most people would accept is crazy. I admit, I earn a much higher salary than these guys do, but I have never had an 8% pay increase, never mind 15%. Get into the real world here. The LTC has said it will have to increase transit fares by 15% to match the offer they want. Its simple economics. Everyone who has to use the buses gets screwed to keep 350 drivers happy. Not real fair (no pun intended). The money has to come from somewhere and in the end someone will always suffer in some other form (tax-payers).

 

The economy sucks, lots of people are out of work. These drivers need a reality check. This is not the time to demand huge wage increases. Accept what is a good deal and wait for the economy to get better. I don't mean this to sound nasty, but they drive buses. End of story. They don't save people's lives or run into burning buildings. Salaries have to match job level. Its very simple economics.

[Woodsman]

Not sure what the personal attacks to me are about though...

No personal attack intended. I'm just stating what appears to me.

 

Best Wishes: Rick

[Radnine]

All i'm reading here is a crapload of jealousy. If the job is so easy and not worthy of anything then feel free to apply and get that "cushy" job. I wont be there.

Sounds to me like people are having hard time dealing with the fact that ppl who may or may not have less education than you are making a better buck than you. Grow up and deal with it Sally.

 

The above may be a little harsh but the sentiment is probably sound.

Remember that the media's job is to get you irate about things like this so you will tune in to find out the latest. Percentages of raises and benefit gains etc. are seldom as actually reported.

I would also ask everyone to look at your own situation and say "you know what I get paid plenty for what I do, I never want a raise again" Won't happen. It is human nature to want to better your own lot in life and if it isn't then you've got a bigger problem than waiting for a bus.

Jim

[Woodsman]

, but I have never had an 8% pay increase, never mind 15%. Get into the real world here. The LTC has said it will have to increase transit fares by 15% to match the offer they want. Its simple economics. Everyone who has to use the buses gets screwed to keep 350 drivers happy. Not real fair (no pun intended). The money has to come from somewhere and in the end someone will always suffer in some other form (tax-payers).

 

I don't mean this to sound nasty, but they drive buses. End of story. They don't save people's lives or run into burning buildings. Salaries have to match job level. Its very simple economics.

A few of points here. It's not a 15 % increase but an increase over 3 years. If you take the city's figures as complete fact ( I'm not inclined to) this would decrease the yearly increase to 5 %. You should also realize this is not just a wage increase but an upgrade to benefits that other city employees receive.

Also if the compensation package added up to 15 % why would this add up to a 15 % increase in transit fees? Does the compensation package make up the whole cost of the transit system? I think not. There's upkeep to vehicles, new vehicle purchases, fuel, insurance and administration costs to name a few other factors. It's the city playing the big bad union card. "Its very simple economics" is it not?

I won't even touch the " I don't mean this to sound nasty, but they drive buses. End of story. They don't save people's lives or run into burning buildings. Salaries have to match job level. Its very simple economics." as you seem to believe they are below the standards of needed services.

Edited November 17, 2009 by Woodsman

[splashhopper]

A few of points here. It's not a 15 % increase but an increase over 3 years. If you take the city's figures as complete fact ( I'm not inclined to) this would decrease the yearly increase to 5 %. You should also realize this is not just a wage increase but an upgrade to benefits that other city employees receive.

Also if the compensation package added up to 15 % why would this add up to a 15 % increase in transit fees?

 

 

Umm lets see... .when fuel went thru the roof last year,,, they raised the fees...

 

and now if the wages and benefits go up by 15% they somehow magically don;t have to come up with 15% more money to cover it?

 

not sure how that works.... let me know how to do it please... your math seems different than mine.

[Dutchy]

I won't even touch the " I don't mean this to sound nasty, but they drive buses. End of story. They don't save people's lives or run into burning buildings. Salaries have to match job level. Its very simple economics." as you seem to believe they are below the standards of needed services.

 

It might be a needed service, but that does not mean that there should be huge salary increases just because the drivers and union think they should get one. The job is what it is, if they don't like it, go get a different job. What they are doing is pure blackmail. "If you don't give me what I think I should get I won't do my job". I have no sympathy for it at all. There are tons of people out of work who would jump at the package these guys have, but no it isn't enough for them.

 

And your point about the 15% increase.........If a current bus pass is $79 then it is going to go up by 15% to cover the costs. That is going to be about an extra $12-13. BUT not everyone pays full fare (Pensioners, students, children), so a 15% increase in those fares won't be nearly as much. So when you factor in everything, then it probably is what is required to cover the increase in the compensation package.

Edited November 17, 2009 by Dutchy

[Woodsman]

Umm lets see... .when fuel went thru the roof last year,,, they raised the fees...

 

and now if the wages and benefits go up by 15% they somehow magically don;t have to come up with 15% more money to cover it?

 

not sure how that works.... let me know how to do it please... your math seems different than mine.

 

It is simple math. If the compensation package was the total of all costs involved in the cost of the bus service than yes the transit fees would have to increase 15 %.

A few factors that effect that are:

1: Only a third of the increase will be applied each year.

2: These are the city's figures which I believe are not completely accurate.

3: Many other costs contribute to the total cost of the service. To blame to total increase on the contract demands is false.

A common tactic of employers is not to factor the # of employees in each wage group into the % calculations.

For example.

IE: 85 employees at $15

10 employees at $19

5 employees at $26

Employers stated average wage $20.00.

Were if you factor # in each category it's an actual average wage of $15.95.

If all employees get a 2% increase than it's a 2 % in increase in wages.

But many employers will use this formula when reporting to media.

2 % at $20 = $.40 average increase in wages.

when actually it's 2 % at an average increase of $.32 with #'s of employees factored into each wage category.

Statistic's are only as accurate as they are calculated and reported.

[Woodsman]

And your point about the 15% increase.........If a current bus pass is $79 then it is going to go up by 15% to cover the costs. That is going to be about an extra $12-13. BUT not everyone pays full fare (Pensioners, students, children), so a 15% increase in those fares won't be nearly as much. So when you factor in everything, then it probably is what is required to cover the increase in the compensation package.

 

I never stated it was a 15% increase. That was someone else. I said if the city's figures could be believed it would be 15% over 3 years or 5% annually.

I don't know what your getting at? 15% is 15% no mater the #'s in each group. Dollar amounts may differ but 15% is 15%. It's just like the #'s of employees in the lower wage group are far higher than those in the higher wage groups.

Edited November 17, 2009 by Woodsman

[splashhopper]

It is simple math. If the compensation package was the total of all costs involved in the cost of the bus service than yes the transit fees would have to increase 15 %.

A few factors that effect that are:

1: Only a third of the increase will be applied each year.

2: These are the city's figures which I believe are not completely accurate.

3: Many other costs contribute to the total cost of the service. To blame to total increase on the contract demands is false.

A common tactic of employers is not to factor the # of employees in each wage group into the % calculations.

For example.

IE: 85 employees at $15

10 employees at $19

5 employees at $26

Employers stated average wage $20.00.

Were if you factor # in each category it's an actual average wage of $15.95.

If all employees get a 2% increase than it's a 2 % in increase in wages.

But many employers will use this formula when reporting to media.

2 % at $20 = $.40 average increase in wages.

when actually it's 2 % at an average increase of $.32 with #'s of employees factored into each wage category.

Statistic's are only as accurate as they are calculated and reported.

 

 

did u read the offer that was posted... it broke the wages down .... and furthermore laid it out, with simple math the cost of each sides proposed increase in package....a pretty big number either way ... that money has to come from some where .

Edited November 17, 2009 by splashhopper

[Dutchy]

I don't know what your getting at? 15% is 15% no mater the #'s in each group. Dollar amounts may differ but 15% is 15%. It's just like the #'s of employees in the lower wage group are far higher than those in the higher wage groups.

 

It simple, if you are paying $40 for your bus pass, then a 15% increase would be about $5-6. If you are paying $79 for a bus pass, then it is $11-12. That is, there is not one price for riding the bus in London. The majority of users (students) pay less than I or you would as adults. So it maybe a 15% increase across the board, but it is not at the same dollar amount as not every bus pass costs the same amount of money. It depends on how much you pay for your bus pass. For example, 100 people paying $40 = $500 extra cash from 15% increase. 100 people paying $79 = an extra $1000 from 15% increase

 

So I am guessing that a 15% increase across the board taking into account that the majority of users do not pay the full adult fare = cost of compensation package.

 

Hopefully that makes sense. The total dollar amount that is brought in by the increase depends on the % of people who pay full fare versus the % of people who don't.

Edited November 17, 2009 by Dutchy