Woodsman Posted November 17, 2009 Report Posted November 17, 2009 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 . Posted by one side of the issue. And yes it is a big # either way but there are 2 sides to every issue. You can't completely believe either side at this point of the process.
irishfield Posted November 17, 2009 Report Posted November 17, 2009 No Woodsman... there is always THREE sides to every issue. The employee.. the employer.. and the real facts somewhere in the middle.
splashhopper Posted November 17, 2009 Author Report Posted November 17, 2009 Posted by one side of the issue. And yes it is a big # either way but there are 2 sides to every issue. You can't completely believe either side at this point of the process. so if we agree it is a BIG number.... where do u propose that money come from then? Oh yeah, I know... it will come from the "savings" of not having to pay the HOSTAGE TAKERS for the time on strike and the savings from not putting fuel in the bus..... but then again... there is a loss of revenue for this time as well and the those darned banks just don;t understand that the loan can't be paid for the bus this month and the insurance company is putting pressure on too... but hey.... we, the government employee, don;t really care about all that real world stuff... we want our god given right to a raise and we don;t give a dang who gets affected nor who has to pay for it....
Woodsman Posted November 17, 2009 Report Posted November 17, 2009 No Woodsman... there is always THREE sides to every issue. The employee.. the employer.. and the real facts somewhere in the middle. True much better phrased than the way I put it. Same meaning though.
Woodsman Posted November 17, 2009 Report Posted November 17, 2009 so if we agree it is a BIG number.... where do u propose that money come from then? All I can say is that after the union has been in a legal strike position for quite a while but refrained from striking in hopes for a negotiated agreement and now they are on strike, the longer it lasts the more it will cost the city. Either get back to the table or agree to go to arbitration. Wasting time with they are the bad guys routine & trying to stir up some citizens will do nothing to settle the strike but will cost the city more in the long run & disrupt the citizens even more.
splashhopper Posted November 17, 2009 Author Report Posted November 17, 2009 All I can say is that after the union has been in a legal strike position for quite a while but refrained from striking in hopes for a negotiated agreement and now they are on strike, the longer it lasts the more it will cost the city. Either get back to the table or agree to go to arbitration. Wasting time with they are the bad guys routine & trying to stir up some citizens will do nothing to settle the strike but will cost the city more in the long run & disrupt the citizens even more. but "where" is the money for any increase going to come from ?
bigfish1965 Posted November 17, 2009 Report Posted November 17, 2009 I am not in favor of unions, but trying to classify transit workers as essential is over the top, IMHO. Firemen, police, EMS and even water treatment and sewage treatment are essential...but bus drivers?? No chance. Toronto relies far more on its transit system and they manage to deal with strikes. It is inconvenient yes. Does it directly put people at risk? No. A 15% raise seems generous given the economy, but I don't know the ins and outs of it all..it may be making up for past concessions...no clue. The city is within their rights to hire out and get replacement drivers if they wish to. Some bus companies may even come in and pick up the routes. If there is a buck to be made, someone will be there. It is just a possible strike, not the end of the world.
rob v Posted November 17, 2009 Report Posted November 17, 2009 Wow... to me this only goes to prove one thing... figures lie and liars figure. Bottom line - they want more money and it has to come from the fare users and the tax payers. I'm not completely up to date on the finances of the LTC but my guess is the tax payer is subidizing this service - and the rate the users pay is only a portion of the over-all cost. so .. once again the tax payer forks it out. And there's plenty of LTC customers who don't pay the full fare - or any fare at all. If the union isn't happy with the city's offer - which I think is fair especially given the current economic climate.. go get a different job - just like most of the other folks out there. And I'm sure there's plenty of CAW members in the area (St thomas isn't that far away) who either are or will be very happy to put their name in the hat for one of these "under paid" positions. Just makes me shake my head, and wonder where this kind of thing will ever end.
ch312 Posted November 17, 2009 Report Posted November 17, 2009 strikes wouldnt occur if we didnt have unions.... :whistling:
Woodsman Posted November 17, 2009 Report Posted November 17, 2009 For all those who are anti unions I'm sure you would be willing to give back all the benefits that unions were pivotal in getting as the normal. Give back your holidays & vacations. Health benefits gone also. Health & safety rules forget it. Decent pay?, $4 per hour sounds about right. Your work week would be a lot longer also with no time or energy left for fishing. To those who would say " the unions did nothing for me in getting what I get" or "government laws give me these things" no employer would offer these things or government legislate some of these things if the weren't the expected norm. For those who own their own businesses how would your businesses fare if the disposable incomes of Canadians were to drop drastically? I'm sure you are quite willing & happy to accept a portion of these unionized workers disposable income. If they have less you'll also get less. The leisure and entertainment industry would quickly see major drops in spending as would the service industries. When money is short people tend to do as much of their own work as they can or friends can help with. Corporations would expect to only pay $4 per hour without benefits which would leave no money for employees to put back into the economy. Think this is not true? Then why are some corporations moving jobs to Mexico for just this?
Jer Posted November 17, 2009 Report Posted November 17, 2009 If they have less you'll also get less. Where in this dispute has anyone been offered less? Seems like some pretty unreasonable drivers looking for a raise that no one else seems to expect in this day & age. Comparing bus drivers to police, firefighters, EMS, etc. is laughable. They drive a bus for godsake.
Chris Posted November 17, 2009 Report Posted November 17, 2009 The fact that some gov't. employees are trying to justify bus driver salaries of upwards of 100K/yr just shows how out of touch with reality they have become. They actually believe it in their heart that their salaries, benefits and demands are justified. Believe me I have 3 sisters and one brother who all have gov't. jobs, and no matter what numbers you show them, they are still convinced that their salaries and benefits are fair and justified. When backed into a corner, they always revert to the common mantra of gov't employees........"if gov't. jobs are so great why don't you go out and get one". The other side of the coin is "if you, as a gov't. employee, feel so hard done by, then YOU go and get another job". Maybe try the private sector and see what kind of compensation packages the people who pay your salaries have. Might just be a real eye-opener. I have a friend who has worked in the mail room at Statscan for about 6 yrs. and makes about 40K/yr and he complains that he sits there doing absolutely nothing for most of every week. When he does have something to do, it's stuffing envelopes. With no post secondary education, he has full benefits, retirement plan, all kinds of time off each year and (the big one) job security. I work with several guys his same age (late 20's) that have been through post secondary school in engineering related fields (drafting, CET's, etc.), that have been working since leaving school that make approx. the same salary, half the benefits, half the time off, no pension and they work like buggers to meet deadlines. Oh, and they have absolutely NO job security. In fact several of them have been laid off or are working reduced work weeks during this recession. Yeah I know, "if they don't like it, go and get a gov't. job" yadayadayada. One word....ENTITLEMENT....No wonder the taxpayer is doomed. We are second class citizens in this country.
bigfish1965 Posted November 17, 2009 Report Posted November 17, 2009 I think we can call this one 'off the rails' and put it to bed now.
Recommended Posts