Amtrak Posted January 1, 2012 Share #1 Posted January 1, 2012 Will there be a strike or no anybody comment please:( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KNIGHTRIDER3:16 Posted January 1, 2012 Share #2 Posted January 1, 2012 Can someone say...(Taylor Law) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marctalky1 Posted January 1, 2012 Share #3 Posted January 1, 2012 2005? I don't think Taylor law matters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FriedChikkin Posted January 1, 2012 Share #4 Posted January 1, 2012 If Samuelson's going to be a wuss about it, too and relent for less after only two days there might never be a strike ever again... 2005 pissed a lot of workers off and left a bad taste in the mouths of even those whom weren't even working for TA at the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
East New York Posted January 1, 2012 Share #5 Posted January 1, 2012 2005? I don't think Taylor law matters. Why would the Taylor Law not matter?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
INDman Posted January 2, 2012 Share #6 Posted January 2, 2012 The Taylor law didn't stop a strike from taking place in 2005. All it did was nearly bankrupt the union. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tokkemon Posted January 2, 2012 Share #7 Posted January 2, 2012 The Taylor law didn't stop a strike from taking place in 2005. All it did was nearly bankrupt the union. I think that's kinda the point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LRG Posted January 2, 2012 Share #8 Posted January 2, 2012 For every day they strike, they lose two days worth of pay. Is it really worth it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
INDman Posted January 2, 2012 Share #9 Posted January 2, 2012 I think that's kinda the point. Not really, they can still go on strike so the law does not prevent it. Now if the law said that a public employee who went on strike would be fire, that would prevent them for striking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kamen Rider Posted January 2, 2012 Share #10 Posted January 2, 2012 Please, watch the Nazi Banksters Crimes Ripple Effect at http://jforjustice.co.uk/banksters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TwoTimer Posted January 2, 2012 Share #11 Posted January 2, 2012 In all terms, of course a strike wasn't taken off the table (which obviously is a PR/negotiating ploy), but there won't be a strike. TWU plans to negotiate a deal without binding arbitration (which has already sided with management in the case of LI Bus, although there were no major givebacks). The whole "no zeroes" clause was more of a bitter inner-union rivalry between Samuelson's party and Touissant's loyalists, as not only would the zeros constitute a failure, but also possibly a victory for Touissant's party when elections come next year. Touissant is no longer with Local 100, BTW, but he did go to take a job with the International (not sure if he's still up there). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CenSin Posted January 2, 2012 Share #12 Posted January 2, 2012 Not really, they can still go on strike so the law does not prevent it. Now if the law said that a public employee who went on strike would be fire, that would prevent them for striking. The MTA can't afford to just fire most of its work force. If they did strike, I would bet that they wouldn't all be fired. They would have a severe shortage of labor for the coming weeks or months. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
East New York Posted January 2, 2012 Share #13 Posted January 2, 2012 The Taylor law didn't stop a strike from taking place in 2005. All it did was nearly bankrupt the union. Not really, they can still go on strike so the law does not prevent it. Now if the law said that a public employee who went on strike would be fire, that would prevent them for striking. Murder laws don't stop people from killing each other either. The Taylor Law is a deterrent, and had it not been in place, the strike of 2005 would have likely been longer. So if someone is ready to go to jail, then sure they will strike. However, after 2005, it's highly unlikely. As Two Timer said, it's just a negotiating ploy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TwoTimer Posted January 2, 2012 Share #14 Posted January 2, 2012 If firing was an outcome that can be achieved without disrupting service AFTER the strike, it would have been written into the Taylor Law. But obviously that is not the case, as it takes weeks of training to become a conductor, and months of training for a train operator or tower operator. Remember TWU doesn't only represent just the operational employees (many think of TWU as JUST train operators/tower operators/conductors/cleaners/station agents), but most hourly employees that actually work in the subway (including the guys in the barn and maintenance people of various capacities). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TriboroughBridge Posted January 2, 2012 Share #15 Posted January 2, 2012 For every day they strike, they lose two days worth of pay. Is it really worth it? Let's not forget the million dollars they had to pay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
INDman Posted January 2, 2012 Share #16 Posted January 2, 2012 Murder laws don't stop people from killing each other either. The Taylor Law is a deterrent, and had it not been in place, the strike of 2005 would have likely been longer. So if someone is ready to go to jail, then sure they will strike. However, after 2005, it's highly unlikely. As Two Timer said, it's just a negotiating ploy. Your not really comparing a job action to murder are you? If you are, that's beyond reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Of RedBirds Posted January 2, 2012 Share #17 Posted January 2, 2012 Please don't have a Strike. In 2005 when I still lived next to Bergen St on the and I had to walk from there to City Hall on the Bklyn Bridge and I was exhausted then i had a VIP Escort to my Moms job as she's a Cop and then School. If there was a Strike I would have to walk from Castle Hill to 33rd St. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NYCTSignals Posted January 2, 2012 Share #18 Posted January 2, 2012 thats just a rally to comemerate MLK.....they said nothing about a strike.......:eek: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Urbanfortitude Posted January 2, 2012 Share #19 Posted January 2, 2012 Every time the subways strike the cab companies make more bank than they already do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
6 Lexington Ave Posted January 5, 2012 Share #20 Posted January 5, 2012 Some news... MTA Contract Negotiations To Resume Without Threat Of Strike - NY1.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
East New York Posted January 5, 2012 Share #21 Posted January 5, 2012 Your not really comparing a job action to murder are you? If you are, that's beyond reason. No, I could have referenced just about any law. The point being that many are just deterrents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TwoTimer Posted January 5, 2012 Share #22 Posted January 5, 2012 Some news...MTA Contract Negotiations To Resume Without Threat Of Strike - NY1.com Wad just bout to post this...ends all discussion right? Locky locky Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest lance25 Posted January 5, 2012 Share #23 Posted January 5, 2012 As you wish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.