> That's why I'm investigating. I'm not criticizing anyone's actions;
> but for many people outside NYC this strike is being reported in
> sound bites and one-liners. Talk of "respect" just isn't going to
> get the point across to the distracted multitudes; and if this
> confrontation is as important as many are saying it is, the
> important issues must be communicated to as many people as
> possible. True, the media may well be selective in their quotes
> and reporting, and Toussaint and the workers can't do much about that.
The transit workers' union has a website: <http://www.twulocal100.org/>.
The website says clearly that "So why is the strike still on? Ask the MTA and Governor Pataki. They are the ones who shut down New York’s lifeline. They came in at the last minute with a take-it-or-leave-it 10 year 4% pay cut for all future hires" (at <http:// www.twulocal100.org/index.asp?Type=B_PR&SEC={935B2C90-91BF-46F4- A7A0-26E576FF26B5}&DE={9DAA8AF1-C0F1-4B34-A9D0-3FCA14C1CBB6}>). Call MTA at 212-878-7274 and Governor Pataki at 518-474-7516 to let them know that you support the workers and oppose the pay cut.
The website also reposted this very useful article from the New York Times:
<blockquote>Times: Changing Pension Plan Might Pose Dilemma for Legislature
Dec. 20-One of the main sticking points in the transit contract negotiations this week has been the Metropolitan Transportation Authority's effort to reduce pension benefits for future transit workers. But by state law, such pension changes are supposed to be decided by the State Legislature, not at the bargaining table.
And it is far from certain how a proposal to reduce pension benefits would be received in Albany. For one thing, lawmakers, by and large, tend to try to sweeten pension benefits, not cut them. For another, any plan to reduce pension benefits for transit workers would set a precedent that could apply to other public unions. That could end up alienating labor, a key constituency of both the Democratic-led Assembly and the Republican-led Senate.
Officials from both houses said they would have to approve any proposal to change the pension system.
"This is a major change that would impact public employees throughout the state," said Eileen Larrabee, a spokeswoman for Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, who said that such negotiations were apparently against the law. "Nobody's presented us with any proposal, or said how much this might save."
And John E. McArdle, a spokesman for the Senate majority leader, Joseph L Bruno, said: "It's against the law for them to negotiate pension changes. I guess what they could do is get together to come to us for changes. We would certainly be willing to listen to any proposal they came to us jointly on."
The transportation authority, which is controlled by Gov. George E. Pataki, wants to raise the age at which future transit workers become eligible to receive their full pensions to 62, from 55. But just this year both houses of the Legislature tried to go in exactly the opposite direction, attempting to lower the retirement age for some transit workers.
Both houses of the Legislature passed a bill - later vetoed by Governor Pataki - that would have lowered the retirement age for subway station agents to 50 from 55. A legislative memorandum in support of the bill gave several reasons for the proposed change, including an assertion that "dust particles from the money and its ink composition leads to unfavorable health conditions."
Local 100 of the Transport Workers Union, which represents subway and bus workers, is a powerful force in Albany. State campaign finance filings indicate that the union has donated at least $472,941 to state candidates and parties since 1999. And other unions with huge clout in Albany are closely watching the transit talks, worried about the precedent that could be set by any cut in pension benefits.
But several lawmakers said that in the end, they expected the Legislature to approve the pension change if the union accepted it.
Oddly enough, the law that gives the Legislature the power to decide pension issues is an amendment to the Taylor law - the same law that Governor Pataki and others have cited all week in forbidding public- sector workers to strike. It states that retirement benefits, like pensions, should not be negotiated through collective bargaining, and that "any benefits so negotiated shall be void."
The union filed a complaint with the state about the authority's decision to make pension cutbacks an issue in the bargaining.
Edmund J. McMahon, the director of the Manhattan Institute's Empire Center for New York State Policy, a conservative watchdog group, said it appeared that unions had previously negotiated agreements to improve pensions, and were objecting now only because they were being asked to cut them.
<http://www.twulocal100.org/index.asp?Type=B_PR&SEC={B7B64A0A- A600-4129-B3D4-C03D985DC0A3}&DE={63453BF2-6A75-45F5-B883-0055676C324A}
></blockquote>
While Bush, et al. failed to privatized Social Security, the capitalist class are trying to force more and more private and public sector workers' pension cuts, and there will be more fights on this front. See Rick Wolff, "US Pensions: Capitalist Disaster": <http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/wolff191205.html>.
Yoshie Furuhashi <http://montages.blogspot.com> <http://monthlyreview.org> <http://mrzine.org>