Gotham Gazette

The Place for New York Policy and politics

Topics

Topics

Bracing For A Transit Strike


For the second time in three years, New Yorkers are bracing for a transit strike during the busy and cold December holiday season.

To prevent a showdown, a myriad of issues need to be resolved between the Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) and its largest union, the Transport Workers Union (TWU) Local 100. Central issues to the contract dispute are:

Wage increases: The MTA on December 7 offered wage increases of three percent next year and two percent the following year. Union officials criticized this offer but did not formally reject it.

Pension benefits: The MTA wants to move the retirement age from 55 to 62 for newly hired employees and is asking for those new workers to contribute more towards their pensions. Union president Roger Toussaint has voiced opposition to “selling out our unborn” in reference to new workers and said that the current “25/55” (25 years of service, retire at 55) must be maintained.

Health coverage: The MTA is asking for higher co-payments for prescription drugs and office visits. The MTA also wants new employees to contribute two percent toward health care premiums. The union opposes these changes.

Job responsibilities: Another controversial area is the agency's desire to broaden job responsibilities for certain titles. It originally asked to eliminate conductors from some trains so that train operators (“motormen” in the old parlance) would open doors and make announcements as well as operate the train. The union has been fiercely opposed to this proposal and won an arbitration ruling on the issue. The agency more recently proposed to convert conductors to customer service agents who would roam the train rather than stay in the conductors booth. Similarly, the MTA wants the former token clerks to move around subway stations and help riders. The union has expressed reservations about employees’ safety in stations, and passenger safety if conductors’ duties are changed.

Unlike three years ago, the MTA is running a $1 billion surplus, so the union feels there is less of an argument that the MTA cannot afford more generous wages and benefits. The MTA replies that the surplus is generated by a blip in tax revenues that will not last. The MTA expects to confront deep deficits in coming years and plans fare increases in 2007 and 2009.

That may be part of the reason that in its latest proposal, the MTA put forward a two-year contract offer rather than a three-year contract, the recent practice. Two years from now, MTA deficits will set a different tone for contract negotiations.

First Strike Since 1980?

Will there be a strike? The possibility seems very real. There is also strong pressure on Roger Toussaint, the union president, who needs a favorable contract to head off the disaffection among union members that followed the 2002 contract settlement.

On the other hand, TWU members also authorized a strike in December 2002, yet the contract was settled after negotiations that went a day past the deadline. The vote to authorize a strike has value as a way to apply pressure on the MTA, whether or not the authorization is exercised. The union and its members face severe sanctions if they do strike, which is illegal under the state’s Taylor Law. In 1980 the TWU paid a $1.5 million fine and workers were penalized two days pay for each day on strike, a total of $18 million.

Another possible option is binding arbitration. The MTA has called for arbitration if no settlement is reached before the contract deadline. The TWU has opposed arbitration; Toussaint has said that it “removes union members from having a say on their contract.” Yet according to the union Web site, the union championed the current law that provides for arbitration and won a 21.5 percent wage increase, over three years, in 1982 through arbitration.

The 1980 strike is widely seen to have been won by the MTA after the city, led by Mayor Edward I. Koch, continued to function. The 11-day strike had lasting impact on the city in a variety of ways, large and small. Women continued to wear sneakers to walk to work (with heels in handbags.) Jitney vans in Brooklyn and Queens, many of which made their debut in 1980, have become a part of many people’s commute.

Still In The Dark Ages

Since the 1980 transit strike, new subway cars and buses, renovated stations and more-frequent service has modernized the city’s vast public transportation system. Unfortunately, one thing that has not changed is MTA-TWU labor relations, which remain in the dark ages. While some transit agencies in other cities have made great strides in focusing labor management efforts on replacing confrontation with problem-solving that benefits both sides (see the Mineta Transportation Institute’s Transit Labor Relations Guide in pdf format), today’s relationship between the sides is far from ideal.

Real progress would be not only settling the contract before December 15, but also tackling the much harder task of preventing a recurrence two or three years from now.

Bruce Schaller, who has been in charge of the transportation topic page since its inception in 1999, is head of Schaller Consulting, which provides research and analysis about transportation. He is also a Visiting Scholar at the Rudin Center for Transportation Policy and Management at New York University. 

Transportation Bond Act's Passage May Bring Other Transit Issues To The Fore


The election results contained much good news for transportation in New York City. Voters statewide approved the $2.9 billion transportation bond act by a surprisingly large margin -- 55 percent to 45 percent -- five years after narrowly rejecting a $3.9 billion measure. The bond act provides $1.45 billion to the Metropolitan Transportation Authority’s (MTA) five-year capital construction program.

Voter approval came after elected officials and civic and advocacy organizations came together to support the ballot proposition. Supporters raised $1.8 million for advertisements, flyers and an election-day operation to remind people to find the proposition on the ballot.

What Passage Will Mean

The bond act allocates $450 million for the first phase of the Second Avenue subway, and $450 million for bringing Long Island Rail Road trains to Grand Central Terminal. Passage of the bond act makes it almost certain that the federal government will contribute $4 billion for these projects between now and 2012 to round out their financing. MTA Chairman Peter Kalikow expressed confidence that his agency will reach agreement with the Federal Transit Administration on long-term federal funding agreements.

The bond act also commits $100 million for a rail link between lower Manhattan and Kennedy airport, $115 million for purchase of new subway and commuter railroad cars, $90 million for new buses; and $161 million for track replacement and tunnel lighting. In addition to transit projects, the bond act will fund tens of millions of dollars in highway improvement projects in New York City.

What Bloomberg's Victory Might Mean (i.e. Congestion Pricing?)

Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s victory was also viewed as a potentially promising development by transportation analysts who are hoping that the mayor will give more focus to transportation needs in his second term than he did in his first term. They hope that he will tackle the politically controversial idea of congestion pricing in Manhattan, which could reduce congestion and provide funds for better bus and subway service. The New York Times quoted Kathryn Wylde, president of the Partnership for New York City, a business group, saying that, “We have every indication that the city is prepared to look closely at that.” Bloomberg officials warned, however, that the mayor has been focusing on winning re-election and has not yet decided what initiatives to pursue.

Transit Security,

Voter approval of the bond may mean a broadening from the almost singular focus on financing needs to a range of other issues. This year has seen the adoption the bond act, a new five-year capital plan for the Metropolitan Transportation Authority and a six-year federal transportation bill that will provide increased funding to the transportation authority. With tax revenues exceeding expectations, the MTA is experiencing a surprising budget surplus. The surplus is unlikely to last very long and the MTA continues to forecast a fare increase in 2007. Nevertheless, financing of transit will compete for attention with several other issues.

One such issue is transit security. The MTA is seeking to use high-tech means to monitor activity in subway stations and catch possible terrorists. Whether this technology will actually work and whether the MTA can successfully install and operate it remains to be seen.

The MTA's Credibility

Another issue confronting the MTA is its own credibility. Kalikow is the first MTA chairman appointed by Governor George Pataki to take independent stands in favor of transit needs and breathe a greater openness into the MTA. But the effects of the fiasco that accompanied the MTA’s 2003 fare increase, in which the agency was accused by lying about its finances, continue to linger. This was seen most poignantly in the public’s reaction to the MTA’s plan to use part of its surplus to discount fares over the year-end holidays. Man-on-the-street interviews by reporters revealed a deep-seated skepticism about why the MTA would want to say “thank you” to riders with this small holiday gift. Some saw the discounts as an attempt to manipulate the public into voting for the bond act.

Overcrowding

The fact is that although the transit system is vastly improved from 25 years ago, riders’ expectations are also much higher. Revamped stations, new subway cars, fare discounts and a host of other improvements have drawn huge crowds into the subway. Overcrowding is now the system’s biggest problem, inevitably exacerbated whenever there is a service delay. A major challenge for the MTA is to reduce overcrowding in the short term, through signal and communications improvements and management of trains in the tunnels. Riders won’t tolerate waiting until the Second Avenue subway is built.

Better Relations With The Public?

While Kalikow stresses the MTA’s “transparency,” his philosophy is not always evidenced in the workings of the agency. Ask a token booth clerk whether trains are currently diverted for announced construction and you are likely to get a puzzled shrug – why would a token clerk know about such things as what trains are stopping at the station? Ask MTA staff for a report that was completed months ago, and one is likely to be told it is still a “draft,” or that staff are too busy to fulfill formal freedom of information requests for four to six months. Look on the MTA’s website for board minutes or detailed budget information – similar to what one finds for the Los Angeles MTA or other major transit agencies – and the effort will be in vain.

The election brought good news about how the MTA will pay for needed subway and bus improvements. But the task of improving the daily commute remains a daunting challenge.

Bruce Schaller, who has been in charge of the transportation topic page since its inception in 1999, is head of Schaller Consulting, which provides research and analysis about transportation. He is also a Visiting Scholar at the Rudin Center for Transportation Policy and Management at New York University. 

 

The Transportation Bond Act: Vote Yes


Unless you are a real policy wonk, you probably are not aware of the most important transportation issue in New York City this election season. No, it is not the well-publicized debate over metered parking on Sunday, an issue that has a relatively tiny impact on the daily lives of New Yorkers and even less on the growth of our economy. The far more pressing issue is a transportation bond act that is vitally needed to restore, maintain and expand the transit system. But, unlike Sunday parking, it has garnered almost no attention just weeks before the election. On behalf of the large and diverse Vote Yes for Transportation Campaign, I urge you to do just that on Proposal 2 this Election Day.

The Rebuild and Renew New York Transportation Bond Act of 2005 is critical to funding the state’s five-year transportation needs, helping to provide congestion relief, safe roads and expanded public transportation service for all New Yorkers. The $2.9 billion act is split evenly between Metropolitan Transportation Authority transit improvement and highway projects that touch every corner of the state, improving mobility while fueling economic growth, creating jobs and protecting the environment. The state’s 2025 Transportation Blue Ribbon Panel warned last year that the entire transportation network is in danger of deteriorating without significant funding, and the bond act is a key part of that funding package.

That is why nearly every elected official in the state -- including Governor George Pataki and Attorney General Eliot Spitzer, Mayor Michael Bloomberg and challenger Fernando Ferrer, Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno and Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, and City Comptroller William Thompson – supports the bond act. Other backers include labor, business, civic and environmental organizations, from the state AFL-CIO to the Partnership for New York City, from the New York Building Congress to the Regional Plan Association and the League of Conservation Voters.

HELP FOR MASS TRANSIT

There are plenty of reasons why New York City residents should support the $2.9 billion act. First on the list is $450 million to restore and maintain the aging transit system that makes the city possible. This money will pay for new subway cars and buses, track repairs, tunnel lighting, a bus locator system, and Staten Island Railway bridges. The past year has brought numerous examples of the system’s fragility, from track fires to derailments, and the safety of all straphangers is at stake.

The second reason to support the bond act is the $900 million it will provide toward the first significant expansion of the subway system in more than 60 years. These funds will be split between East Side Access (which brings Long Island Rail Road trains into Grand Central) and the first phase of the Second Avenue Subway, two projects that will greatly expand the capacity of the transit system and provide critical redundancy in case of natural or manmade disaster. For example, if there were an incident on the East Side today, the entire Lexington Avenue line would be shut down, crippling movement and the economy. But in the event of such a problem, the 2nd Avenue Subway could continue to carry passengers along the East Side. Similarly, the Long Island Rail Road extension would provide back-up commuter rail service during a major disruption at Penn Station. Both of these projects have languished for decades, but that should not be an excuse to reject them. They are critical to the growth of the region’s economy and our safety, and their completion will be nearly guaranteed if the bond act passes.

THE DANGERS OF DEFEAT

Finally, we must consider what would happen if the bond act does not pass. The $450 million for maintenance of the subway system would have to be found elsewhere. That would likely set up a choice between two unpleasant options. On the one hand, the MTA could fill the gap by issuing more of its own debt, putting further pressure on its operating budget and leading to even more fare hikes. On the other hand, the MTA could fill some of the gap by choosing not to fund other items already in its capital plan, such as the station rehabilitations that are so important to many city neighborhoods. In either case, an already decaying system will become more vulnerable and slide further toward the disrepair that plagued it in the 1970s. No one wants to go back there.

The $900 million that the bond act sets aside for expansion is unlikely to be replaced if it fails, causing the state to lose $4 billion in federal funds that were headed our way. Washington is waiting for the state to match some of that money, and, if we don’t, the federal funds will then go elsewhere. More importantly, if voters reject the bond act, we would lose the opportunity to expand a transit system that is no longer able to accommodate its current ridership and is certainly not prepared for the economic and population growth that the city envisions -- on the Far West Side, in Lower Manhattan, East Harlem, 125th Street, Downtown Brooklyn, Greenpoint/Williamsburg, Flushing and in so many other places.

A REASON TO BORROW

Some people will undoubtedly argue that the state’s system of borrowing money is in need of reform. They are absolutely correct. New York must address “back-door” borrowing, where the state’s public authorities pile up debt with no voter approval and little involvement from elected officials. But this bond act is different. Long-term borrowing for transportation infrastructure will always be appropriate, and the needs of our transportation system are too urgent and important to hold hostage to a reform effort that will be not be completed this season.

We have much to gain from a healthy and growing transportation system and too much to lose if we fail to keep that system running at a world-class level. On November 8, New Yorkers have a chance to show how important transportation is in our daily lives. Vote yes for transportation. Vote yes on Prop 2.

Jeremy Soffin is director of public affairs for the Regional Plan Association

• • • • • • •

The Transportation Bond Act: Vote No by Nicole Gelinas

• • • • • • •

For more information in favor of the Transportation Bond Act:

• Vote yes for Transportation
The coalition supporting the act

• Transportation Bond Act
The Metropolitan Transportation Authority information page on the act

• Vote Yes on Ballot Proposal Two: Transportation Bond Act (in .PDF format)
Information from the Straphangers Campaign, the advocacy group for subway riders

• Governor Pataki Announces Support For $2.9 Billion Transportation Bond Act

• Debt We Can Live With: Front-door Borrowing for Transportation
A Newsday editorial

• Transportation Bond Act is Good Move
By Newsday columnist Joseph Dolman

• New York Voters Back Transportation Act: poll

 



Print Friendly and PDF

Editor's Choice


Gotham Gazette: New York Voters Approve $4.2 Billion Environmental Bond Act
New York Voters Approve $4.2 Billion Environmental Bond Act
Gotham Gazette: 
New York City Voters Approve Racial Justice Ballot Measures
New York City Voters Approve Racial Justice Ballot Measures
Gotham Gazette: 
Housing Development in New York City Slows to a Crawl as Officials Debate Tax Incentives
Housing Development in New York City Slows to a Crawl as Officials Debate Tax Incentives
Gotham Gazette: 
City Council Examines Low Voter Turnout, Moving Local Elections to Even Years City Council Examines Low Voter Turnout, Moving Local Elections to Even Years