A Democrat who's pushing to outlaw transit strikes

[marmar]

(LA Times) Steve Glazer may represent the California Legislature's wave of the future. Then again, he may just crash on the rocks.

Glazer is a moderate Democrat running for the Assembly while bucking powerful organized labor.

That just is not done in California for the most part, at least successfully.

A "Jerry Brown Democrat," he calls himself with some credibility. Not only was Glazer the governor's chief strategist during his lopsided election victory in 2010, he also espouses fiscal restraint like Brown. .............(more)

The complete piece is at: http://www.latimes.com/local/la-me-cap-glazer-20131024,0,6114109.column?track=rss#axzz2iaSV7gFr

[Capt. Obvious]

1. He's going after the Reagan votes

[FarCenter]

2. If you want to get people out of their cars and on to mass transit, it has to be reliable.

[nadinbrzezinski]

8. Workers also need a living wage

Trust me, my local labor goes on strike, I will not cross the line.

[gopiscrap]

3. Fuck that, not having the right to organize and bargain

to me is tantamount to slavery!

[brooklynite]

5. who's denying them the right to organize and bargain?

The question is whether its appropriate to threaten to stop providing a public necessity.

[Xithras]

46. Actually, strikes are largely a relic of the past.

In the 1950's there were an average of 350 major strikes a year nationwide across all industries. During the last decade, there were about 20 major strikes a year nationwide. Strikes aren't typically used as "negotiating tools" anymore, but as a last line of defense against abuse.

I've heard various union organizers and politicians propose alternatives to strikes over the years that could work just as well without interrupting services. One of my favorites would require companies to suspend dividend payments and payroll for management until contract disputes are settled. I have no idea how they would pull that off logistically, but holding managements paychecks would probably get them to the negotiating table faster than a strike!

I'm not opposed to limiting a workers right to strike IF that right is replaced with an alternative that is just as effective. The nature of that alternative would control whether or not I'd support any change to the law.

[Xithras]

50. As I said...

....I have no idea how they would logistically pull that off. You have to admit that it's an appealing option though. "You won't negotiate? Fine. We'll suspend your pay until you do."

My point is that there may be better tools out there that labor isn't using, either because the law doesn't currently allow it, or because the strike is favored for historical reasons. If the laws can be changed to put a better option into place, one that would preserve the leverage of the strike without undermining the critically important social and environmental goals that mass transit addresses, then why would anyone oppose changing them?

[Xithras]

52. Well, this IS California, not Wisconsin.

California has a Democratic supermajority in the statehouse, which means the Thugs don't even have much of a voice here. And the state party is so closely tied to the labor unions that NO labor laws get through without the unions rubber stamping them first. A law that strips unions of rights without offering something equal or better is a nonstarter and wouldn't even make it to the floor for a vote.

So I'm not as pessimistic as you apparently are. Any proposed law that limits transit workers rights to strike WILL end up being union friendly, or it will have no chance at actually passing.

[Xithras]

54. San Diego isn't exactly a bellweather for the rest of the state.

And I'd point out that Prop 32, which would have limited union power in California, wasn't supported by any Democratic politicos and failed decisively at the polls. While California has its conservative strongholds, and anti-labor types may occasionally pick off a target here and there, the state party and voters have been fairly consistent in their support of unions over the years. I don't believe that an anti-union law banning strikes could pass at the state level unless it were tempered with a pro-union alternative.

Just a matter of opinion I guess.

[TheKentuckian]

65. pithy nonsense, there is no way at all that labor can hold payments as described

There is no mechanism. Your "alternative" is a sham and just a very dishonest way too hobble labor while pretending to be a friend and snaking a bit of street cred.

At best, a new take on the "Let them eat cake" mentality, that whatever is clever as long as there is no inconvenience.

[Skeeter Barnes]

11. How do you bargain without leverage? How do you gain any leverage without being able to strike?

[brooklynite]

14. Public opinion and political clout

Would you support unionized Firefighters refusing to deal with life threatening emergencies as a negotiating tactic?

[Skeeter Barnes]

15. Yes, I would support them going on strike.

Public opinion would be hard to count on with the corporate owned media. Same goes for political clout, with so many of the politicians being funded by corporations.

Unions have to be able to strike.

[Skeeter Barnes]

17. How would you like it if your wages and benefits were subject to the whims of public opinion?

And a bunch of corporate owned and operated politicians?

[Nuclear Unicorn]

19. "How would you like it if your wages and benefits were subject to the whims of public opinion?"

Um. In the private sector business world "public opinion" is called "customer satisfaction" and you'll be left to starve in the streets if you antagonize your customers or your competitors provide better.

If we the people have a public service we have instituted it with our laws with our government. We don't do things because we think its a neat idea. Public employees have no right to take our taxes and deny us the services we institute for ourselves. No person working in government has a right to their job. The people are the sole and final arbiter of what government can and cannot do, not the other way around. If it were a pubic safety issue the lot of them should be sacked.

[Skeeter Barnes]

21. They are workers just like I am and I support them if they go on strike.

In the scenario you present, no Union could negotiate. Management could just propose anything and the workers would have to accept it. That is not bargaining. And every worker should have the right to organize and collectively bargain.

You say "the people are the arbiters" well, these workers are "the people", too. And I agree they should have their say.

Saying "the lot of them should be sacked" is just nasty and hateful. I doubt the two of us are going to have a very productive discussion when you are coming from that sort of Republican perspective so have a good rest of the day.

[brooklynite]

23. Many unions are prohibited from striking and they still manage to negotiate.

[Skeeter Barnes]

25. See post #13

[Nuclear Unicorn]

29. My comments were not about private sector unions.

You say "the people are the arbiters" well, these workers are "the people", too.

No, they're public servants. No one has a right to power. No politician, general at the NSA, police officer, bureaucrat, etc. has a right to the position they hold. They serve at the pleasure of the people, not their own power.

If they want better wages, etc. they are free to present their case to the people but if the people decide a government function is not worth the price then that is the end of the matter. If that is unsustainable then that is the end of that function, the people bear sole responsibility.

[jeff47]

33. If "the people" actually set the wages, that might be a good argument.

But we don't. See: Teachers - increased education funding is being captured by administrators instead of paying teachers more.

You seem to be talking from the position that the inevitable result of a strike is unnaturally high worker pay.

Can I move to your planet? On this one, strikes don't do that.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

40. I'm with you on the admin vs. teachers issue.

But go ahead and say you want to cut admin's strangle hold on education and watch the ensuing riot. I've a sneaking suspicion that many admin positions are "kingdom building" exercises.

You seem to be talking from the position that the inevitable result of a strike is unnaturally high worker pay.

No. I'm saying they serve at the pleasure of the people. That has to be the first rule and if/when it is forgotten it needs to be retaught with unflinching resolve. Failure to do so will resulting in losses far worse than a mere trolley system.

[jeff47]

41. You seem to be confusing politicians with transit workers.

No. I'm saying they serve at the pleasure of the people.

That would be politicians.

Transit workers serve at the pleasure of their manager, who serves at his and so on up the line until you get to the corporation that actually runs the "public" transit. Usually it's got a vaguely government name that ends with words like "district" or "authority".

At least in most cities. There's a small number where the city owns the transit. But even in those cities, you don't have an item on the ballot "Should we fire Jimmy?" or "Should Jane get promoted?".

That has to be the first rule and if/when it is forgotten it needs to be retaught with unflinching resolve. Failure to do so will resulting in losses far worse than a mere trolley system.

So your plan is to make the job pretty shitty. "You are my driver, boy! Now get this bus moving!". Why, I can't picture any safety implications of this plan. I'm sure the best people will sign up for such abuse.

Alternatively, you could look into what's behind the transit strikes, and you'll discover things like 5 years of wage freezes. Also known as "these workers have a point".

[brooklynite]

22. They have been for decades...

...I hold a management position with no civil service tenure, and I haven't had a pay raise in four years. Our budget, and thus my salary are continually at the whim of public officials. Doesn't mean I think holding the public hostage is an acceptable negotiating strategy.

[Skeeter Barnes]

24. Management doesn't want workers to be able to strike.

What a surprise.

[nadinbrzezinski]

20. You do know that is a false comparison since FF have a no strike clause

by law in most states, if not all.

That said, I have seen emergency responders go on strike in other countries for fair wages. Those strikes tend to be short, and the public tends to get behind them. Of course the population is not as heavily propagandized as it is in the US. So that helps.

[brooklynite]

26. I do indeed...

...but it's not a false comparison because the person I was replying to thinks that ban is unacceptable. The question is where do you draw the line and say these services are essential and these are not? Many cities cannot function if everyone was required to get to work on their own, and the result of a strike is economic hardship for thousands if not millions of workers.

[brooklynite]

31. Actually, no it wasn't

The Union and Management had come to agreement on wages; they were at odds over work rules.

[brooklynite]

48. Ah, the slippery slope...

Many public authority unions have worked for decades with a no strike law or provision...and many a union contract has been negotiated.

But don't let me interrupt your hyperbole...

[seveneyes]

4. It boils down to what is reasonable

Sure, some people are absolutists, but if the strikers are being unreasonable or risking public safety, the strikers will be the losers.

[nadinbrzezinski]

7. Labor is not being unreasonable to demand living wages

That is not an unreasonable demand. In fact, Americans should join them in that demand. Americans should embrace the strike as a tool once again and wear comfy shoes.

We are where we are cause Americans believe the propaganda.

For the record, sectors of society are now starting to do so, and this is scaring owners in those industries.

[seveneyes]

9. Of course not

My comment was not about any particular strike or any specific demands. Just that public opinion about a strike that affects the public will likely determine its outcome.

[nadinbrzezinski]

10. That is a media generated meme

From media intent in not covering the strike issues.

Every strike for the last 50 years inconveniences the public, every one.

Yes, there are studies on this.

We will have, it looks like it, have one with our local NPR station as it seeks to organize, dime on the dollar this is how it will be portrayed, just as the almost strike over at Channel 10 camera crews. The latter would have inconvenienced reporters, nobody else. Yet it was presented in the how inconvenient to the public

This is not by accident. It is a well concerted generational campaign.

[nadinbrzezinski]

12. Thank, will put some serious analysis

On this later, just not on DU.

[Skeeter Barnes]

13. A Democrat hoping to implement Scott Walkers Koch funded agenda in California.

[KamaAina]

16. We have a fair amount of union-busting DINOs out here

For instance, I was hoping that San Jose mayor Chuck Reed would slither back under his rock after he's termed out next year. No such luck. He's pushing a statewide version of the infamous Measure B, which retroactively cuts retirement benefits and is likely illegal.

[NuclearDem]

18. Union busting -- it's not just for asshole Republicans anymore!

[FiveGoodMen]

35. Nope. It's for asshole Democrats, too.

(Note: I'm only calling the union-busters assholes!)

[badtoworse]

27. As one who's had to put up with transit strikes in NYC,...

he would get my vote. Strikes against the public interest should NOT be allowed. If you can't accept that as part of the job, get a different job.

[jeff47]

34. Because I really want my driver to be making minimum wage.

Such a program has worked great at putting fantastic salespeople in Wal-Mart. Clearly it'll be a fantastic idea when controlling a machine full of dozens to hundreds of people traveling at highway speeds.

[frylock]

38. these people aren't really into looking at the big picture..

being so absorbed in their own oh so very important little lives. they don't care who gets screwed as long as it doesn't effect them, which it eventually will. real nice play on the "love it or leave it" meme.

[reddread]

42. classic

truly laugh out loud sad.

[badtoworse]

43. A NYC Bus Driver makes at least $30 per hour plus full benefits

A Motorman makes about $32 per hour plus benefits. We're not talking minimum wage or even close to it, so enough with the sarcasm (or is it just plain ignorance?).

[jeff47]

44. And they got that way through magic and pixie dust.

There were absolutely no transit strikes or threats of transit strikes that resulted in that pay.

[badtoworse]

45. That's arguable

The TWU has struck 3 time in NYC history. They did well in the 1966 strike (which led to the Taylor Law that I fully support). They struck in 1980 and in 2005 and were heavily penalized both times. In 2005, they settled for a little more than the city's offer, but they paid $2 million in fines, lost dues checkoff for 8 or 9 months and the striking workers lost 2 days pay for each day they were on strike. I'm not sure what they got in 1980.

This is really irrelevant as far as I'm concerned. If you're a public employee, you should not be allowed to strioke - period.

[kestrel91316]

28. He's a DINO. The right to collective bargaining and the right to strike must NOT

be taken away.

[liberal_at_heart]

36. This is why we should not automatically be voting for anyone with a D after their name.

[Blue_Tires]

37. I expected this thread to be about Rahm Emanuel

[reddread]

39. Jerry Brown Democrats

Last edited Thu Oct 24, 2013, 02:57 PM - Edit history (1)

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0407-06.htm

and VERY worth reading is this-

http://danielborgstrom.blogspot.com/2004/01/whose-port.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_Quan

"Mayor Quan received widespread national criticism in October 2011 for her handling of the Occupy Oakland protest.[38] On October 11, Mayor Quan visited the protest site.[39] Thirteen days later more than 500 police officers from Oakland, other area police departments, and the State of California were directed to use tear gas and batons to clear the plaza where the protests were being held. Mayor Quan was in Washington, D.C. at the time on city business.[40] Quan issued a statement the next morning commending the police chief "for a generally peaceful resolution to a situation".[41] That night, hundreds of police used tear gas, rubber bullets, and flashbang grenades to subdue and arrest over 100 protesters, though denied the use of rubber bullets and flashbang grenades during the press release. The mayor's office was flooded with demands that protesters be released[42] and her legal adviser opposed the police action and threatened to resign.[43]
One protester, war veteran Scott Olsen, was hospitalized with a fractured skull after being struck in the forehead by police projectiles.[44] On November 2, a second protester-veteran, Kayvan Sabehgi, suffered a ruptured spleen when he was allegedly hit and tackled by Oakland Police in an area away from the protests' center.[45] By November 14, two of Mayor Quan's top advisors, legal advisor Dan Siegel and Deputy Mayor Sharon Cornu, had resigned.[46]
Quan was criticized for apparent insensitivity at an Oakland City Council meeting on March 6, 2013. In a conversation with war veteran Scott Olsen, she accused him of having a "chip on his shoulder". Later, Olsen tweeted, “J.Quan told me she realizes I have a chip on my shoulder. Insulting, more like a broken skull and brain trauma."

and guess who spent some quality time with B of A and Goldman Sachs?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kathleen_Brown

[Fumesucker]

63. I still think Quan should have been a keynote speaker at the DNC

First reply to this thread.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x2212128

[reddread]

66. I was moved by her involvement, ala Brown

coming to these events, ostensibly as a participant more than onlooker,
and in the end, conquering the problem, old school style.
Maybe it is time for citizen's commissions, without official sanction.
People everywhere are waiting for their leaders to give them some
input into police activities.
Pretty much just end up blew in the face, waiting for that.
Black and blue.

[tularetom]

56. Public employee unions that strike are shitting in their own food dishes

Especially those unions that represent so called essential employees, firemen, police, garbage collectors, water and sewer plant operators.

The threat of a strike may result in some short term gains as terrified politicians give in to union demands but an actual strike will always result in a lack of public support for the strikers. And continued strike threats without action begin to sound hollow, so the unions can't resort to playing the strike card year after year without losing credibility.

In this county, a deputy sheriff makes about $55k per year not including overtime. The median household income in the county is somewhere around $42k annually. What kind of sympathy do you think the citizens here would have for public employees who went on strike?

[tularetom]

60. Apples and oranges

You can't compare individual salaries with median family costs of living. If you want to do that you have to add the overtime earned by the average BART employee to the published salaries to determine what they are actually earning per year. I've seen articles that estimate the average overtime paid to a BART worker at $15k annually. You also have to add in any income earned by spouses or other family members. Also BART employees pay less than $100 monthly for health insurance premiums for their family, which means that the employer (the taxpayer) is ponying up maybe another $500-$1000 per month. Add it all up and it's entirely possible that BART line employees are pulling down over $80k per year.

I'm not some management stooge. I was a public employee for more than 30 years from entry level gofer to department head. When I first started, back in the 60's there was kind of an unspoken agreement between "civil servants" and their employers. We all knew we were getting paid less than we could have made in the private sector, but we were compensated with job security, excellent vacation and sick leave benefits and a liberal retirement plan. Over the years I watched all that change as the unions pushed and pushed for salary parity without giving back any of the benefits. Pretty soon, park and street workers were making more than the median household income for the area, and could retire at age 60 at 90% of their salaries with a 2 to 5% COLA every year. In fact a lot of municipalities are in dire financial straits today partially due to unfunded pension liabilities (as well as loss of tax base due to the bursting of the real estate bubble of course).

The public is not stupid, particularly in a highly educated, tech heavy region like the Bay Area. Don't forget the 9 county area went for Obama by huge margins in 2012. But they aren't going to have much sympathy for transit workers making close to 6 figures and then striking because they want even more.

[xchrom]

57. i hope he gets his ass handed to him. nt

[Niceguy1]

67. the bay

Area was solidly against the strike. ..

[mulsh]

59. Give him a break he's from upper middle class Orinda and Jerry's dog walker.

He's appealing to his constituency out there. Them folk in Orinda don't like to be inconvenienced much. They need BART to escape the natural beauty of the back side of the Oakland hills.

[Enthusiast]

62. Steve Glazer has got to go.

The days of the Reagan Democrat must come to an end.

[joshcryer]

64. So he's following FDR's lead?