[psa] TTC on strike as of midnight...

[misskitty_79]

When I got on the streetcar to work this evening, my driver informed me that I shouldn't stay out late, since they were going on strike.

Confirmation can be found in the following links:

• Google news search;
• ATU Local 113's press release

Updated @ 01h20: Mayor David Miller says TTC workers will be ordered back to work:

• Unacceptable and irresponsible;
• We've got people downtown tonight who might have relied on public transit. How are they going to get home?

Updated again @ 10h10: Sunday legislation possible:

• TTC back by Monday? (good article, though I'm not sure where/why the sports tie-in occurred)

Comments

[misskitty-79.livejournal.com]

The 48h clause would have been a nice one, yeah.
No, no, you misunderstand. The union had already assured the public (last week) that if they voted to strike, they would give notice. In doing this sneaky midnight stuff, not only did they leave a lot of people out in the cold last night/this morning, but they reneged on a promise. Their actions have discredited them completely.

[gashin.livejournal.com]

Sorry, my phrasing wasn't clear. It was meant in the sense of "the 48h clause would have been a nice one to actually uphold". I understand it was promised and then not delivered; when I say "in calling surprise strikes at midnight that are necessarily and understandably going to enrage the public", the enraging part is from the surprise-ness. Of course, lots of people would be enraged with a midnight strike even IF 48h were not previously promised. But even more so, given that they were.

I don't think Edmonton's transit union will ever strike because it would impact too few people to shock the city into doing something. Sigh.

Money for Buildings and equpment is different than salaries

[(Anonymous)]

The Money being spent on the Building programs
are a one time expenditure where as salaries come from the operating budget which is on going. The levels of government that gave money for the building and equipment is one time thing not an annual contribution to the TTC budget.

If they don't want to work.. then let them be replaced. Private sector has that cut throat mentality and while I myself may not like it is the way of the world. So they should grow up or some one will downsize and out source their asses to INDIA or closer to home, St. Catharines where the unemployment rate is well above the national average.

Tell me where does one get a 40k + job by sitting in a booth taking change and giving tickets. And what make them so special that their employers pay their health tax when the rest of us have to pay it ourselves. The rate of inflation for the past few years has been less than 2 percent. So they are ahead of the game where others have not had raises for a few years.

Peter

Re: Money for Buildings and equpment is different than salaries

[gashin.livejournal.com]

Hi Peter,

What forms the basis of the TTC's operating budget, in that case? Is it primarily funded by the city, and the city is no longer providing adequate supplementation to fare prices/etc. to meet the standard of employment the union holds the TTC to, or is it something else?

Private sector does not need to have that cutthroat mentality; that's partially why unions were created in the first place. Coming from Quebec (ah, the legacy of the Quiet Revolution), perhaps I hold unions dearer than a giver other, average citizen, but even working for a well-established financial corporation, my lack of union is somewhat unsettling to me. They are what keep corporations accountable to their workers. Unless I'm willing and able to dig up all BMO's financial records for the last year, I can't actually challenge them on their supposed inability to provide all employees in the Prairies district with raises that would put OUR salaries on par with those of other financial corporations, as they pledge they always will (and even if I COULD dig up those records, who would I challenge?)-- a union would do that for me. Frankly, the fact that there is not more across-the-board unionizing in this country is an eternal source of bafflement to me.

And that answers your question: where there are unions, there are jobs that actually pay enough to let people live reasonable lives, not panicking about where their next grocery trip or electricity bill is going to get funding from. That is where you find your widely-available $40K/yr jobs-- instead of a few $150K/yr jobs and tons and tons of $23K/yr jobs. The idea of a union is to provide the same (acceptable) quality of life for as many people working for a corporation as possible, be they drivers or ticket-collectors or janitors or whatever else. Everybody in this country deserves a $40K/yr salary, and the corporations in this country could afford it. But they don't, because they rather keep their profits and pay richly a few individuals at the top. And nobody holds them accountable.

/soapbox