BART strike

[Elefantino]

Well, it looks like they're going to walk at midnight. I feel for the workers (although envious of their relatively low health-care costs) and for the Bay Area commuters who are going to face a mess in the morning.

Personally, it sucks. Commute sans car for 20 straight days and I get a card worth another 10 percent off employee purchases. No way I'm riding 21 miles over the hills in the dark, so my streak will end tomorrow at 18.

All politics is local.

[eddief]

a new set of hostages this time in the Bay Area.

Crunican said BART was continuing to propose its latest four-year offer. That includes a total 12 percent pay increase on top of union workers' average gross pay of $76,500 — the highest among California transit agencies — changing pension contributions from zero to 4 percent, and bumping up monthly health care payments from $92 to $144.

Unions had agreed to the pension and health care offers but wanted a 15.9 percent increase in pay, BART said.

The other big remaining issue is BART's refusal to let a neutral arbitrator give the final ruling on various perks that workers want to keep but which management says are inefficient.

Among the work rules BART wants to change: Currently, union workers can call in sick, work four days and get paid overtime on the fifth day; employees can leave projects in the middle of a job to go work on something else; and employees can receive paper paycheck stubs instead of electronic notices.

A shutdown would leave 200,000 people who ride BART roundtrip each day stranded for the second time in three months after a four-day walkout in July.


Well, it looks like they're going to walk at midnight. I feel for the workers (although envious of their relatively low health-care costs) and for the Bay Area commuters who are going to face a mess in the morning.

Personally, it sucks. Commute sans car for 20 straight days and I get a card worth another 10 percent off employee purchases. No way I'm riding 21 miles over the hills in the dark, so my streak will end tomorrow at 18.

All politics is local.

[Shortsocks]

Hey ElefantinoI saw these bar plugs and I thought of you.
Sorry for the lousy pic, ebay pic. But these would be breat bar plugs for you.

http://i1080.photobucket.com/albums/j323/prelude97si/828cf54cec4d651e2a6f2e0c23c2d02a.jpg

I think they say Elefantino.

[CiclistiCliff]

No way I'm riding 21 miles over the hills in the dark, so my streak will end tomorrow at 18.

All politics is local.


Isn't that what your fancy light is for?

[rice rocket]

Crunican said BART was continuing to propose its latest four-year offer. That includes a total 12 percent pay increase on top of union workers' average gross pay of $76,500 — the highest among California transit agencies — changing pension contributions from zero to 4 percent, and bumping up monthly health care payments from $92 to $144.

I know it's expensive to live in the Bay area, but that's pretty high pay for jobs that require little more than a GED.

[plattyjo]

I'm working from home today due to all of the crazy commuter madness.

And RIP to the cyclist who was killed (http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Bicyclist-killed-in-S-F-in-crash-with-Muni-bus-4907180.php) this morning downtown.

[Likes2ridefar]

I know it's expensive to live in the Bay area, but that's pretty high pay for jobs that require little more than a GED.

Guess they prove their worth with everyone complaining they can't get to work or play or school or wherever.

[Elefantino]

Hey ElefantinoI saw these bar plugs and I thought of you.
Sorry for the lousy pic, ebay pic. But these would be breat bar plugs for you.

http://i1080.photobucket.com/albums/j323/prelude97si/828cf54cec4d651e2a6f2e0c23c2d02a.jpg

I think they say Elefantino.
Oh, I have to have those!

[bart998]

Guess they prove their worth with everyone complaining they can't get to work or play or school or wherever.

Not sure it proves their worth. Most of those positions require little training and they are easily replaceable, just not all at once.

[Germany_chris]

..

[Likes2ridefar]

Not sure it proves their worth. Most of those positions require little training and they are easily replaceable, just not all at once.

If it was so easy it'd be done far more often.

[buldogge]

Step 1: Pit the workers against each other...

-Mark in St. Louis

I know it's expensive to live in the Bay area, but that's pretty high pay for jobs that require little more than a GED.

Not sure it proves their worth. Most of those positions require little training and they are easily replaceable, just not all at once.

[Louis]

This wouldn't be a problem if everyone just commuted in their Escalades.

[Vientomas]

Hire scabs at minimum wage.

[FlashUNC]

Or why not use computers...that would totally work...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/June_22,_2009_Washington_Metro_train_collision

Considering these are the folks responsible for the timely and safe commute of hundreds of thousands of folks everyday -- yeah, they can get paid.

[BumbleBeeDave]

it IS pretty expensive to live in the Bay Area. That was true when I was there 20 years ago and I know it hasn't changed.

What sounds like an outrageous pay scale to most of us may sound far more reasonable when you consider the cost of, well, just about everything if you live anywhere close to the Bay.

BBD

[rice rocket]

Considering these are the folks responsible for the timely and safe commute of hundreds of thousands of folks everyday -- yeah, they can get paid.

I have no qualms about paying skilled workers what is deserving pay.

The union leader is station agent (I'm guessing she sells tickets?), her base pay is $107k, with OT and benefits, it's $145k.

[Likes2ridefar]

I have no qualms about paying skilled workers what is deserving pay.

The union leader is station agent (I'm guessing she sells tickets?), her base pay is $107k, with OT and benefits, it's $145k.

Leaders of most organizations (corporations mostly) make far more than that usually.

[rice rocket]

She's not a leader/manager, she's an agent.

http://www.mercurynews.com/salaries/bay-area/2012

You can check it out since she's a public employee. Select Bay Area Rapid Transit, and R-Line Station operations.

[Likes2ridefar]

She's not a leader/manager, she's an agent.

http://www.mercurynews.com/salaries/bay-area/2012

You can check it out since she's a public employee. Select Bay Area Rapid Transit, and R-Line Station operations.

Sorry I'm confused. You just said she was a leader, but now she's just an agent. Frankly, I don't really care, but that's why I responded with what I did:)

If you are happy with a minimum or low paid worker that hates their job, and can't even afford to live within 50 miles of the city they serve, then enjoy your ride. I will stay very far away from it.

[binxnyrwarrsoul]

"If you are happy with a minimum or low paid worker that hates their job, and can't even afford to live within 50 miles of the city they serve, then enjoy your ride. I will stay very far away from it."

Plus 1.

[blessthismess]

The strike is a big pain in the butt but I support being able to fight/strike/protest for what you want. Not up to me to decide whether or not what they are asking is unreasonable. But I reallyyy hope they figure this out soon one way or another!

[rice rocket]

Sorry I'm confused. You just said she was a leader, but now she's just an agent. Frankly, I don't really care, but that's why I responded with what I did:)

If you are happy with a minimum or low paid worker that hates their job, and can't even afford to live within 50 miles of the city they serve, then enjoy your ride. I will stay very far away from it.

She was elected to lead the union negotiations.

I'm all for paying workers fairly, but I have a hard time believing that there isn't a balance between six figures to collect tickets and minimum wage, maybe I'm crazy. Maybe a few less overtime hours, and more refreshed workers instead? There's quite a lot of people making near their base salary in overtime.

Or hey, maybe even give riders a break on fares, since public transit serves a large portion of the underprivileged.

[1centaur]

I am having trouble following the logic here. If they have our safety in our hands, and get us to work on time, should they be paid $4 million a year? Why not?

Unionized transit workers are not paid what they are worth (their skills could easily be matched for less without union restrictions), they are paid what their organization can get them. This is why public worker unions are viewed in some quarters as inherently a problem - they can disrupt so many lives so easily that it is easy (especially for politicians) to just give in and pay them more, but over time they end up being paid something unrelated to their skills and we all suffer for that, INCLUDING other people who might get more from the government if government's finances were in better shape. You know, "the kids."

And equating a union leader to a CEO? CEOs are theoretically paid a lot to make other people a lot MORE money (doesn't always work that way because shareholders and boards can be undisciplined with their contracts, but sometimes a great CEO is really worth millions - Alan Mulally at Ford, for example). Union leaders are on a whole 'nother plane.

[Likes2ridefar]

I am having trouble following the logic here. If they have our safety in our hands, and get us to work on time, should they be paid $4 million a year? Why not?

Unionized transit workers are not paid what they are worth (their skills could easily be matched for less without union restrictions), they are paid what their organization can get them. This is why public worker unions are viewed in some quarters as inherently a problem - they can disrupt so many lives so easily that it is easy (especially for politicians) to just give in and pay them more, but over time they end up being paid something unrelated to their skills and we all suffer for that, INCLUDING other people who might get more from the government if government's finances were in better shape. You know, "the kids."

And equating a union leader to a CEO? CEOs are theoretically paid a lot to make other people a lot MORE money (doesn't always work that way because shareholders and boards can be undisciplined with their contracts, but sometimes a great CEO is really worth millions - Alan Mulally at Ford, for example). Union leaders are on a whole 'nother plane.

I suppose I'm in the minority, but I'd rather have my city streets clean and a public transit system that runs efficiently and safely instead of paying a guy obscene amounts of money who in many cases does...nothing....for society besides for a select few while often times destroying everything in it's path without regard for anyone or thing else.

In my eyes, most CEOs are zero value compared to the bus driver that drives my kid to school.

[Vientomas]

Interesting table here: http://government-pay.findthedata.org/d/d/Transit

Transit workers in Nevada are paid more on average than those in California. Who knew there was public transportation in Nevada?

[rwsaunders]

unionized transit workers are not paid what they are worth (their skills could easily be matched for less without union restrictions), they are paid what their organization can get them.

+1.

[etu]

I get annoyed with unions too, but then I remember books like Jungle by Upton Sinclair or Grapes of Wrath by Steinbeck. Yes, like all organizations, they can abuse their power, but there are necessary for balance in our society.

[stuckey]

Holy ····!!! really??? Are you guys worth what you are paid? Does the public know what you make for what you do?

[FlashUNC]

And equating a union leader to a CEO? CEOs are theoretically paid a lot to make other people a lot MORE money (doesn't always work that way because shareholders and boards can be undisciplined with their contracts, but sometimes a great CEO is really worth millions - Alan Mulally at Ford, for example). Union leaders are on a whole 'nother plane.

Not to turn this totally into class warfare, but I'll take high union wages over the out-of-control wages for CEOs over the last three decades that have outpaced everything -- including average employee wages -- by orders of magnitude that would make Robber Barons blush.

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

[Louis]

i get annoyed with unions too, but then i remember books like jungle by upton sinclair or grapes of wrath by steinbeck. Yes, like all organizations, they can abuse their power, but there are necessary for balance in our society.

+1

[Elefantino]

Not to turn this totally into class warfare ...
It's hard not to, particularly when you see charts that show the staggering growth of income inequality in this country since the 80s tax cuts. That trend accelerated dramatically beginning in 2001 and after a slight recession dip continues apace today. The richest are getting fantastically richer and the wages of the bottom 90% of earners have flat-lined.

I don't blame the rich; they're playing the game under rules set up by their peers on Capitol Hill. And now, because "corporations are people too, my friend," the chances of the average wage earner having any sway over the decision makers is gone with the wind.

There will be a tipping point somewhere down the line. I probably won't be around to see it, but it will be messy.

[PQJ]

i don't blame the rich; they're playing the game under rules set up by their pawns on capitol hill.

fify

[1centaur]

Still have not heard why transit workers are not worth $4MM a year.

Income inequality is not about CEOs - there are not enough of them and even fewer getting huge amounts (much of which comes in the form of stock with various restrictions). Income inequality is about the transformation of our economy from a manufacturing base to a knowledge base, which simultaneously reduces the value of physical labor (less output AND more automation) and amplifies the efficiency of turning knowledge/intelligence into wealth. CEOs are just the very tip of that secular wave.

As a professional investor I see a lot of CEOs. The good ones are worth a lot more to their shareholders than they are paid. The average ones are worth a lot more than a transit worker to their shareholders, but probably could be swapped out for less money. The bad ones should pay their shareholders for putting up with their obtuse stupidity and ridiculous ego. All of them can be booted if their performance is not up to snuff. But the key point here is that it's their shareholders who benefit or don't from that compensation contract, which is negotiated by a board picked by the shareholders to represent their interests. Transit workers take from taxpayers and their contracts are set by politicians who benefit personally from writing lax contracts because the transit workers will vote for them and the commuters won't have strikes. So a bad contract for a CEO's value is a lot different from a bad contract for a transit worker's value.

And BTW I took two years of Management/Union Relations in undergrad where I read The Jungle and totally agree in the need for unions to offset the worst instincts of businesses looking to make a buck. That's not the case with public sector unions.

[Louis]

Still have not heard why transit workers are not worth $4MM a year.

If a CEO can strong-arm the BOD into getting $40 million a year (and we know that that whole thing is just a good-ol'-boys club) I see no reason why a union shouldn't be able to strong-arm management into extracting as much money as possible from the company. If $4 million a year works, then great - other than the fact that it allows the little guys to get a larger portion of the pie, there's nothing inherently wrong with collective bargaining.

Don't we all take as much as we can get?

[onekgguy]

This is something that's been concerning me for a while now. It should concern you too.

9 out of 10 Americans are completely wrong about this mind-blowing fact (http://www.upworthy.com/9-out-of-10-americans-are-completely-wrong-about-this-mind-blowing-fact-2?g=2)

Kevin g

[choke]

And now, because "corporations are people too, my friend," FYI, the concept that "corporations are people" is not something that just occurred with Citizens United. Some would say that it started in 1819 with Trustees of Dartmouth College v. Woodward (17 U.S. 518 (http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/17/518/case.html)). It certainly was the case in 1886, when during Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad (118 U.S. 394 (http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/118/394/case.html)) Chief Justice Waite remarked "The Court does not wish to hear argument on the question whether the provision in the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution which forbids a state to deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws applies to these corporations. We are all of opinion that it does."

[Likes2ridefar]

This is something that's been concerning me for a while now. It should concern you too.

9 out of 10 Americans are completely wrong about this mind-blowing fact (http://www.upworthy.com/9-out-of-10-americans-are-completely-wrong-about-this-mind-blowing-fact-2?g=2)

Kevin g

Uplifting video:hello:

[FL_MarkD]

Very well stated 1centaur. Couldn't agree more with your assessment.

[FlashUNC]

Income inequality is not about CEOs - there are not enough of them and even fewer getting huge amounts (much of which comes in the form of stock with various restrictions). Income inequality is about the transformation of our economy from a manufacturing base to a knowledge base, which simultaneously reduces the value of physical labor (less output AND more automation) and amplifies the efficiency of turning knowledge/intelligence into wealth. CEOs are just the very tip of that secular wave.

As a professional investor I see a lot of CEOs. The good ones are worth a lot more to their shareholders than they are paid. The average ones are worth a lot more than a transit worker to their shareholders, but probably could be swapped out for less money. The bad ones should pay their shareholders for putting up with their obtuse stupidity and ridiculous ego. All of them can be booted if their performance is not up to snuff. But the key point here is that it's their shareholders who benefit or don't from that compensation contract, which is negotiated by a board picked by the shareholders to represent their interests. Transit workers take from taxpayers and their contracts are set by politicians who benefit personally from writing lax contracts because the transit workers will vote for them and the commuters won't have strikes. So a bad contract for a CEO's value is a lot different from a bad contract for a transit worker's value.

And BTW I took two years of Management/Union Relations in undergrad where I read The Jungle and totally agree in the need for unions to offset the worst instincts of businesses looking to make a buck. That's not the case with public sector unions.

And great CEOs are awesome and magical until they're, well, not. Enron, Countrywide, WorldCom, Adelphia, Refco, Lehman Bros., Tyco. The list goes on and on.

And yeah, the guy driving the train probably shouldn't make $4 million a year, but I have yet to see a plausible reason why CEOs should make 300 times the pay of their average employee (average...not the lowest paid janitor, the average). Particularly with corporate boards stacked in the CEOs favor (how many CEOs are also chairman? Even Sarbanes-Oxley couldn't get rid of this), ridiculous voting standards at the annual meeting, the game is rigged in the CEOs favor, not the shareholder.

Never mind the debunked notion that CEO pay is correlated to company performance: http://www.kansascity.com/2013/08/28/4440246/high-ceo-pay-doesnt-mean-high.html

We're seeing it right now at JPMorgan. How is Jamie Dimon still employed? He's the guy in charge, right? The company is paying a $13 billion fine. And yet the top guy doesn't get axed? There's no real accountability, and while pay at the CEO level continues to outstrip anything resembling reality, middle class wages have stagnated and the middle class is quite literally, dying before our eyes.

Should a train driver make $4 mln a year? Of course not. But there was also a time in this country when you could raise a middle class family on one salary. In the second most expensive city in the country, I don't see their demands as outrageous. Unless you think it's okay your transit workers live in, say, Stockton or some other far flung burb and only come to the city to serve the rich who would be all that's left in San Fran.

[onekgguy]

How is Jamie Dimon still employed? He's the guy in charge, right? The company is paying a $13 billion fine. And yet the top guy doesn't get axed?

Why is the guy not doing serious time in prison? He oversaw massive amounts of fraud while he and his company stole billions from others.

Kevin g

[thenewguy11]

Why isn't Jamie Dimon fired? Probably because since he took over in 2006, JP Morgan has recorded almost $100 billion in profits.

[cnighbor1]

just near where I live 2 BART worked killed by BART Train
Great!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
end the strike before anymore workers get hurt

[Louis]

Why isn't Jamie Dimon fired? Probably because since he took over in 2006, JP Morgan has recorded almost $100 billion in profits.

And how in the world can anyone know what % of that was due to his work vs the work of all the other people at the company?