Teachers Pension Bill Passes In Less Than One Month While 20/50 Bill Continues To Sit

In less than one month, the United Federation of Teachers (UFT) was able to get their pension bill A9820 from the governmental employees committee to the Governors desk.

Now I understand that their bill was part of a negotiated contact packaged that included merit pay for teachers. But one can’t help but be impressed with the speed it moved through the various phases.

Their bill arrived at the Governmental Employees Committee on January 23, 2008, and by February 11th it had passed through the Ways and Means Committee where it progressed rapidly, landing on the Governor’s desk for signature on February 15th.

The TWU 20/50 bill arrived at the Governmental Employees Committee a year ago, on February 23, 2007. SIX MONTHS LATER, in June, it was finally reported to the Ways and Means Committee. Rather than progress, however, it sat there for ANOTHER SIX MONTHS, before finally being referred BACK to the Governmental Employees Committee, on January 9th, 2008, where it continues to sit to this date.

So our 20/50 bill moved backwards while theirs moved forwards. (see comparison chart; click on image to enlarge)

Some will attempt to argue that you can not compare different union contracts and pension improvements and I would argue just the opposite. Comparing two unions in the same city and the same pension fund under the same state laws, who are both seeking pension improvements for their members at the same time is the perfect comparison.

That teachers will go from a 62/30 pension to 55/25 pension is in fact very similar to Transit workers going from a 55/25 pension to a 50/20 pension. Both the teachers and the transit workers will pick up the costs of the pension improvements; teachers will pay an additional 1.85% and transit workers will have to pay an additional 6% . HomeStation will keep of the track the 20/50 bill in what we will call the 20/50 Bill Watch.

One thing is for certain: the rapid movement of the teachers pension bill through the legislative process versus our pension bill going backwards and then virtually dying in committee is a clear indication of which union has more political muscle in New York State. It is time for Local 100 leadership to end its silly internal infighting and begin to build some real political power in this city and state.

M.H.
. . . . . . . . . . . . .

Congestion Pricing: Who Speaks For Transit Workers?

By now most of you have probably have heard of Mayor Bloomberg’s plan NYC2030 which has two dozen transportation proposals, but the one that has gotten all the attention is congestion pricing. This means more commuters to a transit system that is already at capacity, and in desperate need of repair.



Both the public and the State legislation rejected the original plan of the Mayor’s which led to the creation of the New York City Traffic Congestion Mitigation Commission, a seventeen-member body directed to undertake a review and study of plans to reduce traffic, congestion and other related and health and safety issues within the city of New York. Our union leadership has supported the Mayor’s congestion pricing plan and continues to do so. Now even the biggest proponents of congestion pricing say that the system is currently unprepared to handle thousands of additional commuters.

The one thing no one -- including our union leadership Local 100 and the Mayor’s research staff -- has studied is the impact it would have on the transit workers. President Toussaint has not only endorsed the Mayor’s plan, he is now pushing the mayor and the MTA’s congestion pricing plan for them. In other words, our union is pushing a plan that would be a new tax on the working class, small business and at the same time increase our workload. He has made this decision not through research from our union but on the homework of the MTA.

Where are the researched reports and the studies conducted by the union? Why has congestion pricing not been on agendas for union meetings? Are we to believe that the Mayor and MTA are doing what’s best for local 100 members? To make matters worse, everyone knows that there are no guarantees that money generated will go only for mass transit. The other key here is how this will be funded, as congestion pricing is very expensive to set up and then to run, especially when you consider that we were all told that this congestion pricing plan would stop mass transit fare increases.

Something is really wrong when union leaders side with the ruling elite to add new taxes that will impact the working class. Make no mistake about, this is a tax on working class New Yorkers no matter what they try to call it. Although congestion is a problem, and the need for more funding for mass transit is critical, both the mayor’s original plan and the alternative plans by the commission are deeply flawed.

There are many groups, coalitions and individuals discussing the plan, both pro and con. The one thing that every one of these debates has in common is no one speaks for the transit worker. It is time that we get in on the debate, and until we know how this will impact every title in transit, I say we keep NYC Congestion Free.

READ MORE:
Transit Unions Split on Congestion Plans, Chief-Leader 1/18/2008

M.H.
. . . . . . . . . . . . .