[NewPacifica] anonymous critique of the American dream



Title: anonymous critique of the American dream
 [NOTE:  if you think that this is just a local New York problem, please rethink: as the author (anonymous: please cite if you know who it is) points out, the national trend is being made plain in this case.  Who is next?
Carolyn Birden



It now appears that the Transport  Workers Union has succumbed to
intimidation and pressure from the MTA, Gov.  Pataki, the Draconian (and probably
un-Constitutional) penalties imposed by the  Taylor Law, and the short-sighted lack
of support by the general public.   After three days, the strike effort has
collapsed.  The TWU is now, to use  the current street vernacular, the MTA's
'bitch.'  It is another nail in  the coffin of what was once called the American
Middle Class, that vast category  of working people who have achieved some
level of comfort and affluence  through earned wages.

So here are a few things for all of  us to think about:

Yes, the strike was technically  "illegal" under a law that is so bizarre and
anti-worker that it can actually  impose fines of thousands of dollars
against individual workers for not going to  work, something you might expect from
the former Soviet Union but not here in  America. 


What they aren't telling you is  this.  Under that same law, New York State's
Taylor Law, it is also illegal  for the MTA management to demand alterations
in the union's pension program as a  part of contract negotiations, and that
is what this strike was all about.   The MTA deliberately provoked this strike
in order to break the union by  refusing to obey the Taylor Law themselves and
stop insisting on pension  reductions.  And still, even now, the MTA
continues insisting on reducing  the pension benefits of TWU's future employees in
blatant violation of the very  law they complain that the union broke while
striking.  It should not be  part of these contract talks.  The MTA is continuing
to break the Taylor  Law by refusing to abandon this issue as a central point
of contract  negotiations.  So who broke the law first?

They aren't telling you that the  projected long-term fiscal problems
regarding the MTA's budget have little to do  with funding the TWU's pension for city
workers.  It has a lot more to do  with the MTA several years ago taking over
the pension fund (and its legal  responsibilities) of the LIRR's union as a
political favor to Long Island's  Republican politicians, who are very tight
with that union's leadership.   The LIRR pension fund currently has a deficit of
1.2 billion dollars due to  under-funding by the MTA which currently has a
surplus in its treasury of one  billion dollars.

They aren't telling you---because  they'd rather not talk about it---that for
years the Pataki regime and the city  of New York under-funded the MTA and
simultaneously turned a blind eye to MTA's  borrowing of massive amounts of
money for capital improvements in the  system.  Now the debt bird has come home to
roost, debt service takes up  17% of the MTA's operating budget, and they
want TWU rank and file workers to  absorb the cost via the expedient of reduced
pension  benefits.

They aren't talking about the fact  that in private industry one major
corporation after another has resorted to  raiding the pension funds of workers as a
means of boosting profits and that now  local and state government is
starting to attempt to do the same thing in order  to solve the fiscal problems
created through their own  managerial ineptitude.  If the MTA can reduce pension
benefits for the  TWU this will quickly become a precedent for reducing pensions
throughout all  city and state agencies.

Everyone is wagging their finger at  the union for striking just before
Christmas but nobody pays attention to the  fact that within the past two
weeks---just before Christmas---General Motors  announced the lay-off of 30,000
workers. 

People are saying 'well, I work in  private industry and I don't have a
pension, so why should transit workers have  one' instead of asking why it is that
the company they work for dissolved their  pension fund and abdicated their
pension responsibilities to workers ten or  fifteen years ago.

If we are really the great country  that we like to believe we are, then why
is it that the vast majority of  working people in this country were better
off thirty or forty years ago  than they are now?  Why is it that in the 1960's
a blue collar worker with  a good union job could buy a house, a new car every
few years, save money in the  bank and send his kids to college while his
wife stayed home but now  young adults with two income families can't afford to
even buy the  house?  Why is it that health care costs have risen to a point
where  individuals cannot afford health care unless their employer supplies it to
them  and their employers are more and more often saying that they cannot
afford it  either? 

Basic premise here:  If we are  a great country we will be able to provide
health care to all of our  citizens.  If we are a great country, life for our
citizens will improve  with each generation, not get worse.  If we are a great
country, our  economic system will focus on improving the living standards for
as many people  as possible, not just a selected few celebrities, oil company 
executives, and Silicon Valley tycoons.

Organized labor created the middle  class in this country.  Even highly
skilled professionals like medical  doctors have relied upon unions for their own
affluence.  If a physician in  private practice has patients who are mostly
working class people, his own  income is sustained by their ability to pay and
that ability to pay  is largely the result of the medical benefits historically
won by unions  and the collective bargaining process.

If you are non-union but work  in an industry that is heavily unionized, then
you can bet that your  pay scale is what it is because of those unions who
have set the prevailing  wage standard for the work you do in your industry.

Unionized labor is now down around  the 13% mark in the United States of
America.  In the 1960's it was closer  to 40%.  That might not seem to matter to a
lot of people.  But just  remember that decent wages and the forty (or
thirty-five) hour  work week didn't evolve naturally out of our wonderful democratic
political  system and the kindly beneficence of corporate America.  It was
forced  upon employers after many bitter struggles.  Coal miners in America once
worked 16 days six days a week in the mines for barely enough money to live 
on.  (In winter they would only see daylight on Sundays.)  Without  labor
unions they'd still be doing that today.

And another labor union got it's ass  whooped this week, caving in after a
three day strike.  Whoopee! we  can all ride the subways again.

And celebrate another nail in the  coffin of Middle Class America.
-- 
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

About elections of Pacifica Foundation Delegates and Directors
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wbaielections/

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^


New Pacifica Working Group
http://www.egroups.com/group/NewPacifica
'Save Our Stations!'




SPONSORED LINKS
Cause Issues Pacifica
Culture Participant Forging


YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS






questions/problems with archive to: webmaster@mcabee.org
Mail converted by MHonArc 2.6.12