--- Tom Searles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Excuse me. Who wants the strike? Who went into the last negotiation > and demanded a 5% raise over 2 years? Oh, that's right, it is a drop > from their demand for a 6% raise over 2 years. I grant that 5% isn't > a lot over 2 years, but that does not seem like a productive start to > a meeting (unless you want the meeting to be short meeting). The > union seems to be its own worst enemy in this strike.
[TB] I'm not going to pretend to know how much compensation a bus driver deserves. I don't think a 5% raise over two years, a mere 2 1/2 percent per year is unreasonable. It approximates the rate of inflation. However, I think you need to look at total compensation, wages, benefits, etc. The increase in the cost of health insurance needs to be included in computing the amount of increased compensation. We need to merge all of our metro area bus systems, had that happened there would be more political pressure to end the strike. The opt out provision dating back to the days of a no longer existing Metropolitan Transit Commission property tax levy killed any possibility of a truly metropolitan area transit system. It should also be noted that the suburban systems only serve the cream routes, routes that on their own can be profitable. Unfortunately many of the suburbs prefer to rely on the central cities for jobs and culture but refuse to participate in any of the social costs. Also, unfortunately, the Mayor's has been entirely reactionary. The said in his Strib editorial "Public money included putting five times the normal number of traffic control officers on duty in downtown Minneapolis the first week of the strike. We also increased the number of police officers on the street from the downtown command." (see: http://www.startribune.com/stories/562/4654433.html ) I'm not sure where you put 5 times the normal number of traffic control officers, we already had them at every major intersection. Without oncoming buses, you probably need fewer of them on Marquette Avenue, certainly don't need them on the mall (off topic, Channel 4 had a nice piece on how pleasant the Mall has been the past couple of weeks). Unlike a strike against a profit making business which loses money when a strike causes a shut down, a strike against a government entity doesn't cause a financial loss to the employer. In fact, the government employer may gain in the short run by "saving" thousands of payroll dollars. In this case the small number of people directly effected by the strike, 1 or 2 percent of the metro area population, isn't providing the political push for the governmental agency to be in any hurry to settle the strike. It could be a long one ... especially with no negotiations. Terrell Brown Loring Park __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Finance Tax Center - File online. File on time. http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html REMINDERS: 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
