It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


NYC Jails Public Worker For Protests

page: 1
<<   2  3 >>

log in


posted on Apr, 25 2006 @ 02:05 PM
This is what appears to be the result of a three day strike last year by the public transit in NYC. Roger Toussaint, the man who led the people in the strike, received a 10 day jail sentence. But this is not the real story, the real story is what followed. Roger and transit workers matrched on the Brooklyn Bridge as Roger made some comments about whats happened. He is intent on speaking out.
NEW YORK -- After a boisterous send-off complete with speeches, cheering crowds and a march across the Brooklyn Bridge, transit union boss Roger Toussaint began serving a 10-day jail sentence -- and supporters started what they said would be an overnight vigil in his honor.

"I stand here today because a judge has found me guilty of contempt of court," Toussaint told supporters before turning himself in. "The truth of the matter is that I have nothing but contempt for a system that gives employers free rein to abuse workers."

Gov. George Pataki doesn't see it that way. At a public appearance earlier Monday, Pataki said he wants people to remember the plight of Matthew Long, a firefighter who was run over by a private bus while he was bicycling to work during the strike -- suffering serious injuries including a crushed pelvis.

The 33,000-member union was fined $2.5 million for the strike and plans to appeal.

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.

This is a story which I think is very important. It says a great deal about the priorities of people who run the Transit systems. Instead of giving into the union, they would rather sue them. This really shouldnt be possible, these people believe they deserve better. I think this is an important issue about how far your able to go when it comes to speaking out about the conditions in which you work in. The fact that they ban the strike means they want you to talk about how angry you are, but not actually act on it. That works to their benefit rather then ours.

Related News Links:

posted on Apr, 25 2006 @ 02:12 PM
he should be jailed and the transit union should be fined, with the money going back to the people who had to sit in traffic for hours as a result of his illegal strike. he went against his own union bosses and opted to break the law.

posted on Apr, 25 2006 @ 02:18 PM
why should it be illegal in the first place? maybe you have never been in a strike but my father was once, and its a very tough decision to make between going on strike and having the money to pay the bills. you only stike if you really need to. its not like these people can strike and not sacrifice anything themselves. they arent doing it because it would be fun, or they are really really greedy. You dont strike when your making money, you strike when your just managing to get buy on overtime working.

why should any stike be banned if they arent being heard after a protest?

posted on Apr, 25 2006 @ 02:59 PM
in NY it is against the law for certain unions to go on strike. the MTA operates the public bus and train systems and a strike by them cripples the city. they did this during christmas, practically bringing the city to a stand still. the law is in place and Toussaint decided to break that law knowing he would be hit with fines, as would the union, and that he would probably be put in jail. He also took the risk that the courts wouldn't take away the union's right to collect dues from the paycheck, which they might now do. The fines and the removal of autopay on the dues could destroy the union. the international union boss told him not to strike and he did it anyway. he did all this and then agreed on a deal that was rejected by the workers. he is more concerned with the photo op than his union workers and the people they service.

the MTA is not much better. The head of the MTA just scored a nifty new ferarri.

they should be locked up in jail together.

the best part of the whole thing is that you rarely see any workers in the subways anymore. nobody mans the booth and when there's an issue with the machines that sell the transit cards, the random mta employee who happens to be in the booth that day doesn't do a thing.

monkey in a cage basically

posted on Apr, 25 2006 @ 03:13 PM
Yes but I am talking about the bigger picture, WHY should they have such things against the law? Because its bad for business? Well as I recall our rights werent made as long as it doesn't effect profits. Our rights come to us, regardless of what effect it has. There is a thing called sacrifice that people dont want to come to grips with. Things don't come for nothing, especially with the age we are living in. Only the super rich get things for nothing, we have to sacrifice in order to get what we rightfully deserve.

Its not about if it puts the city to a hault, its about people who feel like they arent getting what they deserve. God forbid these people get fed up and just start coming to work drunk and get people killed just because they felt "i will give them the quality of work they pay me for". We need to keep the people in mind when we make laws, not the money.

posted on Apr, 25 2006 @ 03:22 PM
god forbid they come to work drunk?

didn't read about the ferry crash in NYC? We've also had drunk subway drivers in the past.

while I agree they should get what they deserve, let me say that they are paid more than policemen and firemen and they get far better benefits. they get the earliest retirement age I've ever heard of.

they are well paid already and they want to drop the retirement age more, they want more pay and they want even better benefits.

and they want the underpaid, under appreciated NYPD to protect their trains and buses.

posted on Apr, 25 2006 @ 03:27 PM
An illegal strike is an illegal strike.

The citizens of NYC are the ones who pay the bills and they are the ones who were harmed by this fellows actions. The whole city should be able to sue him because I'm pretty sure they didn't get a refund on the taxes they paid for transit service that wasn't provided.

Union workers in public services need to remember that many of the people who contribute to their paycheques don't earn as much as them. Unions members need to learn how to sacrifice, too.

posted on Apr, 25 2006 @ 03:35 PM
Its all about who is willing to give more. If the people didn't whine and complain about the busses being out and didn't have to dread the fact they would have to walk, the people driving the busses would have to come back unless they want to be unemployeed with nothing. Its about whos willing to sacrifice more for what they want. These citizens want something, and are willing to sacrifice. We can A) hear them out and say "alright we will give in because we agree you arent being treated fairly" or B) say "no we dont think so" and not use the busses till they either come back to work, or they lose their jobs and we have people that will come and work for the wages they are getting.

The citizens ultimately decide what they want. If the majority says no, then we don't give in and we don't complain. They will be on stike until they are forced to come back. We dont make it against the law for them to show just how strongly they feel about it and that they feel they arent being heard by simply protesting.

Like i said if it came down to it, we just don't use it. Thats how we know what the pay bountry is, when the PEOPLE say what its worth.

posted on Apr, 25 2006 @ 03:43 PM
Maybe that might work in NY, but it sure wouldn't in Vancouver.

We had a transit strike a few years ago, it lasted four months. There were many people who lost their jobs because they couldn't get to work.

If everyone had a vehicle or lived close enough to work to walk, your solution might work. Until then, the people who can least afford it, the working poor, are hit the hardest.

posted on Apr, 25 2006 @ 03:50 PM
To grimreaper,

please take a look at the nyc taylor laws;

I think you'll find the answers to your questions here. I live in NYC and I am a commuter. It was a cold walk across the brooklyn bridge those three days. It's pretty simple, this guy broke the law.

posted on Apr, 25 2006 @ 03:51 PM
get a bike, get up earlier, do what you got to do. If you rely on them that much, then apparently they deserve to be treated better. Its all about how important it is to everyone. Apparently in vancouver its alot more important then it probably would be in new york. So obviously they should be getting paid better then those in new york. What your willing to put up with is what it comes down to. This is beyond that though, this is them saying you cant protest or strike because its not good for business.

Really in all truth, if people rely on transit and work pretty far from there home, then maybe they should find an alternate way of travel or get a job closer. They put themselves in that position of dependence, then they shouldnt be surprised when they get in a jam.

Hey if the oil companies and other business can do it to us, then I dont see why the unions can't do the same.

posted on Apr, 25 2006 @ 03:56 PM
what i would like to know is what other means of force do these people have if not strike? what makes anybody hear them out if they are not allowed to strike? the good nature of the politicians?HAHAHAHA
not a chance. They need it as a finally deadline. They need there protests and deadline to settlement backed by something that will actually give more incentive.

posted on Apr, 25 2006 @ 04:00 PM
Most unions have the right to strike (I'm not sure how essential services works in the States). The fact is that this fellow broke the rules and put his welfare above the thousands of people who needed his services.

I could turn around and say to all the transit workers 'If you wanted to make more money, then perhaps you should have gotten an education and not a bus drivers licence'. Alternately, I could say 'If it doesn't pay as much as you'd like, then find another job and stop whining about it'.

After all, they put themselves in that position.

posted on Apr, 25 2006 @ 04:04 PM
yes but a jobs pay is determind by how important it is to the economy. if transit is really this important, then shouldnt we be taking them a bit more seriously and maybe treating them better. This society was meant for ALL people to be treated equal, that means no person be forgotten. If your job is important, we don't forget about you. regardless of how 'hard' there job may be, its a very very important one, and should pay accordingly. if its not such a hard job, then you would be able to replace them without much worry instead of paying them. that seems to be the case to me.

posted on Apr, 25 2006 @ 04:04 PM
Grimreaper, please go and read the link.

Allow me to make a point, as a new york resident. the transit union was offered a fair contract. On the word of the union president, R.Tousiant, the membership rejected it. In the end, they voted for virtually the same contract they were offered. Nothing was gained by the membership going on strike.

Collective bargaining is not so simple a thing. The teachers waited 3 years for a new contract(my spouse is a teacher), police, fireman, sanitation workers all waited about the same time. All those city employees did not go on strike while the negociations were taking place.

Let me turn this around on you. We rely on the transportation system a great deal here. If these people are not happy in their jobs why don't they get another job? After all, they picked that profession.

posted on Apr, 25 2006 @ 04:09 PM
if they arent happy, you can always hire different people...but after you hire a certain amount of people and they repeatedly keep striking, maybe then you might want to take a look at the position your taking. I did read the article, and like I said, if its that important to the economy then they should be treated accordingly. If you don't believe they should be paid that much, and if faced with the choice would rather walk or ride a bike, well then thats what you should do. If you depend on it that much, then give in. After a certain point of course you cant give in because its too much, and thats when you go buy a bike, or walk.

You cant get something that important for nothing. We want, but we dont want to pay. If its worth it, pay the extra amount. If its not worth it, then don't use it.

posted on Apr, 25 2006 @ 04:18 PM
I'm going to do something completely out of character and give a big thumbs up to old Ronnie Reagan. He was a man who knew how to deal with a pain in the butt union and it's executives.

If they don't want the job, then they can quit. I can't break the law at my job and I have to show up for work. I get my raises through negotiation, not pouting and stomping my feet.

posted on Apr, 25 2006 @ 04:21 PM

Your really not listening to anyone. You also did not follow what happened here in NYC at all.

There is no point in trying to explain it to you. But, you are entittled to your opinion.

posted on Apr, 25 2006 @ 04:26 PM
compare the transit union salaries and benefits with that of the police and fire department here in NYC and the teachers.

transit workers make out pretty damned well in my opinion

posted on Apr, 25 2006 @ 04:35 PM
Crakeur --

A fellow New Yorker? Thank you. My wife is a teacher. You are correct.

new topics

top topics

<<   2  3 >>

log in