Jump to content


NY Transit System On Strike


Admin
 Share

Recommended Posts


Glad I live 4 blocks from school. I am sure this thing is a nightmare right now.

 

The MTA has a $1 billion yearly surplus. Give the MTA workers the pension concession they're looking for. The only thing they want is for new employees to be given the same pension plan current workers have - the option to retire and receive their pension at 55. I'm siding with the workers on this one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The pension age should be increased IMO. Social Security full retirement is now 65 1/2 years. Why should transit workers get to retire at 55?

 

 

They bargained for it. They ought to have the right to bargain for whatever they want - this is a free country and they can ask for whatever. It's not about what anyone thinks is the right pension age. This isn't social security. We leave in a free market system where people and groups can sign whatever deals they want - so long as they're not unjust or illegal The MTA needs the workers just as much as the workers need the MTA.

 

The Union is opposed to having two different pension ages for the workers - one for those that are already on the job and one for those that are just joining or will join in the future. They're just trying to maintain solidarity. I hope the MTA gives them what they want. The City is a mess right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The pension age should be increased IMO. Social Security full retirement is now 65 1/2 years. Why should transit workers get to retire at 55?

 

 

They bargained for it. They ought to have the right to bargain for whatever they want - this is a free country and they can ask for whatever. It's not about what anyone thinks is the right pension age. This isn't social security. We leave in a free market system where people and groups can sign whatever deals they want - so long as they're not unjust or illegal The MTA needs the workers just as much as the workers need the MTA.

 

The Union is opposed to having two different pension ages for the workers - one for those that are already on the job and one for those that are just joining or will join in the future. They're just trying to maintain solidarity. I hope the MTA gives them what they want. The City is a mess right now.

 

As quality of life for the elderly and life expectation continues to increase the length of time a retired person is on a pension increases.....thus the increased financial burden to the system. People retiring today collect Social Security (full benefits) at age 65. The earliest you'll get them is 67. It makes complete sense for the retirement age to go up. 55 is very low.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The pension age should be increased IMO. Social Security full retirement is now 65 1/2 years. Why should transit workers get to retire at 55?

 

 

They bargained for it. They ought to have the right to bargain for whatever they want - this is a free country and they can ask for whatever. It's not about what anyone thinks is the right pension age. This isn't social security. We leave in a free market system where people and groups can sign whatever deals they want - so long as they're not unjust or illegal The MTA needs the workers just as much as the workers need the MTA.

 

The Union is opposed to having two different pension ages for the workers - one for those that are already on the job and one for those that are just joining or will join in the future. They're just trying to maintain solidarity. I hope the MTA gives them what they want. The City is a mess right now.

 

As quality of life for the elderly and life expectation continues to increase the length of time a retired person is on a pension increases.....thus the increased financial burden to the system. People retiring today collect Social Security (full benefits) at age 65. The earliest you'll get them is 67. It makes complete sense for the retirement age to go up. 55 is very low.

 

 

I don't disagree when you're talking about a public pension system. This isn't a public pension system, though. It's only available for MTA workers. They bargain for their pension plan just like a union for GM would. It's the same principle. Are you saying all pension plans should increase even when they're not for the public at large? I don't have a problem with a negotiated pension plan for workers. We're talking about a labor agreement here, not a pension plan designed for the public at large.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The pension age should be increased IMO. Social Security full retirement is now 65 1/2 years. Why should transit workers get to retire at 55?

 

 

They bargained for it. They ought to have the right to bargain for whatever they want - this is a free country and they can ask for whatever. It's not about what anyone thinks is the right pension age. This isn't social security. We leave in a free market system where people and groups can sign whatever deals they want - so long as they're not unjust or illegal The MTA needs the workers just as much as the workers need the MTA.

 

The Union is opposed to having two different pension ages for the workers - one for those that are already on the job and one for those that are just joining or will join in the future. They're just trying to maintain solidarity. I hope the MTA gives them what they want. The City is a mess right now.

 

As quality of life for the elderly and life expectation continues to increase the length of time a retired person is on a pension increases.....thus the increased financial burden to the system. People retiring today collect Social Security (full benefits) at age 65. The earliest you'll get them is 67. It makes complete sense for the retirement age to go up. 55 is very low.

 

 

I don't disagree when you're talking about a public pension system. This isn't a public pension system, though. It's only available for MTA workers. They bargain for their pension plan just like a union for GM would. It's the same principle. Are you saying all pension plans should increase even when they're not for the public at large? I don't have a problem with a negotiated pension plan for workers. We're talking about a labor agreement here, not a pension plan designed for the public at large.

 

 

In a sense, yes. I do believe the retirement age for all pension plans should go up. Or perhaps said in a better way, pensions plans should be adjusted so all recepients have the same length of benefits on average. It's necessary for corporations to remain competitive in a global market. As a matter of fact, most corporations have eliminated pensions altogether and now have employees manage their own 401K retirement plans. Anyone who earns a pension these days is fortunate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In a sense, yes. I do believe the retirement age for all pension plans should go up. Or perhaps said in a better way, pensions plans should be adjusted so all recepients have the same length of benefits on average. It's necessary for corporations to remain competitive in a global market. As a matter of fact, most corporations have eliminated pensions altogether and now have employees manage their own 401K retirement plans. Anyone who earns a pension these days is fortunate.

 

While I understand your logic, you are missing one very important piece of the puzzle. This isn't about "retirement" as much as it is about "compensation." As an MTA employee, you have a tough job with difficult hours and low wages. To make up for the low wages, your retirement and benefits package become paramount in the compensation arena. To take away this retirement benefit - or even to push it back - is like forcing a paycut on new workers. THAT is where the conflict is stemming from.

 

In addition, the MTA is doing very well financially, thank you very much, and can easily afford to honor their current contract. This is not supposed to be a for-profit organization yet they remain heavily in the black year after year.

 

Here's a fun fact - the tolls you pay to cross the George Washington Bridge were supposed to go away once the bridge was paid for. The bridge currently pays for itself three times over each year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Think it will last another day?

 

 

 

I think this will all be over before Thursday or Friday.

 

I think that the bigwigs were saying, "Go ahead- strike!" They never thought their bluff would be called- and now the city is in a state of panic, right before the two busiest shopping days.

 

I love New York.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...