5 ms·

In New York City, the trash workers union prevents dumpsters from being used, which would kill jobs. Remember: trash is not a problem to deal with. It's a solut

In New York City, the trash workers union prevents dumpsters from being used, which would kill jobs. Remember: trash is not a problem to deal with. It's a solution to unemployment.

macintux 2y ago
Where would the dumpsters go? Serious question, the impression I get is that there is no room in many places in the city.
- bobbylarrybobby 2y ago
  Parking spots that currently house individuals’s cars could be used for dumpsters instead.
  - DonHopkins 2y ago
    What if all cars were required to haul trash?
  - rincebrain 2y ago
    Ignoring the political backlash around taking people's parking, I would instead point out the likely rate of hitting dumpsters in the street with how tightly packed people would park around them. NYC was, for large stretches, built without the alleys that lots of other cities would use to store such bins, and I don't think you can easily accommodate the volumes of trash that people want to turn over with just street storage without significant logistical problems with how much you disrupt the flow of people in the city. Even if we eat the cost of parking around residential locations, businesses have gotten used to using the space in front of their restaurants as additional seating, so cannibalizing that for dumpsters will cause massive backlash on that front, to say nothing of the nasty effects on people's desire to eat when sitting next to a dumpster. I agree that NYC is slow moving on a lot of things, but this is also a genuinely hard problem.
- kevin_thibedeau 2y ago
  They had plenty of room for on street restaurant expansions in many parts of the city.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
- bombcar 2y ago
  Room would have to be found. At this point, even massive dumpsters on the sidewalk would be an improvement.
- yostrovs 2y ago
  Dumpsters would go where trash goes now. Instead of trash sitting on the street, the same trash will sit inside dumpsters.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
anovikov 2y ago
I thought the problem with it was the lack of space.
- bobbylarrybobby 2y ago
  There is plenty of space, but most of it is taken up by individuals’ cars.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
- eru 2y ago
  Well, the trash on the pavement is taking up space, too. Proper bins could pile the trash higher, so they would take up less floor space than the random distributed piles. And as other commenters point out, you could sacrifice some parking spots.
  - rincebrain 2y ago
    > could pile the trash higher I don't actually think you can get denser storage, at the moment, than the raw piles of garbage bags. In some places, they are absolutely willing to pile them higher than people stand, sometimes, and proper individual trashcans would sacrifice some space for their size, and actual dumpsters would be pretty disruptive to place since there's not much in the way of locations to land them on. The trash bag piles also have the nominal benefit that they're transitory - that is, you don't have to permanently say "this space will only be used for trash storage", and with a place with space at such a premium sometimes, that really does matter. (I'm not fond of the bags either, but short of the city dropping a truly astonishing amount of money on trying to buy up properties on each block to keep dumpsters in, as far as I can see, just getting the rolling bins out and about is the best reduction you can hope for.)
bliteben 2y ago
I moved back to the south after living out west for 20 years and it is insane the amount of trash dropped by trash workers while they are dumping bins. Part of it is cultural in that trash is literally piled at the street in bins of varying condition vs out west where you know if it doesn't fit in your 90 gal bin it ain't getting picked up by the robot arm.
- nwatson 2y ago
  I don't see much of that in North Carolina.
- Suppafly 2y ago
  The transition from "pile everything in a heap" to "if it's not in your wheelie bin it's not getting picked up" happens pretty quickly. Just need the garbage company to specify that in their contract with the municipality. I honestly miss being able to pile up oddly shaped pieces of trash though. Now if you have something weird, it's just not going to get picked up and you have to figure out how to get it to the dump.
andrewla 2y ago
Is there a source on this? This is the second of two conspiracy theories I've heard, the other being that Reagan is somehow responsible for getting rid of the communal dumpsters that are claimed to have once existed.
martimarkov 2y ago
It absolutely is a problem to be dealt with. I understand what you are implying but it actually is a problem
petee 2y ago
That is at odds with the fact the article says they are using bins and picking them up 6 days a week, I don't see any union complaint here?
orwin 2y ago
I've heard that it was that it was because it would remove parking space. But if what you are saying is true, that's what you get for not allowing multi-concern unions. Our union branch that take care of trash collection workers is also responsible for municipal cleaning workers, as well as dump workers: making the job worse for cleaning and dump workers is just not something the union would push for.
- eru 2y ago
  Or alternatively, it's what you get for allowing unions. (At least unions that have special extra rights compared to any old club that people can form.)
  - orwin 2y ago
    Unions have obligations in the US. You can't organize a protest or strike for other professionals. You _have_ to follow some rule before and after a strike. You cannot "just stop working" (because some industrial processes, when let down, can destroy the whole factory). The right the unions got are written in blood, and honestly in the US, it seems to me they control workers a lot more than they protect their rights, at least since the 70s. In any case, the US should destroy the unions by removing all legislation preventing work organization or giving them special rights, and let them reform as grassroot unions (your "old club that people can form") and let them grow from this point.
    - eru 2y ago
      > You cannot "just stop working" (because some industrial processes, when let down, can destroy the whole factory). Well, people in any old club can "just stop working". But they are facing contractual penalties including getting fired. And I think that's fair. > In any case, the US should destroy the unions by removing all legislation preventing work organization or giving them special rights, and let them reform as grassroot unions (your "old club that people can form") and let them grow from this point. Yes. Though removing the special legal rights (and the few obligations) from unions would basically destroy them.
eru 2y ago
> It's a solution to unemployment. No, it's not. Just because a union opposes something doesn't mean it would cause unemployment.
BeFlatXIII 2y ago
That's a sign the city has useless excess population.

In New York City, the trash workers union prevents dumpsters from being used, which would kill jobs. Remember: trash is not a problem to deal with. It's a solution to unemployment.

macintux 2y ago

Where would the dumpsters go? Serious question, the impression I get is that there is no room in many places in the city.

bobbylarrybobby 2y ago
Parking spots that currently house individuals’s cars could be used for dumpsters instead.
- DonHopkins 2y ago
  What if all cars were required to haul trash?
- rincebrain 2y ago
  Ignoring the political backlash around taking people's parking, I would instead point out the likely rate of hitting dumpsters in the street with how tightly packed people would park around them. NYC was, for large stretches, built without the alleys that lots of other cities would use to store such bins, and I don't think you can easily accommodate the volumes of trash that people want to turn over with just street storage without significant logistical problems with how much you disrupt the flow of people in the city. Even if we eat the cost of parking around residential locations, businesses have gotten used to using the space in front of their restaurants as additional seating, so cannibalizing that for dumpsters will cause massive backlash on that front, to say nothing of the nasty effects on people's desire to eat when sitting next to a dumpster. I agree that NYC is slow moving on a lot of things, but this is also a genuinely hard problem.
kevin_thibedeau 2y ago
They had plenty of room for on street restaurant expansions in many parts of the city.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
bombcar 2y ago
Room would have to be found. At this point, even massive dumpsters on the sidewalk would be an improvement.
yostrovs 2y ago
Dumpsters would go where trash goes now. Instead of trash sitting on the street, the same trash will sit inside dumpsters.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]

anovikov 2y ago

I thought the problem with it was the lack of space.

bobbylarrybobby 2y ago
There is plenty of space, but most of it is taken up by individuals’ cars.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
eru 2y ago
Well, the trash on the pavement is taking up space, too. Proper bins could pile the trash higher, so they would take up less floor space than the random distributed piles. And as other commenters point out, you could sacrifice some parking spots.
- rincebrain 2y ago
  > could pile the trash higher I don't actually think you can get denser storage, at the moment, than the raw piles of garbage bags. In some places, they are absolutely willing to pile them higher than people stand, sometimes, and proper individual trashcans would sacrifice some space for their size, and actual dumpsters would be pretty disruptive to place since there's not much in the way of locations to land them on. The trash bag piles also have the nominal benefit that they're transitory - that is, you don't have to permanently say "this space will only be used for trash storage", and with a place with space at such a premium sometimes, that really does matter. (I'm not fond of the bags either, but short of the city dropping a truly astonishing amount of money on trying to buy up properties on each block to keep dumpsters in, as far as I can see, just getting the rolling bins out and about is the best reduction you can hope for.)

bliteben 2y ago

I moved back to the south after living out west for 20 years and it is insane the amount of trash dropped by trash workers while they are dumping bins. Part of it is cultural in that trash is literally piled at the street in bins of varying condition vs out west where you know if it doesn't fit in your 90 gal bin it ain't getting picked up by the robot arm.

nwatson 2y ago
I don't see much of that in North Carolina.
Suppafly 2y ago
The transition from "pile everything in a heap" to "if it's not in your wheelie bin it's not getting picked up" happens pretty quickly. Just need the garbage company to specify that in their contract with the municipality. I honestly miss being able to pile up oddly shaped pieces of trash though. Now if you have something weird, it's just not going to get picked up and you have to figure out how to get it to the dump.

andrewla 2y ago

Is there a source on this? This is the second of two conspiracy theories I've heard, the other being that Reagan is somehow responsible for getting rid of the communal dumpsters that are claimed to have once existed.

martimarkov 2y ago

It absolutely is a problem to be dealt with. I understand what you are implying but it actually is a problem

petee 2y ago

That is at odds with the fact the article says they are using bins and picking them up 6 days a week, I don't see any union complaint here?

orwin 2y ago

I've heard that it was that it was because it would remove parking space. But if what you are saying is true, that's what you get for not allowing multi-concern unions. Our union branch that take care of trash collection workers is also responsible for municipal cleaning workers, as well as dump workers: making the job worse for cleaning and dump workers is just not something the union would push for.

eru 2y ago
Or alternatively, it's what you get for allowing unions. (At least unions that have special extra rights compared to any old club that people can form.)
- orwin 2y ago
  Unions have obligations in the US. You can't organize a protest or strike for other professionals. You _have_ to follow some rule before and after a strike. You cannot "just stop working" (because some industrial processes, when let down, can destroy the whole factory). The right the unions got are written in blood, and honestly in the US, it seems to me they control workers a lot more than they protect their rights, at least since the 70s. In any case, the US should destroy the unions by removing all legislation preventing work organization or giving them special rights, and let them reform as grassroot unions (your "old club that people can form") and let them grow from this point.
  - eru 2y ago
    > You cannot "just stop working" (because some industrial processes, when let down, can destroy the whole factory). Well, people in any old club can "just stop working". But they are facing contractual penalties including getting fired. And I think that's fair. > In any case, the US should destroy the unions by removing all legislation preventing work organization or giving them special rights, and let them reform as grassroot unions (your "old club that people can form") and let them grow from this point. Yes. Though removing the special legal rights (and the few obligations) from unions would basically destroy them.

eru 2y ago

> It's a solution to unemployment. No, it's not. Just because a union opposes something doesn't mean it would cause unemployment.

BeFlatXIII 2y ago

That's a sign the city has useless excess population.