8 ms·

How much do BART Employees make?

35 points by doh 13y ago

malyk 13y ago
So it is a little bit shocking when you see those numbers. Most of us immediately think of people who work on the subway or in public transit as meaningless low wage jobs. It seems to make sense. But what if you look at it from a slightly different angle. First, these workers work in one of the highest cost of living areas in the country. Second, they work for a critical piece of infrastructure. You only have to look at the havoc one day of them being off has caused. Third, public transportation is generally valued more highly here than in other places for a variety of reasons. Oh, and I overheard on KQED this morning that the base pay is $71,000, which is high, but not astronomical.
- ccarter84 13y ago
  Agreed, but asking for 20+ % raise over 3 years was a poor PR approach. I think unions served a purpose in the past, and hopefully still do now, but honestly once you look at the overtime pay it's painful. http://www.mercurynews.com/salaries/bay-area/2012 http://www.mercurynews.com/salaries/bay-area/2012 p.s. Some dude took a stab at liberating the data further, but it could use some work. http://public.tableausoftware.com/views/BARTsalaries/BARTsalariesandovertime?:embed=y&:display_count=no http://public.tableausoftware.com/views/BARTsalaries/BARTsal...
  - eightyone 13y ago
    CBS is reporting they were seeking a 15% raise over three years. http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2013/07/01/bart-workers-officially-strike/ http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2013/07/01/bart-workers-off...
    - jcnnghm 13y ago
      Plus 2% cost of living each year. That's actually 22.5% over 3 years.
      - eightyone 13y ago
        May I get a source for that?
        jcnnghm 13y ago
        Not that hard to google it yourself: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/24/bart-strike_n_3493161.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/24/bart-strike_n_34931.... Simple interest isn't additive, that should be the first clue.
        eightyone 13y ago
        I shouldn't have to Google it myself, you're making the claims. You can't just drop a whole bunch of numbers in a thread, present them as facts, and not cite any sources whatsoever. It does no one who is trying to learn about the subject matter any favors and isn't constructive at all.
        malandrew 13y ago
        I completely agree with this, however the tact could have been a bit better. I wouldn't mind having something like this officially added to the HN guidelines. Use IIRC or AFAIK when you remember something, but don't remember exactly or cite a source for anything stated as fact.
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
  - mc32 13y ago
    Except for politics, there is little reason the conductors could not be replaced by automated systems. In other places, some mass transit systems are at least partially automated.
    - cpeterso 13y ago
      I believe BART was intended to be automated. This 1972 LA Times article mentions safety concerns: Safe Automated BART Train Controls Doubted (1972) Legislative Analyst A. Alan Post expressed doubt Tuesday that a $36 million automated train control system for the Bay Area Rapid Transit District can be made "fail safe" to adequately protect its passengers." http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/latimes/access/660715472.html?dids=660715472:660715472&FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS:AI&type=historic&date=Nov+15%2C+1972&author=&pub=Los+Angeles+Times&desc=Safe+Automated+BART+Train+Controls+Doubted&pqatl=google http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/latimes/access/660715472.html?di...
      - mc32 13y ago
        That may have been the finding back when the system was being evaluated prior to '72. Since then, automation has seen vast improvements in safety and fail-safe systems. It's only political inertia, in my opinion, which keeps things manned (and womanned). I suspect that even as Google cars take off in popularity and prove their safety, public transit will resist and insist that drivers who are susceptible to weariness, exhaustion, sleep deprivation, disease, etc. are still the safer to steer buses through our streets.
- spitx 13y ago
  Third, public transportation is generally valued more highly here than in other places for a variety of reasons. If various professionals employed by the state were paid in accordance of their value to the society (even if only to a certain slice of society), members of the armed forces would be centi-millionaires. That line of reasoning is utter bunk.
  - epistasis 13y ago
    > members of the armed forces would be centi-millionaires. I don't mean to dispute, but I don't understand this. I had thought that it was impossible that the US' military could be worth the $682 billion per year the US spends on it, that it was a sinecure for contractors. At >1.4 million active personnel, you're talking a value of hundreds of trillions, at least 10x the US GDP. The military is only useful as a threat deterrent and threat defense, what threat could possibly justify that?
    - hudibras 13y ago
      I had the same reaction ("Huh?") but from the other direction. Centi-millionare implies a worth of $10,000 each, or $14 million for everybody. I guess the moral is that people shouldn't try to be cute when using metric prefixes.
      - spitx 13y ago
        Are you done with your troll walk? Don't let the door hit you on your way out, moron. Centimillionaire http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/centimillionaire http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/centimillionaire
- jcnnghm 13y ago
  $71,000, which is high, but not astronomical They also, on average, get a $50,000/year benefits package, including a fixed-benefit pension. Plus paid overtime. That's not high, or astronomical, it's absolutely outrageous.
  - jack-r-abbit 13y ago
    and 10-12 weeks paid time off. That is 1/5 of the year. Damn I wish I had that.
    - hudibras 13y ago
      Organize and form a union with like-minded co-workers and then use your collective bargaining power to negotiate better terms of employment. You know you can do that, right? (Assuming you live in America, that is.)
      - jack-r-abbit 13y ago
        While technically still possible... unions don't really work like that any more. But even if I did, I would be adding to the problem not helping. No group should have the power the unions hold over their "members" and the companies. Many people are only in a union because they are required to be in order to perform the job they do. Some of them would rather work than strike. But they don't really have a choice. If the union members have a majority vote to strike, then they strike. And the strike is little more than extortion. For those BART riders that didn't have other means to get to work... they suffered. For BART riders that were able to drive, traffic was a complete and total cluster fuck this morning. This also effected everyone else that doesn't even ride BART but had their otherwise normal commute turned upside down. The union knows this so they have no problem being unreasonable pricks until BART finally gives in to the compromised extortion. I would never be in a union. We don't need them any more. (assuming the were ever needed... which is probably debatable)
        hudibras 13y ago
        Although I won't try to debate most of your points--I think we'll have to agree to disagree--I do think you're being unfair to say that a strike is extortion. The striking workers are also suffering. Every week that the strike continues is a 2% pay cut for this year. After a few days of the strike, commuters will have adjusted and the transit union leadership will start hearing it from their members and the "balance of power" will shift back towards the BART management. Eventually, there will come a point where the workers are begging to come back to work and the union's power will have been blunted for many years. Not much else to say, just wanted to point out that the decision to strike is not taken lightly by any union. The potential downside is huge.
jcnnghm 13y ago
You can make as much doing menial work for BART as you can in engineering. Except that you don't actually have to do anything difficult when you work for BART, it's almost impossible to lose your job, there is no unpaid overtime, and you get more vacation. The economics of bay-area engineering are broken. Consider this, how many engineers making comparable salary could take over these jobs with minimal training? What about vice-versa?
- adamjernst 13y ago
  BART jobs are quite supply constrained. Sure, union jobs are great if you can get one, but there aren't many to go around. Plus, who would really enjoy working in a workplace where everyone doesn't care? I couldn't stand it even if I were paid more, couldn't lose my job, and had more vacation time.
  - jcnnghm 13y ago
    BART jobs are quite supply constrained That's because they pay way too much. If they paid commensurate to required skill level, demand would drop because the true equilibrium price is much lower.
    - thrownaway2424 13y ago
      It's a union gig, it doesn't work that way.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
fishtoaster 13y ago
A quick search of their cited source shows this to be incorrect (or misleading, at least). Here's a few corresponding values (Total Cost of Employment = salary + overtime + vacation/sick time value + employer contributions to medical + employer contribution to pension + employer 401k matching + 'misc')(Cash = salary + overtime): - Customer Service Clerk: 61k cash, 85k TCOE - A-Line Train operator: Hard to say, because the range goes from 7k cash to 122k (although half of that high number was overtime). It looks like the lowest paid operator that's probably full time is around 40k cash, 74k TCOE - Elevator worker: I couldn't find this job, but a "maintenance engineer" is 68k Cash, 106 TCOE. http://www.mercurynews.com/salaries/bay-area/2012 http://www.mercurynews.com/salaries/bay-area/2012
- thrownaway2424 13y ago
  The trains drive themselves in normal circumstances. The operator is needed only to close the doors. The elevators (and especially the escalators) are frequently out of service for days at a time. I think people are mainly annoyed that BART workers want big raises when the system works so poorly. If all the escalators worked and the maintenance guys could stop crashing their shit into each other in the middle of the tube, then maybe we could talk.
  - pstuart 13y ago
    I'm chagrinned to be defending BART maintenance workers, but there are some challenges: http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/BART-labors-to-keep-escalators-running-4144347.php http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/BART-labors-to-keep-es...
  - malandrew 13y ago
    What is necessary to automate the closing of the doors? I imagine that a timer coupled with computer vision software would be more than adequate to solve this problem. Furthermore, you could have the timer duration set automatically via machine learning tied to many dimensions, such as: (1) Number of humans or Volume of humans plus accessories waiting at the platform. (2) Duration until next train (3) Historical business for that station at that time of day on that day of the week (4) Historical figures of the number/volume of humans that enter and exit the train at that time of day on that day of the week.
hudibras 13y ago
I imagine that somewhere out there on the internet is a Hacker News-equivalent for public transit workers full of outraged comments about 21-year-old tech workers getting $200K to eat free food and move their fingers back and forth over a keyboard. Full disclosure: I'm a government worker.
- skizm 13y ago
  Doesn't make them right :P
- thrownaway2424 13y ago
  news.goldbricker.com?
- jack-r-abbit 13y ago
  The difference is that the 21-year old tech worker is making $200k because they asked for that and/or that is what the company feels that job/person is worth and is willfully paying it. If the person does not think that is enough, they can ask for more. If they get it, great. If not, they can move on. The unions force people who are fine with their job to stop working while the reps fight for more money or something. The unions hold entire segments of people hostage when they go on strike. Some are less visible than others. Back in 1989, some Boeing unions went on strike and no one really noticed because regular people aren't out buying airplanes everyday. I only noticed because my step mom had to stop going to work because the union said to. But BART shutting down effects hundreds of thousands of Bay Area people that just want to get to their own job. We noticed this one.
  - melindajb 13y ago
    "While the reps fight for more money or something..." ? really? "or something?" that's your argument here? We have a constitutional right to strike in the united states. Getting mad at people who get paid less than you for exercising that right--only because it disrupts your pampered existence-- is the height of selfishness. Let me set you straight: Unions vote on striking. It is not the leadership who decides. So the workers who are indeed taking a pay cut for what they believe is right, made this decision. They had been without pay raises for 5 years. Assumptions that "anyone" can do the job are not based in reality, but a sense of arrogance that the people who do the jobs are somewhat beneath the gods of programming. Really, sometimes the ignorance displayed on hacker news is embarrassing to me as person proud to work in an industry that usually prizes intelligence.
Spooky23 13y ago
I find it funny to read a bunch of outraged reactions from Californians. You guys allow this by voting in the nut cases that you vote in to the legislature. Why does a customer service rep make over $110k? Because the city/state/agency allowed for work rules that strictly assigns overtime based in seniority and only seniority. Why is there so much overtime? Because the agency doesn't maintain an adequate staffing level and doesn't improve productivity via technical means, hire more people, or supplement with temps. Probably because somebody in 1990 gave away the store to the union. In New York, people are always bitching about police OT and loaded pensions. NY made things especially expensive because police and fire unions are entitled to mandatory binding arbitration. So the unions ask for 20%, and the city/town/etc say 5%. The arbitrator says 10% raise with free healthcare forever.
- melindajb 13y ago
  Your argument isn't logical. The workers are striking because they want more money. They are exercising a constitutional right. That has nothing to do with the legislature.
  - thatswrong0 13y ago
    These are public unions. There is an incredible difference between public unions and private unions. I don't know if you simply don't understand the difference or actually don't want to, but the fact remains that there is, and you can't pretend it doesn't exist and isn't the source of most of the outrage against the strikers.
  - coin 13y ago
    Since when is striking a constitutional right?
rayiner 13y ago
Its interesting to look at the legal department salaries. Mid-level Alameda county counsel seem to be at $150-160k base + $40k pension contribution, or roughly comparable to a mid-level associate at a private law firm, while working far fewer hours.
malandrew 13y ago
"We gave up over $100 million in concessions in our last contract negotiations, and we haven’t had a raise in 5 years, yet the cost of living in the Bay Area has spiked by over 18%." What I don't get is why they don't try to peg their salaries to something tangible in the local economy. I know that is already done with the pricing of Below Market Rate (BMR) housing. "A BMR unit will be resold at a restricted affordable price to a household that meets the first-time homebuyer and income qualifications for the program and for the particular unit. New BMR units will be repriced according to change in the median income from the time of the current owner’s purchase to the time of sale." In exchange for such a concession, the city cannot be blocked from improving cost saving measures associated with automation, including the dismissal of any employer whose job is no longer necessary. Any employee that loses his job due to automation would first consideration first for any new jobs they qualify for that are created as the system progresses. These two concessions on both sides take care of the employees and let the system progress. The other concessions the employees are asking for such as increased lighting to improve safety are completely reasonable and shouldn't even require negotiations to implement.

35 points by doh 13y ago

malyk 13y ago

So it is a little bit shocking when you see those numbers. Most of us immediately think of people who work on the subway or in public transit as meaningless low wage jobs. It seems to make sense. But what if you look at it from a slightly different angle. First, these workers work in one of the highest cost of living areas in the country. Second, they work for a critical piece of infrastructure. You only have to look at the havoc one day of them being off has caused. Third, public transportation is generally valued more highly here than in other places for a variety of reasons. Oh, and I overheard on KQED this morning that the base pay is $71,000, which is high, but not astronomical.

ccarter84 13y ago
Agreed, but asking for 20+ % raise over 3 years was a poor PR approach. I think unions served a purpose in the past, and hopefully still do now, but honestly once you look at the overtime pay it's painful. http://www.mercurynews.com/salaries/bay-area/2012 http://www.mercurynews.com/salaries/bay-area/2012 p.s. Some dude took a stab at liberating the data further, but it could use some work. http://public.tableausoftware.com/views/BARTsalaries/BARTsalariesandovertime?:embed=y&:display_count=no http://public.tableausoftware.com/views/BARTsalaries/BARTsal...
- eightyone 13y ago
  CBS is reporting they were seeking a 15% raise over three years. http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2013/07/01/bart-workers-officially-strike/ http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2013/07/01/bart-workers-off...
  - jcnnghm 13y ago
    Plus 2% cost of living each year. That's actually 22.5% over 3 years.
    - eightyone 13y ago
      May I get a source for that?
      - jcnnghm 13y ago
        Not that hard to google it yourself: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/24/bart-strike_n_3493161.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/24/bart-strike_n_34931.... Simple interest isn't additive, that should be the first clue.
        eightyone 13y ago
        I shouldn't have to Google it myself, you're making the claims. You can't just drop a whole bunch of numbers in a thread, present them as facts, and not cite any sources whatsoever. It does no one who is trying to learn about the subject matter any favors and isn't constructive at all.
        malandrew 13y ago
        I completely agree with this, however the tact could have been a bit better. I wouldn't mind having something like this officially added to the HN guidelines. Use IIRC or AFAIK when you remember something, but don't remember exactly or cite a source for anything stated as fact.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- mc32 13y ago
  Except for politics, there is little reason the conductors could not be replaced by automated systems. In other places, some mass transit systems are at least partially automated.
  - cpeterso 13y ago
    I believe BART was intended to be automated. This 1972 LA Times article mentions safety concerns: Safe Automated BART Train Controls Doubted (1972) Legislative Analyst A. Alan Post expressed doubt Tuesday that a $36 million automated train control system for the Bay Area Rapid Transit District can be made "fail safe" to adequately protect its passengers." http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/latimes/access/660715472.html?dids=660715472:660715472&FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS:AI&type=historic&date=Nov+15%2C+1972&author=&pub=Los+Angeles+Times&desc=Safe+Automated+BART+Train+Controls+Doubted&pqatl=google http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/latimes/access/660715472.html?di...
    - mc32 13y ago
      That may have been the finding back when the system was being evaluated prior to '72. Since then, automation has seen vast improvements in safety and fail-safe systems. It's only political inertia, in my opinion, which keeps things manned (and womanned). I suspect that even as Google cars take off in popularity and prove their safety, public transit will resist and insist that drivers who are susceptible to weariness, exhaustion, sleep deprivation, disease, etc. are still the safer to steer buses through our streets.
spitx 13y ago
Third, public transportation is generally valued more highly here than in other places for a variety of reasons. If various professionals employed by the state were paid in accordance of their value to the society (even if only to a certain slice of society), members of the armed forces would be centi-millionaires. That line of reasoning is utter bunk.
- epistasis 13y ago
  > members of the armed forces would be centi-millionaires. I don't mean to dispute, but I don't understand this. I had thought that it was impossible that the US' military could be worth the $682 billion per year the US spends on it, that it was a sinecure for contractors. At >1.4 million active personnel, you're talking a value of hundreds of trillions, at least 10x the US GDP. The military is only useful as a threat deterrent and threat defense, what threat could possibly justify that?
  - hudibras 13y ago
    I had the same reaction ("Huh?") but from the other direction. Centi-millionare implies a worth of $10,000 each, or $14 million for everybody. I guess the moral is that people shouldn't try to be cute when using metric prefixes.
    - spitx 13y ago
      Are you done with your troll walk? Don't let the door hit you on your way out, moron. Centimillionaire http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/centimillionaire http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/centimillionaire
jcnnghm 13y ago
$71,000, which is high, but not astronomical They also, on average, get a $50,000/year benefits package, including a fixed-benefit pension. Plus paid overtime. That's not high, or astronomical, it's absolutely outrageous.
- jack-r-abbit 13y ago
  and 10-12 weeks paid time off. That is 1/5 of the year. Damn I wish I had that.
  - hudibras 13y ago
    Organize and form a union with like-minded co-workers and then use your collective bargaining power to negotiate better terms of employment. You know you can do that, right? (Assuming you live in America, that is.)
    - jack-r-abbit 13y ago
      While technically still possible... unions don't really work like that any more. But even if I did, I would be adding to the problem not helping. No group should have the power the unions hold over their "members" and the companies. Many people are only in a union because they are required to be in order to perform the job they do. Some of them would rather work than strike. But they don't really have a choice. If the union members have a majority vote to strike, then they strike. And the strike is little more than extortion. For those BART riders that didn't have other means to get to work... they suffered. For BART riders that were able to drive, traffic was a complete and total cluster fuck this morning. This also effected everyone else that doesn't even ride BART but had their otherwise normal commute turned upside down. The union knows this so they have no problem being unreasonable pricks until BART finally gives in to the compromised extortion. I would never be in a union. We don't need them any more. (assuming the were ever needed... which is probably debatable)
      - hudibras 13y ago
        Although I won't try to debate most of your points--I think we'll have to agree to disagree--I do think you're being unfair to say that a strike is extortion. The striking workers are also suffering. Every week that the strike continues is a 2% pay cut for this year. After a few days of the strike, commuters will have adjusted and the transit union leadership will start hearing it from their members and the "balance of power" will shift back towards the BART management. Eventually, there will come a point where the workers are begging to come back to work and the union's power will have been blunted for many years. Not much else to say, just wanted to point out that the decision to strike is not taken lightly by any union. The potential downside is huge.

jcnnghm 13y ago

You can make as much doing menial work for BART as you can in engineering. Except that you don't actually have to do anything difficult when you work for BART, it's almost impossible to lose your job, there is no unpaid overtime, and you get more vacation. The economics of bay-area engineering are broken. Consider this, how many engineers making comparable salary could take over these jobs with minimal training? What about vice-versa?

adamjernst 13y ago
BART jobs are quite supply constrained. Sure, union jobs are great if you can get one, but there aren't many to go around. Plus, who would really enjoy working in a workplace where everyone doesn't care? I couldn't stand it even if I were paid more, couldn't lose my job, and had more vacation time.
- jcnnghm 13y ago
  BART jobs are quite supply constrained That's because they pay way too much. If they paid commensurate to required skill level, demand would drop because the true equilibrium price is much lower.
  - thrownaway2424 13y ago
    It's a union gig, it doesn't work that way.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

fishtoaster 13y ago

A quick search of their cited source shows this to be incorrect (or misleading, at least). Here's a few corresponding values (Total Cost of Employment = salary + overtime + vacation/sick time value + employer contributions to medical + employer contribution to pension + employer 401k matching + 'misc')(Cash = salary + overtime): - Customer Service Clerk: 61k cash, 85k TCOE - A-Line Train operator: Hard to say, because the range goes from 7k cash to 122k (although half of that high number was overtime). It looks like the lowest paid operator that's probably full time is around 40k cash, 74k TCOE - Elevator worker: I couldn't find this job, but a "maintenance engineer" is 68k Cash, 106 TCOE. http://www.mercurynews.com/salaries/bay-area/2012 http://www.mercurynews.com/salaries/bay-area/2012

thrownaway2424 13y ago
The trains drive themselves in normal circumstances. The operator is needed only to close the doors. The elevators (and especially the escalators) are frequently out of service for days at a time. I think people are mainly annoyed that BART workers want big raises when the system works so poorly. If all the escalators worked and the maintenance guys could stop crashing their shit into each other in the middle of the tube, then maybe we could talk.
- pstuart 13y ago
  I'm chagrinned to be defending BART maintenance workers, but there are some challenges: http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/BART-labors-to-keep-escalators-running-4144347.php http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/BART-labors-to-keep-es...
- malandrew 13y ago
  What is necessary to automate the closing of the doors? I imagine that a timer coupled with computer vision software would be more than adequate to solve this problem. Furthermore, you could have the timer duration set automatically via machine learning tied to many dimensions, such as: (1) Number of humans or Volume of humans plus accessories waiting at the platform. (2) Duration until next train (3) Historical business for that station at that time of day on that day of the week (4) Historical figures of the number/volume of humans that enter and exit the train at that time of day on that day of the week.

hudibras 13y ago

I imagine that somewhere out there on the internet is a Hacker News-equivalent for public transit workers full of outraged comments about 21-year-old tech workers getting $200K to eat free food and move their fingers back and forth over a keyboard. Full disclosure: I'm a government worker.

skizm 13y ago
Doesn't make them right :P
thrownaway2424 13y ago
news.goldbricker.com?
jack-r-abbit 13y ago
The difference is that the 21-year old tech worker is making $200k because they asked for that and/or that is what the company feels that job/person is worth and is willfully paying it. If the person does not think that is enough, they can ask for more. If they get it, great. If not, they can move on. The unions force people who are fine with their job to stop working while the reps fight for more money or something. The unions hold entire segments of people hostage when they go on strike. Some are less visible than others. Back in 1989, some Boeing unions went on strike and no one really noticed because regular people aren't out buying airplanes everyday. I only noticed because my step mom had to stop going to work because the union said to. But BART shutting down effects hundreds of thousands of Bay Area people that just want to get to their own job. We noticed this one.
- melindajb 13y ago
  "While the reps fight for more money or something..." ? really? "or something?" that's your argument here? We have a constitutional right to strike in the united states. Getting mad at people who get paid less than you for exercising that right--only because it disrupts your pampered existence-- is the height of selfishness. Let me set you straight: Unions vote on striking. It is not the leadership who decides. So the workers who are indeed taking a pay cut for what they believe is right, made this decision. They had been without pay raises for 5 years. Assumptions that "anyone" can do the job are not based in reality, but a sense of arrogance that the people who do the jobs are somewhat beneath the gods of programming. Really, sometimes the ignorance displayed on hacker news is embarrassing to me as person proud to work in an industry that usually prizes intelligence.

Spooky23 13y ago

I find it funny to read a bunch of outraged reactions from Californians. You guys allow this by voting in the nut cases that you vote in to the legislature. Why does a customer service rep make over $110k? Because the city/state/agency allowed for work rules that strictly assigns overtime based in seniority and only seniority. Why is there so much overtime? Because the agency doesn't maintain an adequate staffing level and doesn't improve productivity via technical means, hire more people, or supplement with temps. Probably because somebody in 1990 gave away the store to the union. In New York, people are always bitching about police OT and loaded pensions. NY made things especially expensive because police and fire unions are entitled to mandatory binding arbitration. So the unions ask for 20%, and the city/town/etc say 5%. The arbitrator says 10% raise with free healthcare forever.

melindajb 13y ago
Your argument isn't logical. The workers are striking because they want more money. They are exercising a constitutional right. That has nothing to do with the legislature.
- thatswrong0 13y ago
  These are public unions. There is an incredible difference between public unions and private unions. I don't know if you simply don't understand the difference or actually don't want to, but the fact remains that there is, and you can't pretend it doesn't exist and isn't the source of most of the outrage against the strikers.
- coin 13y ago
  Since when is striking a constitutional right?

rayiner 13y ago

Its interesting to look at the legal department salaries. Mid-level Alameda county counsel seem to be at $150-160k base + $40k pension contribution, or roughly comparable to a mid-level associate at a private law firm, while working far fewer hours.

malandrew 13y ago

"We gave up over $100 million in concessions in our last contract negotiations, and we haven’t had a raise in 5 years, yet the cost of living in the Bay Area has spiked by over 18%." What I don't get is why they don't try to peg their salaries to something tangible in the local economy. I know that is already done with the pricing of Below Market Rate (BMR) housing. "A BMR unit will be resold at a restricted affordable price to a household that meets the first-time homebuyer and income qualifications for the program and for the particular unit. New BMR units will be repriced according to change in the median income from the time of the current owner’s purchase to the time of sale." In exchange for such a concession, the city cannot be blocked from improving cost saving measures associated with automation, including the dismissal of any employer whose job is no longer necessary. Any employee that loses his job due to automation would first consideration first for any new jobs they qualify for that are created as the system progresses. These two concessions on both sides take care of the employees and let the system progress. The other concessions the employees are asking for such as increased lighting to improve safety are completely reasonable and shouldn't even require negotiations to implement.