6 ms·

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 lo

by 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.

by malyk 13y ago

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.