Alaska Ferry on strike (cost, trains, money)

[akpls]

Originally Posted by 6.7traveler

The inlandboatsmen (a term I personally find highly sexist and uninclusive) union is to blame demanding a 3% year after year raise and other silliness and is willing to shut down the ferry in peak summer to try and get it.. The only logical thing to do is fire them all.

Do the workers that do those particular jobs require USCG certifications? You could fire them all, but it may not be so easy to find qualified replacements very quickly....which means the ferry system is down even longer. I don't know myself so just asking out of curiosity.

[mitgreb]

Originally Posted by Arktikos

Needless to say this is leaving a lot of people stranded and pissed off.

IMO, it will bring more well deserved criticism to Governor Dunleavy's policies, but may backfire in the long run.

Workers want a raise, in this economic and political climate? I'm afraid they may instead just lose their jobs entirely.

That is just stupid. They went on strike.

[mitgreb]

Originally Posted by keyman51

They are not stranded. The ferry said they will refund people and I am pretty sure there is local plane service that can take them to "civilization." There are a lot of people like me that live in villages all over bush Alaska, that do not have a ferry system. Our local plane service (cargo and transportation) is sometimes unreliable and getting perishables here in good condition can be interesting, but we persevere, and plan for the future as much as we can.

Can you fly out a 30' RV?

[Arktikos]

Originally Posted by mitgreb

That is just stupid. They went on strike.

You ever get an indication on your email that says something like "Sorry, this message has no content"?

That's my impression of this post.

[bus man]

Originally Posted by keyman51

They are not stranded. The ferry said they will refund people and I am pretty sure there is local plane service that can take them to "civilization." There are a lot of people like me that live in villages all over bush Alaska, that do not have a ferry system. Our local plane service (cargo and transportation) is sometimes unreliable and getting perishables here in good condition can be interesting, but we persevere, and plan for the future as much as we can.

The people themselves may not be stranded, but their vehicles are. (Remember, the Alaska Ferry takes cars as well as people.)

What is the public mood in Alaska regarding this strike? Do most people sympathize with the workers, or with the inconvenienced travelers?

[phlinak]

Originally Posted by 6.7traveler

The inlandboatsmen (a term I personally find highly sexist and uninclusive) union is to blame demanding a 3% year after year raise and other silliness and is willing to shut down the ferry in peak summer to try and get it.. The only logical thing to do is fire them all.

Hmmm....

The union is asking for measly 3% yearly raises over a 3-year period, for the state to pick up any additional future costs for their health insurance, and to pay ferry workers who live out of state the same wages as workers who live in Alaska are paid.

Your response is to "fire them all" for exercising their labor rights.

All of these requests are fair and reasonable to anyone who is not anti-union hater.

Hopefully, those involved in resolving the issue are not as subjectively biased and judgmental as you.

[Arktikos]

Originally Posted by bus man

What is the public mood in Alaska regarding this strike? Do most people sympathize with the workers, or with the inconvenienced travelers?

With some people, both groups are sympathized with. I don't think anyone wants to see travelers inconvenienced.

Hard to say overall what kind of support the strikers have. Alaska is very conservative politically, especially interior areas, but ferries run along coastal routes that are typically less conservative. My guess is about a 50/50 proposition, maybe less for Union.

I thought the workers would be striking to save their full time jobs, as these looked to be in jeopardy when Dunleavy unveiled his budget with drastic cuts. Not sure the timing for pay raises is ideal.

In a recent editorial State administrator claims Union is making "illegal" demands, such as paying out of state same as in state workers. They make it sound like Union has been totally unreasonable while Union says the same thing about State.

[Arktikos]

Originally Posted by bus man

The people themselves may not be stranded, but their vehicles are. (Remember, the Alaska Ferry takes cars as well as people.)

What is the public mood in Alaska regarding this strike? Do most people sympathize with the workers, or with the inconvenienced travelers?

Here's a snippet from a news source with a bit more info on the situation.

<...Dunleavy proposed to cut funding for the AMHS by $96 million, or 75 percent. This would have shut down the system entirely from October through the spring. There’s less tourist traffic during those months, but if anything the ferry becomes more important, since planes are harder to run in the winter.

The state legislature ended up “compromising” by cutting service by $46 million. Some communities will see no off-season service, and others will see their frequency of service cut significantly.

This wasn’t the first round of cuts. The ferry system is receiving about a third of the funding it relied on a few years ago.

AMHS service also faces the specter of privatization. A report prepared by a group of business interests—including marine shipping companies and chambers of commerce—advocated for privatizing the whole system, while simultaneously making the case that the service is essential.

Segments of the state’s elected leaders seem to be taking the bait. “We think it’s a viable public system,” Arnold said of the ferries, but “this administration’s view is that Alaska is for sale.”

BREAKING POINT
The IBU contract has been expired for three years. Wages have been frozen for five years. The union’s 430 members at AMHS walked out after lengthy negotiations and mediation.

Negotiations were stalled with the state demanding that workers take a net pay cut by paying an increased share of their health care costs. The raises offered wouldn’t have come close to covering the difference.

The union also wanted seniority-based wage increases. Right now, members only get raises when the union negotiates a cost-of-living bump. The state balked, saying it would need seven months to perform a wage study, and proposed three years of zeroes for cost-of-living increases.

When the Dunleavy administration took over, negotiations took a turn for the worse. “They weren’t willing to honor any of the rules we agreed to,” Calibo said. “It was like two steps back, and then some.”.....>

[Frostnip]

I feel bad for the people who are stranded, but if the state's going to threaten to shut down the AMHS, I can hardly fault the workers from calling them on that bet rather than allowing themselves to be quietly chipped away at.

[Arktikos]

Strike over. They got 3% raise over 3 years, not 3% each year as hoped.