BART and Unions dispute, any concerns? (Oakland, Daly City: health insurance, crimes, minimum wage)

[Natural510]

Originally Posted by ccm123

Unions are really not needed in this day and age. The workplace should be all managed by the free market.

Unions are needed, though there is a marked difference between public- and private-sector unions.

[BayAreaHillbilly]

They actually picked a good week to strike. There is lower traffic, many people are taking the week off due to the mid week 4th.

[jade408]

I think unions are good. We have swu g the balance ce a little too far in favor of employers and not employees. But I have little sympathy for BART workers who have it pretty good. Although muni has it better.

Just another reason we need to consolidate transit agencies in the region. We have far too many.


On an autocorrecting iDevice.

[bmw335xi]

Originally Posted by jade408

I think unions are good. We have swu g the balance ce a little too far in favor of employers and not employees. But I have little sympathy for BART workers who have it pretty good. Although muni has it better.

Just another reason we need to consolidate transit agencies in the region. We have far too many.


On an autocorrecting iDevice.

This is exactly the reason why we should NOT consolidate all transit agencies... they could shut down the entire Bay Area and have even more bargaining power than they already do.

[AngusHsu]

The BART union embraces greed. Greed is good!

BART fares are one of the highest in the nation when travelling from a SF suburb into downtown SF while fares are far cheaper intra-SF. This price gouging comes from high BART wages and benefits. Heck, we still have carpets on many trains. Nothing like 1980s nostalgia in 2013.

Here is the standard script between BART unions and BART management:

Unions demand 7% increase each year for the foreseeable future. Management offers 1%. Then the unions strike. Then after lots of wrangling they would come to something reasonable on both sides - the "Duh offer". Meanwhile, the union leaders look great for getting more than management offered, while management looks great for getting less than union leadership wanted.

[jade408]

Originally Posted by bmw335xi

This is exactly the reason why we should NOT consolidate all transit agencies... they could shut down the entire Bay Area and have even more bargaining power than they already do.

I think Bart union is jealous of munis bd provision that guaranteed them top five highest wages in the nation. They get raises whenever other agencies do to stay on the list. I think less competition and agencies to compare with would be better. When was the last time you heard about an NYC transit strike?

And less overhead means more money that could go to workers


I am on my phone, please forgive the typos.

[bentobox34]

Originally Posted by AngusHsu

BART fares are the highest in the nation when travelling from a SF suburb into downtown SF while fares a far cheaper intra-SF.

At the risk of thread derailment, BART fares are distance-based, so the reason intra-SF trips are cheaper is because they happen to be shorter. Also, BART's fare policy is not very relevant to this labor dispute.

Secondly, your comment about "highest in the nation" didn't sound right to me. I checked one example, Stamford CT to Manhattan (35 miles) which costs $13.75 at peak period and $10.25 off peak. Fremont to downtown San Francisco (36 miles) costs $5.65.

[AngusHsu]

Originally Posted by bentobox34

At the risk of thread derailment, BART fares are distance-based, so the reason intra-SF trips are cheaper is because they happen to be shorter. Also, BART's fare policy is not very relevant to this labor dispute.

Secondly, your comment about "highest in the nation" didn't sound right to me. I checked one example, Stamford CT to Manhattan (35 miles) which costs $13.75 at peak period and $10.25 off peak. Fremont to downtown San Francisco (36 miles) costs $5.65.

BART's fare policy is not directly linked to the labor dispute. My main point was that fares are high largely because of union negotiations in its favor over the years. A station agent without a college degree making $71K will cause fares to be higher, and I haven't even discussed benefits yet.

So fares are not necessarily the highest. It is a complete rip-off though coming from the inner suburbs into SF, say in Daly City station or Lake Merritt station into downtown SF. Those are short rides with hefty fares. You can go from Coney Island into lower Manhattan for 2.50.

[lucillenyc]

There was an NYC transit strike in 2005. I was there and it sucked.

Originally Posted by jade408

I think Bart union is jealous of munis bd provision that guaranteed them top five highest wages in the nation. They get raises whenever other agencies do to stay on the list. I think less competition and agencies to compare with would be better. When was the last time you heard about an NYC transit strike?

[bmw335xi]

Originally Posted by jade408

I think Bart union is jealous of munis bd provision that guaranteed them top five highest wages in the nation. They get raises whenever other agencies do to stay on the list. I think less competition and agencies to compare with would be better. When was the last time you heard about an NYC transit strike?

And less overhead means more money that could go to workers


I am on my phone, please forgive the typos.

The work ethic and culture is very different in NYC. It's the land of handouts and entitlements in SF, which is not the attitude in NYC. I don't think enough will ever be enough here.