toll-collectors' strike
Nov. 27th, 2004 07:49 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
cellioAs you know, the Teamsters union organized a strike of the Turnpike toll collectors and maintenance crews to begin on the busiest travel day of the year. The state was forced to let travellers use the road for free on Wednesday, and has been collecting reduced tolls since then.
While many drivers are happy with this turn of events, as a taxpayer I am outraged. In most lines of work, sabotage that costs an employer money would be punished. I have heard nothing of reimbursement from the Teamsters, nor do I expect to.
I read in today's newspaper that the state has hired temporary workers to begin collecting the regular tolls, and that when the strike ends these workers will be laid off. I have a better idea: hire them permanently and fire the strikers. Quickly.
The striking workers are not being taken advantage of, as should be clear from the ease with which you hired their replacements. They make an average of $18.50 per hour, not counting overtime, which is a lot more than other cashiers make. (80% of those on strike make more than $50,000 per year.) Each year they also receive 15 paid holidays and four weeks' vacation. The deal they rejected included fully-paid health care, protection from layoffs for three years, and annual raises.
Their greed is ridiculous, and I urge you to fire these spoiled brats and replace them with people who want to work for the more-than-fair compensation the state has offered. Please restore the Turnpike to normal business as quickly as possible, before even more of our tax dollars have to be diverted to paying for this loss.
Thank you.
I haven't actually sent it yet, so feedback is very welcome. What's the correct way to address the governor, anyway? I don't think it's Dear Governor".
"Open letter" means I'll be sending copies to the newspaper and my representatives, not just whining here. :-)
Update: I may be making some unwarranted assumptions about the terms of their employment; need to check.
(no subject)
Date: 2004-11-28 02:55 am (UTC)Also, the article says they only have 50 temps, and plan on getting 300. Which I find amusing. Some of those are third shift positions. Yeah, they're just going to find 100 people this week dying to work 3rd shift for $16/hr, no benes, and no job security. Riiiiiight.
(no subject)
Date: 2004-11-28 03:39 am (UTC)Dang -- I somehow managed to read right past the sidebar. Oops! (The $16.25 was quoted in the print article this morning -- not in a sidebar IIRC, but minor repackaging of information for print and web is nothing new.)
Yeah, they're just going to find 100 people this week dying to work 3rd shift for $16/hr, no benes, and no job security. Riiiiiight.
On the other hand, what I'm suggesting is that they just hire those (up to) 800 people at the offered %16.25 plus bennies and job security (or up to the current rate of $18.50 if that's what the market demands). This is a case where I think it's reasonable to say "you walk out, you lose". This does not appear to be a case of exploitation or unsafe working conditions or some other situation for which a work stoppage is a legitimate response.
(no subject)
Date: 2004-11-28 05:42 am (UTC)In the Scranton area? Hell, they could probably find 1,000. That's like hitting a gold mine compared to what you get around here. I know plenty of people living temp job to temp job who consider themselves lucky to get $9/hr.
(no subject)
Date: 2004-11-29 07:44 pm (UTC)Well, if someone's been out of work for over a year, and no unemployment benefits left, and the only other jobs out there are retail or McD's for minimum wage, you bet your ass I'd jump on a 3rd shift job for $16 an hour, no matter how long it'll last. It's money, and some people will take it where they can find work to get it.