SFist: Angry Union Member Causes A.M. Muni Delay

Jym

Thu, 19 Feb 2009 23:58:12 -0800

=v= Seriously, WTF does this have to do with the union? How did it merit the "Union" in the headline and the still from Norma Jean? The emphasis on something so totally irrelevant reveals more about the writer than the events.

Joel

Thu, 19 Feb 2009 10:13:32 -0800

Wow, you could write for unionfacts.org!

Belgand

Thu, 19 Feb 2009 02:39:34 -0800

"You can't treat the working man this way. One day we'll form a union and get the fair and equitable treatment we deserve! Then we'll go too far, and get corrupt and shiftless and the Japanese will eat us alive!" True, unions have done some good, but they also have a strong track record of going way too far and doing nothing but viciously protecting their own interests at the public expense, forcing people to join them or be blackballed, and causing all sorts of minor property damage to unrelated workers not on strike crossing picket lines lest they lose their jobs. Not to mention frequently protecting their members from disciplinary measures and, in many cases, even legal action. Ultimately we need to stand up to these unions and stop caving in. They keep fighting to be the most highly paid transit employees in the country (as I believe Prop. A mandated), but refuse to provide service that would even remotely support that or operate at any level in a manner necessary to meet mandated minimum service levels. True, this was probably just one guy throwing a hissy-fit, but he ought to be severely disciplined for his actions not protected by the union or acting in a manner such as this because of the union. In the end we don't want the same things. We want efficient, reliable transit. They want to get paid as much as possible and have thoroughly protected jobs for life.

Greg

Wed, 18 Feb 2009 22:56:26 -0800

AHEM. Ok look, good unions are ones that do great work and show that you pay for what you get. the "union label" is supposed to mean that if you treat people right you get the best of the best, and a mutual respect means management gets good workers and the workers know they are not going to get screwed. in this case, this has been so far tossed out the window as to not be funny. Ok, fine so the union "leadership" (the ones that work their asses off to defend shitty drivers and not celebrate the awesome ones) did not "authorize" this (allegedly). Ahem. This is bullsh*t. That one shop steward set off a ripple effect that essentially frakked MUNI all morning. Now let's face facts, in this economy the bosses for the Rest of Us are willing to fire people for whatever reason, being late being one of them. So basically this jerk made sure the OWNERS of MUNI (AKA ALL OF US) got screwed. If even ONE person lost their job for being late today because of this crap, well then braVO muni union. You just ensured someone hates your asses. Prop A (2007) was amended to placate MUNI's unions and this is the thanks we get? Sorry, TWU, you are teh suck ,and even union supporters like me have a hard time justifying stupid silliness like this. Do it again and even the leftiest leftist from leftville who gets fired for being late thanks to MUNI is going to want to kick you in the ass.

aj

Wed, 18 Feb 2009 16:04:25 -0800

I would bet that this was NOT authorized by the union local. Probably a dispute with this particular individual. Still no excuse for blocking in the buses.

aj

Wed, 18 Feb 2009 16:02:40 -0800

"Irresponsible" would suffice.

Joel

Wed, 18 Feb 2009 15:55:51 -0800

I didn't say I agreed with the tactic. In fact, I'm willing to bet union leadership and the AFL-CIO didn't, either. This was one steward, not the union on the whole.

mattymatt

Wed, 18 Feb 2009 15:37:30 -0800

Just like how the drivers agree to provide reliable on-time pickups, courteous and helpful service, functioning equipment, and safe driving out of the goodness of THEIR hearts. Muni management is always willing to make concessions to the union's needs. It would be nice if employees would do the same for riders.

periqueblend

Wed, 18 Feb 2009 15:37:21 -0800

but they spend way too much time protecting the incompetents in their ranks. this is a major concern. of course its not always such a clear case. I think overall, that Muni's union seems to be too powerful. But if management / gov't agrees to the contract then they must bear equal blame as they both have to enforce it - and they can say no.

SFBurke

Wed, 18 Feb 2009 14:10:22 -0800

What is the union's position on this action? I bet they won't let Muni fire this person. It is great when unions help workers negotiate for wages etc., but they spend way too much time protecting the incompetents in their ranks.

bottombracket

Wed, 18 Feb 2009 13:42:55 -0800

Did this headline really need to have the 'Angry' in it?

Angrybat

Wed, 18 Feb 2009 12:38:36 -0800

How is that different from any other day?

Joel

Wed, 18 Feb 2009 12:19:51 -0800

This guy probably thinks that employers agreed to minimum wages, health insurance, the five day workweek, eight hour workday, and safety/sanitary laws out of the goodness of their hearts.

withak

Wed, 18 Feb 2009 11:57:23 -0800

They get that $40+ an hour plus untold benefits because of the union.

spysea

Wed, 18 Feb 2009 11:52:20 -0800

From what I heard MUNI drivers get paid $40+ an hour plus untold benefits paid for by SF tax payers and pls explain to me the need for a Union? Does management beat the drivers? or make them work 20 hours a day? Another useless UNION

Akit

Wed, 18 Feb 2009 11:24:18 -0800

Is that why my bus driver this morning was pissed, speeding, making sharp turns and high speeds, and driving like a fucking maniac?

periqueblend

Wed, 18 Feb 2009 10:10:05 -0800

muni pile on.... go!