I'm listening to Metro Morning and they're getting some pretty pissed off listeners calling in. Apparently there are people all over the place standing at bus stops and stations because no one knew this was going to happen. I'd be out there too if I hadn't been woken by Metro Morning this morning.

Did Kinnear seem pissed off? I've been hearing on the news that he's "going to comply" once he reads the Labour Relations Board back to work order. How does that work if it was done without his approval? If it was done without his approval, then how can he be the one to "comply"? And if he does have the power to "comply" then why hasn't he done it before now if he actually doesn't support an illegal strike, since everyone has known all along that they're not in a legal strike position?

People might not like them... but they won't be ignored.

People don't care generally about the plight of workers, especially unionized workers.

These people could give a rat's ass if this means these workers rarely see their family, or if this was imposed on them. They simply do not care one bit. Oh and they believe only what the papers tell them - it is entirely the fault of the workers themselves.

[ 29 May 2006: Message edited by: Stargazer ]

eta: CBC also said high temps are part of the problem, expected to remain so, for a few days.

[ 29 May 2006: Message edited by: Boom Boom ]

quote:

---

A SMOG ADVISORY* has been issued by the Ontario Ministry of the
Environment for the following forecast regions:

For: Sunday May 28, 2006

Barrie - Orillia - Midland
Belleville - Quinte - Northumberland
City of Hamilton
City of Toronto
Dufferin - Innisfil
Dunnville - Caledonia - Haldimand
Grey - Bruce
Haliburton
Halton - Peel
Huron - Perth
Kingston - Prince Edward
London - Middlesex
Niagara
Oxford - Brant
Parry Sound - Muskoka - Huntsville
Peterborough - Kawartha Lakes
Sarnia - Lambton
Simcoe - Delhi - Norfolk
Waterloo - Wellington
York - Durham

The SMOG ADVISORY (issued on a previous date) for the following forecast region(s) is still in effect:

Elgin: From May 27, 2006
Windsor - Essex - Chatham - Kent: From May 27, 2006

Advisories will remain in effect until further notice.

For more details visit the Air Quality Ontario website at:
www.airqualityontario.com

During the smog episode, individuals may experience eye
irritation. Heavy outdoor exercise may cause respiratory
symptoms such as coughing or shortness of breath. People
with heart or lung disease including asthma may experience
a worsening of their condition.

* A Smog Advisory means that there is a strong likelihood
that there may be poor air quality within the next 24 hours
due to ground-level ozone and/or particulate matter.

Health tips:
- avoid exposure to vehicle exhaust fumes

---

[ 29 May 2006: Message edited by: lonewolf2 ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jimmy Brogan:
Canadian unions would never have achieved anything if they had waited for 'public approval' of their job actions.

---

True, but most of the major victories of unions (pensions, 40 hour week, Rand formula) were not public sector strikes. You can win a strike at General Motors without public approval, so long as it is hurting their profits enough. You could win a coal mine strike if the public did not approve if it was during war time and the government needed more coal and pressured your company to cave into a small wage increase.

Yet upsetting the public, in my opinion, is not the way for the TTC workers to win here. An angry enough public could push through the TTC being declared an "essential service" or privatization/contracting out.

It is hard for low-income workers to not feel angry when they see how much more TTC workers earn than them (e.g. janitors in the TTC make much more than janitors that clean office buildings), and sadly, rather than try to unionize themselves (the reason TTC janitors make more!) it is easy enough to complain.

quote:

---

You know what sucks? Coming to work and listening to a bunch of assholes moan about how bad the TTC is, yet when asked about why this action occurred, they had no idea. When told that workers are now being forced to alter their lives by going to night shift, their response "Too bad, get another fucking job"
People don't care generally about the plight of workers, especially unionized workers.

---

[ 29 May 2006: Message edited by: Stargazer ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michelle:
You know, this really sucks. Apparently there were a bunch of low-wage overnight workers stranded at their jobs, and they couldn't get back to their homes. Unlike the TTC workers, they don't make enough money to be able to afford cabs or to own cars. No warning at all.

---

Michelle you are a moderator and I expected more of you than to spew the right wing anti-union venom that one encounters so often in the mainstream media.

Normally when people use poor peoples suffering to bash unions it is done by right wingers who have no real empathy but like the wedge it drives between working people. I mean they make so much money and have it so good why should they complain particularily since they have it so much better than other workers. If they didn't make so much there would be more for aother wortkers right? Or is it they should just take whatever shit that the TTC throws at them and take it because they are better off than the the working poor.

quote:

---

Originally posted by kropotkin1951:
Yup thats great solidarity. I support your rights as long as you don't inconvenience me or any poor people.

---

Besides, I have yet to see evidence that the union membership voted for this wildcat strike. It is not democratic if it is imposed from above.

Apparently, if you start a job as a day shift worker, you then 'own' that shift and should never be required to work an afternoon or night shift? Someone other than you should have to do it, right?

Grow up. The 'plight of unionized workers' my ass. All the benefits, good security, great pay and now you'd like all the power to determine your working conditions, too.

quote:

---

You know, the phrase 'public servant' doesn't mean that they have to kiss Adam T's butt, you know.

---

Please tell me where I said anything like that. I expect people to do the job they were hired for and are paid to do. I don't think that is too much to ask for.

The only people who are insisting on 'kissing butt' are the union extremists here who are expecting everybody to say how wonder the TTC boycotters are and how they had a perfect 'right' to do what they did, and how everybody should be happy that they were inconvenienced.

When the NDP are in a position of power, their relationship with organized labour becomes more complicated.

We are killing ourselves with polluted air. Millions of average Torontonians live well out of bicycle-riding or walking distance from their work where they cannot just miss a day and still make enough money to pay all the bills.

To the vast majority of us, public transit is an essential service. If some are going to totally loose touch with those who live outside the downtown core, and who don't need transit, then we will always stay at less than 20% of the population.

I work with someone who lives in Parkdale, and had to spend $30 for a taxi to come in to her $9.50 an hour job.

The MSM will villainize unions, but in this case the union is making media's job so easy.

If transit is an essential service, certain checks should come in, as with the police and fire, which will give the workers safeguards.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Infocus:
Grow up. The 'plight of unionized workers' my ass. All the benefits, good security, great pay and now you'd like all the power to determine your working conditions, too.

---

When you have a job, you're giving up your own time for the benefit of the organisation for which you are working. As your time is your most valuable resource, you morally have a right to have a say in how you're compensated for the time you have given up.

quote:

---

Originally posted by clandestiny:
why can't the union do something creative like offer free rides to everyone, or picket city hall (no more illegal then wildcat striking) or have a ttc ticket giveaway or something, something that would cost the ttc big time? i can already hear the poohpoohing of this creative destruction - the ttc is already strapped as it is, but....if the public can't afford a decent rapid transit where workers are respected etc, then why not just shut the damn thing down (or at least say that 'the public is too poor to have this service? Consider the shock and horror such a suggestion would have on the pigmen, who love lies and pretenses... how can something so vital still be underfunded?)
of course the workers need to be ruthless in order to win, but if what is the fukking human brain for anyway

---

I think some people who posted after me have taken what I've said and run with it. I don't think this action was effective - in fact, I think it was incredibly counter-productive and only hurt the poorest of the poor in Toronto because it didn't give them a chance to make alternate arrangements. But I'm not against striking in general from the TTC - and I completely sympathize with their REASON for striking.

When you're hired to work a day shift, and then your employer arbitrarily decides, hey, I think I'm going to put you on permanent night shift, that's not just some little schedule change. That's changing the entire nature of your job. That's changing your entire life around, especially if you are, say, a single parent with young children. How many overnight child care centres do you know about? I've never heard of one. And I sure as hell wouldn't leave MY kid overnight with some neighbour if I didn't have a close friend or family member nearby. It's a total disruption. In fact, in many cases I would even consider it constructive dismissal since a lot of people just wouldn't be able to make a night shift work.

It amazes me that some people expect others to just say 'yeah well, anything magmt says boss!' yet would not like that if it were done to them.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doug:
It sucks, yes, but then again, the union signed a collective agreement that made such a change both possible and attractive to management. Possibly a big oops on their part but it's a bit late to strike over now.

---

Surely it is time governments provided an alternative means of pressuring management to respond to long standing grievances and unresolved concerns? That is, if government has the well being of the public in mind.

To paraphrase Jean-Claude Parot - at the end of the day, while it's good to have public support, you're negotiating with your employer, not with the public. The workers' tactics were clearly directed at their employer - the City of Toronto and its TTC.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stargazer:
What people seem to forget *cough* Infofocus *cough* is that it does bloodly well matter if you signed a contract to do day shifts and then were told to do night shifts or lose your job. Of course it matters! These are people with families. Do you know how hard it will be for these men and women to see their spouses, their kids? How about just having a decent sleep and a life like everyone else.

It amazes me that some people expect others to just say 'yeah well, anything magmt says boss!' yet would not like that if it were done to them.

Progressive my ass Infofocus. You are simply selfish.

---

Apparently many "progressives" on this board accept the British Master Servant view of workers' relationship to their employers.

I don't know for sure but I would guess that many of the people working in those jobs are parents and if affirmative action has worked at all at TTC many are POC and maybe even single parents.

But enforce the laws made by right wing governments to the full extent because the last thing our society needs is working people acting in concert against injustices that their managers have the "right" to do. My god that could lead to anarchy!!!! Okay maybe syndicalism but certainly not chaos.

By that logic (ie lets follow British law and let the courts decide) the "progressives" would be arguing that there is no right to protest at Caledonia. It doesn't matter the issues at stake, just stop inconveninecing people and let the law sort it all out. This is an unacceptable view for a progressive board when it comes to native struggles and it seems to me it is also an unacceptable view when it comes to working people. After all it is the capitalist greed imperative that drives most of the injustice in our society.

quote:

---

T.O. transit driver assaulted after strike ends

CTV.ca News Staff

A Toronto Transit Commission (TTC) driver was spat on and hit with a broom during a fare dispute just hours after returning to the job following a wildcat strike.

A spike in assaults against drivers and fare collectors was one of the issues workers protested during Monday's illegal job action that crippled the city and stranded 800,000 daily commuters.

The rider who assaulted the driver near Old Weston Road and St. Clair at about 9:30 p.m. was also upset about the strike, police said.

The driver suffered cuts to his hands and knees. The suspect fled the scene.

...

About 800 mechanical workers who initiated the strike will be docked at least one-day's pay, while officials are considering a rebate for metro pass holders.

Transit workers were protesting working conditions, including being forced to work on a permanent night shift.

The TTC wants 53 of 87 janitors and 53 of 91 subway track workers permanently moved to the night shift from day jobs as part of a cost-saving measure.

...

---

quote:

---

Michelle you could have started a thread talking about the effect of the shift change on single parents with school age children instead you chose the right wing side of the argument.

---

You're not 'giving up' your time. You are exchanging it for a negotiated amount of money and benefits. And it's not solely for the 'benefit of the organization' either. It's mutually beneficial.

Your moral right to have a say resulted in a contract, part of which apparently, provides the employer to schedule workers as they deem required. All kinds of people work shift work, both public and private sector, union and non-union, big business and small business.

What makes Toronto transit workers so special that they are immune from change? Does job security also mean the security of working a day shift?

If you don't like it, negotiate it in your next contract. In the meantime, you've got obligations to your customers, your employer and to taxpayers. If the employer, without warning, locked out their employees,I'm pretty certain you'd be demanding consequences for their doing so. Sauce for the goose.....

Kropotkin wrote: "What people seem to forget *cough* Infofocus *cough* is that it does bloodly well matter if you signed a contract to do day shifts and then were told to do night shifts or lose your job."

Violence in the workplace and management unilaterally making changes that have profound effects particularily on parents of school age kids are serious issues not a whim or fancy. What is this crap anyways that the workers have it great and shut up or quit. I hear that shit every day in the main stream but I thought that this was a place for dialogue on left issues not a place were the Moderators start threads to denigrate union women and men who have the communal solidarity to support each other despite the game of labour relations being stacked against them.

It takes only a moment's thought to realize that to garner the public's support, you must communicate your issues to them. If the threat of a wildcat strike is what's necessary to get the public's attention through the media, then go ahead - make the threat. Do it well in advance(weeks in advance), and make it clear where the issues lie.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Infocus:
Aristotle wrote: "When you have a job, you're giving up your own time for the benefit of the organisation for which you are working. As your time is your most valuable resource, you morally have a right to have a say in how you're compensated for the time you have given up."

You're not 'giving up' your time. You are exchanging it for a negotiated amount of money and benefits. And it's not solely for the 'benefit of the organization' either. It's mutually beneficial.

---

Which would explain why business groups have not only fought advancements in workers rights (health and safety, wages, vacations, protection from arbitrary dismissal) but are fighting to roll back these advancements?

quote:

---

Originally posted by kropotkin1951:
What bothers me the most is that a Moderator of this board before she had any understanding of the issues that caused the strike complained about the workers. The start of this thread didn't discuss issues it bitched about unionized workers protesting what they fell are serious issues.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by kropotkin1951:
This is where union bashing leads. Angry people who feel they are entitled to beat up working people to make a point about being inconvenienced.

How very progressive.

---

Indeed, there's a little blurb about it in the Sun too, buried in coverage about how these overpaid underworked union members have inconvienced the "ordinary working people" of Toronto. Whose best interest is served by the Sun, of course.

[ 30 May 2006: Message edited by: Lord Palmerston ]

quote:

---

What still has me questioning this whole affair, is whether or not there was a clause in the contract between management and the union that work would be on the 'day shift' only. Until there is clarification on that front, the whole issue is difficult to understand.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doug:
There's also another issue. The strike was on a day that was already going to be a smog alert day even before all of the additional car traffic the strike created. Though it's impossible to prove, someone could well have died as a result.

---

This is a gross generalization. If someone died from the smog, it could have been the killer smog that was in Toronto before the strike really started to hit. CBC Newsworld mentioned the smog in the early newscast.

From my post above (#11 in this thread):

posted 29 May 2006 09:46AM

CBC Newsworld just announced a 'smog alert' for Toronto - first one this year; brought on by local pollution and smog from south of the border; expected to get worse with more vehicle traffic today and for the next few days, especially if the strike continues.

Now Miller and city bureaucrats are talking about suing the union for the $2-$3 million in lost TTC revenue. I don't see what was accomplished by the wildcat walkout (not much) that a grievance could not have done. Contracts usually require the employers to respond to a grievance quickly. Sometimes they go on to binding arbitration, and there the Labour Board usually rules in favour of unions.

I totally sympathize with how mean it is to move day shift workers to the night shift. I also feel bad about drivers being assaulted, but I don't know what more the TTC can do to protect them. I know they are looking into things like cameras, or a protective wall.

Are there any issues that people should be able to shut down our public transportation system for. Do people from the Squamish nation have the right to block the Lion's Gate bridge to show their support for a land dispute in Ontario involving another First Nation. I think they should but you know I guess I'll have to rethink that because it might inconvenience poor people or heaven forbid not be santioned by our legal system.

If Falcon pushes through his twinning of the Port Mann bridge there can be no protests because he is the government and he has spoken. He has made it very clear that there are one of two choices either his way or the highway. So what if his way is the highway so there is no choice no vote and no representation but he has the legal authority so don't protest.

Civil disobedience is obviously not a progresive stance for this board but it is an attack on poor people.

quote:

---

Originally posted by pencil-skirt:
Why didn't the union bring their concerns about the night shift change and the safety of the drivers/fare-collectors to a grievance or to arbitration? I guess I am still waiting to hear why they had to go on strike.

---

From what I can tell, it's been the workers themselves who have brought the matter to people's attention, not the union. Maybe the workers didn't feel the union was taking their concerns seriously, so they took matters into their own hands.

quote:

---

Originally posted by kropotkin1951:
Okay so the consensus on this progressive board is that TTC unionized workers should never engage in any activity that is not sanctioned by the labour board because to do so is bad for poor people.

---

quote:

---

If, in the end, the union is weakened by perceptions that it is irrational and not willing to play by the rules of the collective agreement, then it only serves to hurt the labour movement in a broader sense, and relations with the TTC specifically.

---

Anyone who has been involved in a strike will tell you that the media coverage will play up the most trivial of their bargaining demands and then highlight the most aggregious possible result. It is obviously a corporate propaganda tactic that works extremely well. Even on this forum the first response without knowing why the workers took this extremely serious action is to come on and use the "poor people" strawman argument(the most aggregious result in this case). The corporate propaganda machine is a thing of beauty ain't it?

If violence in the workplace is not a big enough issue then I don't see what could ever be. You are in fact saying witholding of a workers labour in the public transportation system outside of the labour board dance is never acceptable.

quote:

---

To engage in a strike of this nature, in the manner with which it was carried out, may well have hurt the workers more than helped them. If, in the end, the union is weakened by perceptions that it is irrational and not willing to play by the rules of the collective agreement, then it only serves to hurt the labour movement in a broader sense, and relations with the TTC specifically. If the unions will not abide by the terms of the agreement, likely management may well decide to follow suit. In the middle is you, me, everyone.

---

quote:

---

Its not like the union has any ability to control the corporate media better and make sure they give wide circulation to the union's message.

---

quote:

---

If the threat of a wildcat strike is what's necessary to get the public's attention through the media, then go ahead - make the threat. Do it well in advance (weeks in advance), and make it clear where the issues lie.

---

[ 31 May 2006: Message edited by: Lard Tunderin' Jeezus ]

The TTC is all but a twenty four hour a day opperation, therefore, if there is in fact a need for the white collar jobs in the offices, there is a need for them to be present on the night shift too.

Including Human Resources departments. One would think.

quote:

---

Originally posted by pencil-skirt:
Contracts usually require the employers to respond to a grievance quickly. Sometimes they go on to binding arbitration, and there the Labour Board usually rules in favour of unions.

---

quote:

---

The TTC is all but a twenty four hour a day opperation, therefore, if there is in fact a need for the white collar jobs in the offices, there is a need for them to be present on the night shift too.

Including Human Resources departments. One would think.

---

So we abandon the process? I guess the next time management wants to fire a union member, screw the process and just can him.

Why bother with the 'process'? It takes too much time and is too much effort.

Unions fought long and hard for this process to be put into place. Abandonment for the sake of expediency seems a little short-sighted. No?

[ 02 June 2006: Message edited by: lucas ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sineed:
[QBI rode my bike today, and it was fun, actually. The weather was nice, except for the smog; I wore a mask for the ride home. Coasting past all those cars stuck in traffic was really cool.[/QB]

---

quote:

---

What prompted Monday's wildcat?

Don't believe for a second the work stoppage had to do with the transfer of a few dozen janitorial staff from day to night shift, as some TTC officials are claiming. You don't get TTC employees by the thousands staying off the job over a scheduling conflict.

The big issue

From the union's point of view, it's management's "contempt," as one union insider puts it, for the collective bargaining agreement that is causing low morale. The union says management has dragged its feet or refused to move on a host of issues, including re-evaluating salaries. Management only recently installed carbon monoxide detectors on maintenance vehicles used in subway tunnels, after a crew was overcome by fumes.

The real thorn in the union's side

Workplace safety - especially management siding with riders when complaints or confrontations do occur (everything from being punched, kicked, slapped and spat on). As Amalgamated Transit Union Local 113 prez Bob Kinnear writes in the union's newsletter, "We hate the What could you have done to prevent this assault against you?' questions that we are asked after we have been attacked."

etc. etc.

---

quote:

---

Hey I have an idea: ride your bike every day! (Weather permitting, of course.)

---

CP24 is reporting - based on rumour more than anything it seems - that there could be another TTC strike tomorrow morning.

By the way, don't forget, if you're a metropass holder, to collect your four bucks by showing your May metropass between June 5th and (I think) 19th.

BTW, did you see at the end of the article, how they said that a TTC driver was scratched and spat upon? Nasty. You know what kind of job action would be a smart idea for them to take? The same one they took that one day, when they refused to challenge anyone for their fare. It would probably keep them a lot safer, and it'll get the word through to management that they're going to have to make it a lot safer for employees to collect money before they'll start doing it. Everyone has the right to refuse unsafe work. It's not enough for the TTC to simply hang up posters claiming that they "stand behind" their employees. They actually have to DO something about it.

[ 04 June 2006: Message edited by: Michelle ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tommy_Paine:
S'funny. How is it that only blue collar jobs are done more efficiently on the night shift?

---

Well, when it comes to janitors, I don't think it's more efficiently done on the night shift. I think it's best for janitors to be working during peak times during the day so that trash doesn't pile up and stations don't get filthy all day long. Moving them to night shift is ridiculous.

However, I can see how doing track repair and maintenance at night would be much more efficient. Anyone who has waited at peak times during the day for a train, which then drives at a crawl because they're all backed up due to having to stop or go slowly past people doing track maintenance in the tunnels during the day could easily see the efficiency of having that stuff done at night.