Yes the TTC strike is going to cause disruption. Strangely the that is one of the points of striking.
Yes those who depend on the TTC to get to work, especially those in poverty, will be more harshly affected. In fact it is possible that some may fall behind enough to lose their shelter or phone or….. And it is easy enough to place blame at the door of the evul TTC union for engaging their right to strike and thereby making your morning more difficult.
The real blame does not lie with the union, however, the real blame lies with governments and those who support it, who have allowed poverty to run rampant. Who have allowed a situation where people spend inordinate amounts of their monthly incomes on housing leaving little for anything else.
Image by Pixeloflight via FlickrSupport for workers involves supporting them even when you actually have to make an effort to do so. Even when it actually affects YOUR life. Even when it’s more than just sitting in your house in front of your computer typing how progressive you are.
I admire those who are thinking of the poor, but can’t help but wonder where they have been! Where was this interest and concern during Raise the Rates campaigns. End the Clawback campaigns. Where was the support for temporary workers?
This callus disregard of situations that don’t affect you are exactly what those in power count on. They are also well served by worker pitted against worker in an ever increasing battle to own the crumbs from the masters table.
Use that new found concern for non-union workers. Use that anger and generate it to do something useful for your poorer neighbours, friends and Ontarians. Demand legislation that cares for citizens over corporations. Or sit and whine and bitch and complain and find ways to fuck over your fellow workers. No doubt your government will thank you…or at least laugh.
Could it not also be argued in the reverse that plenty of so-called “progressives” are willing to quite cavalierly shake off the concerns of the poor and disenfranchised when their concerns clash with those of organized labour? That the concerns of union members making 20-30 dollars an hour suddenly outstrip the concerns of the working mother making less than $80 a day, simply because they’re an organized labour group? That “solidarity” trumps poverty.
It also seems clear to me that, contrary to what I might have thought, not as many of my “progressive” fellow travelers are actually using public transportation on a day-to-day basis. Many seem to have no concept of who it is that is riding the TTC every single day. At least out here in the east end, it’s not mostly people like me who would rather not have a car, and are CHOOSING public transit. It’s people who have no choice but public transit. It’s people who don’t own a car because they can’t afford a car, and can’t car pool, because the people they work with don’t have cars either. A mother of three doesn’t lift her stroller and two toddlers on to a bus because she’s being environmentally responsible. She does it because she’s feeding three kids, and can’t afford to feed a car too.
Now, you’re absolutely right that this isn’t the union’s fault. That’s 100% true. However you can’t expect people making $9 an hour not to get upset at a union that strikes over an offer that keeps their salaries at a level 3 times higher, if that strike has a material effect on their daily lives. If it was just me I was thinking of, I’d encourage the strikers to stay out for a very long time indeed (I was even somewhat supportive of the illegal strike 2 years ago, though they’re fast losing my last bit of support). But I know who I’m riding the TTC with everyday, and if it comes down to siding with them, or siding with Local 113, then I side with them.
And I think that’s the progressive thing to do.
Nothing makes the powers that be happier than to see groups of vulnerable people turning against one another rather than acting in solidarity and turning to speak back to power with stronger voices.
LKO seems not to know what the main issue in this dispute has been — the contracting-out of maintenance work, which means that some workers are losing work, perhaps their jobs. He remains focused on pay differences, as though it would somehow be progressive to demand that TTC workers agree to halt or fall back from progress they have made. But the TTC workers are not the source of the problem, so what sense does it make to go after them?
If too many people remain in poverty, TTC workers are not the source of that problem either.
True progressives would be working on the true problems, not arguing to halt any worker’s progress.
Well, we don’t actually know for certain that this is about the contracting out of maintenance work, because that never even came up in public until AFTER the agreement was shut down. The union leadership certainly wasn’t talking about it. It all became an issue AFTER the strike was called (as far as the public knows).
So, I’m less certain that what I’m about to say is absolutely accurate (as the union isn’t speaking publicly anymore) but reports I’ve read suggest that the “contracting out” being discussed isn’t, REALLY, “contracting out”, it’s that the newer buses have parts under warranty that are the responsibility of the MANUFACTURER to fix, not the TTC. Now, the TTC says this isn’t an issue (perhaps because it never came up in negotiations?) and that besides, a “substantial amount” of even the WARRANTY work is done by local 113 members.
Perhaps they’re not satisfied with doing a “substantial amount” of warranty work that is the responsibility of the manufacturer? Perhaps they want the manufacturer to be forced to use Local 113 workers for ALL of the warranty work. Unfortunately we don’t really know, since apparently this was never a stumbling block during the negotiations, and the union hasn’t said anything publicly since the strike was called.
I focus on the wage issues because that (and safety issues) were what the UNION was focusing on, until the contract got voted down. Frankly, I’m not entirely confident even Ben Kinnear truly knew why the contract was being rejected until sometime AFTER the contract was rejected.
As for me, I’m all for giving TTC workers whatever the want , frankly. I just don’t think we should be surprised that the average TTC passenger, looking at what Local 113 already has, balks at them striking to secure MORE job security, and BETTER wages.