Comment by Nelkins | Hacker News Reader

Comment by Nelkins | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

I'd be very skeptical of the "required" money quoted by anyone who is affiliated with the MTA or state government in general. There's a lot of evidence that indicates the MTA is used as a personal piggy bank. Take, for example, this gem: "MTA wrote $4.9M check to three upstate ski centers in bizarre move requested by Cuomo officials" [1]. Or this one[2] (also part of this NYT series):

"Subway workers now make an average of $170,000 annually in salary, overtime and benefits, according to a Times analysis of data compiled by the federal Department of Transportation. That is far more than in any other American transit system; the average in cities like Boston, Chicago, Los Angeles and Washington is about $100,000 in total compensation annually.

The pay for managers is even more extraordinary. The nearly 2,500 people who work in New York subway administration make, on average, $280,000 in salary, overtime and benefits. The average elsewhere is $115,000."

Why are we paying these employees such an insane amount of money relative to our peers? Political failure[3]. Due to the Triborough Amendment clause of the Taylor Law, anytime negotiations with the union fall through, the terms of the previous contract continue. Thus, the Transit Workers Union (TWU) have no incentive to negotiate in good faith. They can't strike, but they still get a pretty sweet deal.

The solution to this starts at the top. We need to vote out our current corrupt (or at the very least, easily cowed) government and put in place people who will make this a priority and not be completely beholden to special interests.

[1] http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/mta-wrote-4-9m-chec...

[2] https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/18/nyregion/new-york-subway-...

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taylor_Law#Criticism_and_refor...

I remain confused about the pay figure the NYTimes gave for subway workers; I have a close relative who works in the subway and I know a number of subway workers, and none of them make anything close to that kind of salary, even counting overtime. So unless that counts something other than the hourly employees, or counts pension contributions as salary (in which case it is just an argument against pensions), I have a hard time believing it.

I also have no idea what better alternative there is when a contract negotiation fails. Is the system supposed to stop altogether until a new contract is agreed upon? Are the workers expected to go without pay? The fact is that the union's demands have not been unreasonable -- they ask to keep benefits, to have pay increases that basically track the cost of living in NYC, and occasional to expand low-cost benefits (e.g. allowing all employees to ride LIRR and MNR for free, rather than just employees who live outside NYC).

Normal government workers in NY cost about 150% of salary due to benefits and pension costs. A big part of this is that NY law requires that the pensions get funded... many states ignore pension contributions and operate at a lower cost.

MTA has other unusual issues... they have a very powerful union that has negotiated wacky deals over the years. In some areas, pretty much everyone retires with dramatically more expensive disability retirements. (See: https://nypost.com/2014/08/06/nearly-all-lirr-workers-have-d... )They also have the ability to "spike" pensions with overtime that most NY government workers outside of police and fire cannot do.

The LIRR is a separate union with a totally different retirement system:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railroad_Retirement_Act

The subway workers are represented by TWU local 100; LIRR workers are represented by 7 different unions, all separate from the subway workers.

Pension spiking happens everywhere. Here in California we had a retired fire chief drawing a $400k pension because he basically worked around the clock the year he retired.

>So unless that counts something other than the hourly employees, or counts pension contributions as salary (in which case it is just an argument against pensions), I have a hard time believing it.

Usually if the figure includes benefits (as it does in this case) the pension contributions are included. Along with things like medical,life, and disability insurance.

Usually when you total everything up it comes to around twice what people get paid. I worked at a place with federal civil servants, and the total cost to the government for a civil servant was costed out at 2.2x salary.

> pay increases that basically track the cost of living in NYC

There's the problem. Half the population is convinced that the people who do all the work to make living in a city possible should not be able to afford to live in said city.

San Francisco is the most extreme example of this insanity, where everyone in the service sector either has multi-hour commutes, or live in a closet with 3 other roommates.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com