TTC's union cop out

TTC's union 'cop out'
Staff urge politicians to endorse position that transit is not essential, should be allowed to strike

By SUE-ANN LEVY

Last Updated: 4th September 2008, 4:53pm


Coun. Cesar Palacio had hoped months ago -- following this past April's "surprise" weekend transit strike -- that council would seriously consider declaring the TTC an essential service.

He felt so strongly about the chaos and disruption caused by a transit strike, he formed a Citizens Advisory Group of TTC commuters, along with Coun. Cliff Jenkins, that "worked very hard" over the summer drafting a 14-page report in favour of taking away the right to strike from the TTC's 9,000 unionized employees.

Even Mayor David Miller declared in the aftermath of April's strike that he was prepared to consider the idea. He asked city manager Shirley Hoy for a full report on it by next month.

But as I've learned, our mayor blows a lot of air when the mood strikes him. His musings (or shall I say threats) back in April, I suspect, were more out of anger that his powerful TTC union buddies dared to catch him off-guard with an out-of-the-blue strike.

I'm betting His Blondness has no more intention of asking the province to declare the TTC an essential service than he has of dedicating the $238-million in infrastructure funding announced by the province yesterday to road repairs.

A lame report to the TTC's meeting tomorrow from the blue suits recommends -- no surprises here -- the TTC "not" be declared an essential service and suggests the idea be killed at that meeting.

And next Tuesday's executive committee meeting has no sign of the promised report from the city manager on its agenda, I was told yesterday.

TTC chairman Adam Giambrone, who is against the essential service idea (again, no surprises there), said the city manager's report is "coming sometime this fall."

The TTC report claims the proposed "no strike model" -- which sends all outstanding issues for both parties to arbitration -- is far more costly than the current "unfettered strike and lock out model."

Using the results of a 1991(!) study, the report contends wage settlements are generally 6% higher under the no-strike model -- which would have added $11.2 million more in the way of total costs by the end of the TTC's latest contract.

"We believe that the TTC, the city and its residents would be best served by not declaring TTC as an essential service," the report concludes.

Naturally Amalgamation Transit Union (ATU) Local 113 President Bob Kinnear thought it "great" that at least his union and the blue suits agree on something.

"We believe in the fundamental right of being able to withdraw our services ... that will not change," he vowed.

I asked him how he felt about holding the city ransom each time he strikes.

"As working people we have a right to withdraw our services ... we should be entitled to do that," Kinnear responded.

Giambrone cited the cost factor as a major reason not to consider deeming transit an essential service.

But Coun. Mike Thompson, who feels "absolutely" the TTC should be an essential service, said the report doesn't compare costs properly. For example, we both agreed it does not take into consideration the lost revenue from a strike -- about $2 million just for April's weekend event -- or the commuters who stop using transit after a strike. It also ignores the hundreds of millions of dollars of lost economic activity in the city as a whole during a strike.

"These guys are getting top dollar for doing the work they do ... yet it's inconceivable to me that they would think it appropriate to disrupt the lives of everyone in the city (who are) trying to get to their essential activities," Thompson said.

He called it a "political cop-out" by those on council and the TTC -- namely the socialists -- who are more interested in representing the interests of their union buddies than the constituents who voted them into office.

"The TTC is as essential as snow-clearing in the wintertime," he said.

---

As for this TTC contract ... Kinnear told me yesterday a hearing date has finally been set up for Sat. Sept. 6 with provincial arbitrator Kevin Burkett for both parties to make arguments. "Sometime after that Mr. Burkett will render his decision," he said, expecting that to be sometime in October. Hmmm. Can't wait to see what the costs will be of this arbitrated settlement -- given that the Millerites weren't able to make the "unfettered strike model" work, yet again.