Mediators Helps End TWU Strike; But Arbitration or Mediation Could Follow

New York City's subways began running again three days before last Christmas after state mediators became involved in the labor negotiations between the Metropolitan Transit Authority and the striking Transit Workers Union, Local 100.

Highly contentious rhetoric on both sides raised the temperature

The union's negotiators walked out of the negotiations without responding to the MTA's offer, claiming the MTA provoked the walkout by putting union pension rights on the table. The union membership authorized the first transit strike in over 25 years on the recommendation of Local 100 President Roger Toussaint. On Monday, Dec. 19, 2005, bus drivers working for two private bus lines that the MTA would shortly acquire took to the picket lines. On Tuesday morning, at 3 a.m., the entire union walked off the job. For three days, New Yorkers either car-pooled, biked, or walked to work. Many others waited out the strike at home. Both Governor George Pataki and Mayor Michael Bloomberg took a hard line against the strike, insisting that the strikers return to work.

The city took the union to court where Justice Theodore T. Jones Jr., of the State Supreme Court in Brooklyn, rejected the union's claim that the strike was provoked by the MTA and declared the union strike in violation of the court's order. The court imposed a $1 million-a-day fine on the union and ordered striking workers to forfeit two days' pay for each day on strike.

Believing negotiations were at an impasse, the MTA invoked the Taylor Law and asked the Public Employment Relations Board to convene a mediation panel. Richard A. Currieri, PERB's director of conciliation, and two other mediators appointed by PERB, Martin Scheinman and Alan Viani, helped motivate the parties to agree to resume negotiations.

On Dec. 22, 2005, at a press conference announcing the end of the strike and a resumption of negotiations, Currieri read the following statement:

Pursuant to the Taylor Law processes, mediation has commenced. Over the last 48 hours, we've met separately with both the TWU and the MTA. While these discussions have been fruitful, an agreement remains out of the party's reach at this time.

It's clear to us, however, that both parties have a genuine desire to resolve their differences. In the best interest of the public ... we have suggested, and they have agreed to resume negotiations while the TWU takes steps toward returning its membership to work.

We will continue to assist the parties in their effort to reach a negotiated settlement and have committed to being immediately available for intensive sessions as needed. However, for these negotiations to be swift and successful, we believe that an immediate media blackout is essential to provide an environment that's conducive to swift negotiated settlement.

To facilitate these continued negotiations, we have asked and the parties have agreed to, a self-imposed media blackout for the duration of these discussions. We have requested that both parties adhere strictly to their commitment.

It's evident to us that the pension changes suggested by the MTA are extremely difficult for TWU to accept. It's equally clear to us that the MTA's legitimate need to address its long-term financial challenges must be addressed in these negotiations. It would be inappropriate at this time for us to ask the MTA to withdraw its pension proposals without an assurance that the TWU is willing to review alternative means to address those challenges, such as the rising costs of health benefits.

The MTA has informed us that it has not withdrawn its pension proposals, but nevertheless, is willing to discuss whether adequate savings may be found in the area of health costs.

It is on this basis that we have requested the leadership of the TWU to take the actions necessary to direct its membership to immediately return to work, and they have agreed to take such actions. This will protect its membership's economic well-being in the short term by returning them to paid status, will permit the TWU leadership to focus its energy on reaching a negotiated resolution, and will restore services to the city's riding public.

We have contacted the TWU leadership to inform them of our recommendation and are hopeful they will abide by it as well. (From CNN's Web site: http://transcripts. cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0512/22/ lt.04.html.)

When asked at the news conference how long the media blackout would last, Currieri said he hoped until a settlement is reached. When asked if there had been joint discussions during the last 12 hours, he carefully answered, "As you're undoubtedly aware, it's an emotionally-charged situation. It's been our decision at this juncture to have met separately with the parties. Obviously progress has been made through that. And we want to continue those negotiations now."

The union's executive board voted to end the strike and continue negotiations. As a result of these negotiations, Toussaint agreed to the MTA's proposal for a three-year contract involving pay raises over three years, a 1.5% payment toward health benefits, but no contributions toward pensions. However, a dissident faction within the union leadership fiercely campaigned against the proposal, which was voted down by only seven votes in an election that concluded at noon on Jan. 20, 2006. Over 22,000 members voted (slightly more than two-thirds of the total membership of 34,000), with 11,234 votes against and 11,227 votes in favor of the proposed contract. The election was conducted by phone and the internet. The American Arbitration Association, the publisher of this Journal, administered the election.

On Jan. 25, 2006, The New York Times reported that the MTA announced its intention to invoke the Taylor Law provision allowing the contract terms to be determined by binding arbitration. The union is opposed to having any contract imposed on it that gives it less than it wants.