Maybe they should complain to Ernie. 

Another driver passed this article along. It's there in black-and-white. Sixth paragraph of the article linked below.

"He pointedly chastised the Democratic lawmakers sitting before him for failing to support his efforts to break the union representing striking school bus drivers, hinting that the officeholders were beholden to organized labor."

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/15/nyregion/bloomberg-in-last-annual-address-cites-gains-and-goals.html?_r=1&

This is why we HAD to go back NOW. Given enough time, (with us on strike), he would have succeeded.

Quote from: steve on February 19, 2013, 01:10:12 PMLooks like a link and if it is then this guy did this either because he has a stake in reliant or He wanted to help his buddy at our expense.

If there is a connection, I would say it's the latter. A bus company, even one of that size, is peanuts to Bloomberg.

Bobby, who wishes to welcome everyone back, says OPT has been making some run changes while we were out.  Run sheets will be attached to our cards Wednesday ... be sure to check for any changes.

Nobody is getting service Tuesday.

There will be a list of non-public schools with their resume service dates posted in the window.

Yes, Wednesday. I suppose there will be a list in the window as to when non-public schools resume service ... I don't think that they're all the same. (I know St. Pat's goes back Thursday.)


(Don't apologize ... most people don't mean to sound like idiots when they post here ... myself included ... LOL)

Well, as another astute driver pointed out to me, only 26% of eligible voters voted in the 2009 mayoral election. Bloomy won by less than 4% over Thompson. Could have been a much different outcome if more people had voted. Not voting is often a vote for the "other guy."

Quote from: bug on February 18, 2013, 09:02:45 PM
Buzz this is the only article from WSWS that was against the union. I've posted many of their articles on my site and all were pro unions . They were the only paper and site telling it like it was.

Hardly. Below are links to just some of the anti-1181 comments that have appeared in their columns. Under each link is a quote (or 2) from that article that illustrates the point. They have a particular penchant for quoting workers who are not happy with the union. I'm not saying their assertions aren't true ... some are, some aren't, but the very last quote in the examples I gave below sums up where WSWS is at. (Their anti-union rhetoric is not limited to ATU.) The purpose of the WSWS is to steer you toward the "Socialist Equality Party," which is 100 times more leftist than even Obama could hope to be.


http://wsws.org/en/articles/2013/01/24/pers-j24.html ...

Indeed, the union, Amalgamated Transit Union (ATU) Local 1181, was long dominated by mobsters, with its former president jailed in 2006 and its current head a longtime member of the old regime. As in "cleaner" unions, these officials pursued their own interests at the workers' expense. The drivers, matrons and mechanics neither benefited from nor are responsible for the corruption.



http://wsws.org/en/articles/2013/01/25/nybu-j25.html ...

Like other picket lines in this strike, the union has made no provision to give even minimal comforts to strikers, such as hot coffee or port-a-potties in the extremely cold weather. Nevertheless, we found that workers were more interested in information about the strike than anything else.



http://wsws.org/en/articles/2013/01/30/nybu-j30.html ...

Local 1181 has been complicit with Bloomberg in wearing the strikers down, withholding information from them, and attempting to demoralize them. After first saying that it would only meet with Bloomberg, the local agreed to mediation on Monday with the bus companies and without the participation of the city.



http://wsws.org/en/articles/2013/02/02/nycc-f02.html ...

The leaders of Amalgamated Transit Union Local 1181 and the ATU International, however, have offered workers no way forward to break their isolation and mobilize this support.

Although the combined assets of ATU Local 1181 and the International are over $121 million, the union has handed out only a paltry sum, around $30 a day, in strike benefits, while advising workers to sign up for COBRA supplemental health care insurance, which they must pay for, and directing workers to food banks.



http://wsws.org/en/articles/2013/02/04/nybu-f04.html ...

However, they were angry that Local 1181 hadn't been supporting them as they stood out on the picket lines.


http://wsws.org/en/articles/2013/02/04/stri-f04.html ...

On the picket lines, strikers who have spoken to the World Socialist Web Site have expressed frustration over the direction of the strike. Some have talked about marching to the headquarters of the Amalgamated Transit Union (ATU) to protest being kept in the dark by the union while strikers man picket lines in the cold and receive a miserly $30 a day in strike pay.


http://wsws.org/en/articles/2013/02/05/nlrb-f05.html ...

ATU International President Larry Hanley, whose salary is $285,000, and ATU Local 1181 President Michael Cordiello, who takes in $245,000 a year, sounded like business consultants discussing opportunities to be opened up through backroom discussions with Democratic Party politicians. There wasn't the slightest hint that workers were locked in a life-and-death battle.

In pursuit of this surrender, International ATU President Hanley said the union was "working the press and the political establishment." He had the gall to boast that AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka had offered the miserable sum of $25,000 for a food bank for strikers.

This only underscores the fact that school bus workers can prevail in their struggle only if they break the stranglehold of the unions and fight for the full industrial and political mobilization of the working class in opposition to the political establishment, the two big business parties, and the Wall Street oligarchs they represent.

Quote from: bug on February 18, 2013, 05:07:49 PM
http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2013/02/18/nybu-f18.html

Well, it doesn't surprise that the WSWS only presented anti-union interviews. That's what they do. It's easy to second-guess the union and play armchair quarterback, but no matter what the union did, not everybody was going to be happy.

Some say we should have gone out in December when the bids went out. That would have made sense, except for the time of year.  What a dilemma for Michael ... how do you put guys out on the street just before Christmas? TWU 100 did that a few years ago and the strike lasted about 2 days.

Some feel we should have stayed out longer. To what end? We were never going to get a concession from Bloomberg. He was looking to fast-track what ever companies are awarded the work that went up for bids. He would have pulled those contracts and the workers for those companies would have been out of work NOW instead of September.

With at least a couple of lawsuits pending, there is a lot that can happen between now and September. There's a good chance the courts can freeze the bids until it's all sorted out, or they can be thrown out altogether. There is a good chance some form of EPP can come from Albany. I don't think the gesture from the 5 democratic candidates was an "empty promise." There were many, many people paying attention to this strike, not only in this country, but in Canada as well. If one of those people becomes mayor they'll know millions of people will be looking for them to live up to their commitment.

We were all hoping for a "win" by getting the EPP from Bloomy. It was never going to happen, and I credit our union officials for acknowledging that there is more than one way to skin a cat, and they don't require people to be on picket lines any longer than we  were.

Quote from: GMC JOE on February 17, 2013, 04:33:37 PM
Hey come on two master minds here confusing the hell out of me 

You say that like it's hard to do ... LOL.

Quote from: Numbers on February 17, 2013, 05:54:22 PMI was told earlier this week by an unemployment representative not to certify anymore because we r on suspension due to the strike. She told me I was to file a new claim after March 6 if I was still on strike

See, now I was told by an unemployment representative at the Restoration Center on Hylan to certify every week (she stressed that a couple of times). I think there's no harm in doing so ... did today and will next week just for the purpose of indicating I'm back to work.

Quote from: GMC JOE on February 17, 2013, 04:25:26 PM
Why would   we not get paid for five if that is what our contract states? As you said we work under the old terms until there is a new agreement. Or is it just a free for all now ?   

Under terms of the old until there's a new.

Quote from: hognol on February 17, 2013, 05:25:27 PM
Do you think those Mayoral hopefuls wrote that letter on their own behalf?  My opinion is our union asked them to write that so we can get back to work and save face.  No one is happier than I that we are back to work, but nothing has changed. The union has the difficult challenge in backing the next mayor, backing the losing candidate will hurt us.  Picking the winner doesn't guarantee the EPP either.  Because lets face it, politicians say one thing to get elected and will do another once they're in office.

Great minds think alike ... LOL. Regardless of who approached whom first, I think it was definitely choreographed between the hopefuls and the local and was mutually beneficial. I think it would behoove the contractors to make substantial contributions to the campaigns of  both the final democratic and republican candidates, then go back to whichever one gets elected and remind them it's payback time.

In today's Advance ...

"For decades, the monopolistic bus contract process benefited the bus companies and unions at the expense of the city's taxpayers and students -- but no longer," Bloomberg said. "Yesterday, I urged the union leaders to end the strike and made clear that the city would not be held hostage."

He thinks we went back for him? This guy's really got to get over himself.

Quote from: Rock Steady on February 17, 2013, 02:18:24 AM
He hired a speech writer . . . . to many big words in there.

LOL ... I knew there was a catch! 

Quote from: Rock Steady on February 17, 2013, 02:21:50 AM
I would file tomorow stating we haven't returned to work full time.  Then next Sunday, the 24th, state we worked 3 days and have returned to work full time.  Just in case . . . .

Yes, actually that's what I was thinking, but if we get paid for the week I think we should say we worked 5. Agree?