You Won't Believe This One!

Hi Everyone:

So there I was this past week, minding my own business, reading my local Gannett newspaper, when I read this article that really shocked me at first then got me really MAD! The story goes like this:

Fifty-one New York City bus drivers took an average of two (yes 2!) months off last year with pay after being spat upon by upset riders. This indignity is considered an assault under their union contract, entitling them to the paid break. The Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) said 83 drivers were spat on last year. Of those, 51 took paid time off averaging 64 days. One spat upon driver took 191 days of paid leave. The driver's union says the encounters cause psychological trauma.

I don't know about you, but taking 191 days off, for being spat upon, seems extremely absurd, way out of line and should never have happened. The whole idea that the union contract covers being spat upon as an assault is excessive. Union contract clauses such as this have become the epitome of what is wrong with unions and their gimmie, gimmie approach to contract negotiations. Having negotiated many union contracts, I am pretty sure how clauses like this get into a contract. The union asks for either some outrageous wage increase or some other entitlement and then will "settle" for a clause like this one.

When management (foolishly) agreed to this demand, little did they know much much it would cost them. If you say drivers earn an average of $25/hour (low ball amount, I think the wage would be closer to $40/hour) times 8 hours per day equals $200/day. Now multiply $200 times 51 drivers and that equals $10,200 for each paid day off. Now multiply the $10,200 times the average of 64 days and you have $652,800 that the MTA paid out for drivers being spat upon last year. That is a ridiculus amount. The MTA runs a deficit almost every year and they wonder why? If, as an example, the contract that this clause became effective is 3 years old, (I don't know when this clause became effective) then the MTA paid out almost $2 million dollars over the three years; just for being spat upon! Unfortunately, once a clause like this is agreed upon by both sides, then it is next to impossible to remove it and the MTA is stuck with it like dog poop on your shoes. Clauses like this stink and should have never been agreed to.

It is painfully obvious that management didn't use any common sense in negotiating and then incredibly agreeing to that clause. Those drivers that had to take on average 64 days of paid leave for being spat upon should be investigated for fraud, including the doctors, who are union paid. Who needs 64 days off to get over being spat upon? The answer is only union bus drivers.

Common sense rules and spitting literally drools.

Til next week.