nyct strike report

8/8/2019 Nyct Strike Report

1/13

New York City Transit Authority

And

Manhattan and Bronx Surface Transit Operating Authority

Public Report

Of

Peter S. Kalikow, Chairman

Katherine N. Lapp, Executive Director

Strike commencing December 20, 2005 and continuing through December 22, 2005


2/13

2

Preliminary Statement

The New York City Transit Authority and its subsidiary, the Manhattan and

Bronx Surface Transit Operating Authority (hereinafter collectively referred to as NYC

Transit) are public benefit corporations organized under the laws of the State of New

York to operate and maintain the subway and the major portion of the bus transportation

facilities throughout the City of New York (New York Public Authorities Law, Sections

1201, 1202). *

The strike, beginning on or about 3:00 a.m., Tuesday, December 20, 2005 and

continuing through December 22, 2005, shut down all subway and bus service operated

by NYC Transit, and virtually all maintenance, cleaning, customer service, security and

infrastructure work performed by hourly employees ceased.

An investigation was conducted as required by Section 210 of the Civil Service

Law (commonly known as the Taylor Law), and this report sets forth (a) the

circumstances surrounding the commencement of the strike, (b) the efforts used to

terminate the strike, (c) the names of those public employees whom the public officer or

body had reason to believe were responsible for causing, instigating or encouraging the

strike, and (d) related to the varying degrees of individual responsibility, the sanctions

imposed or proceedings pending against each such individual public employee.

* A separate public entity, MTA Bus Company, is a subsidiary of the MetropolitanTransportation Authority (MTA). The MTA, through this subsidiary, has taken overbus service formerly provided by private bus companies under franchises issued by theCity of New York.


3/13

3

Circumstances Surrounding Commencement

of the Strike

Collective bargaining for a successor contract to the agreement covering the

period December 16, 2002 through December 15, 2005, commenced with Transport

Workers Union, Local 100 (hereinafter referred to as TWU or Local 100) and

Transport Workers Union of America AFL-CIO on October 14, 2005. During this period

the parties met repeatedly until Local 100 commenced its strike. Collective bargaining

with Amalgamated Transit Union, Divisions 726 and 1056 (hereinafter collectively

referred to as the ATUs) and Amalgamated Transit Union, AFL-CIO commenced on

November 10, 2005. During this period the parties met repeatedly until the ATUs

commenced its strike.

During the negotiations, representatives of the TWU made public statements

threatening to strike or to support a strike if the parties had not reached an agreement by

December 15, 2005. For example, on December 10, 2005, the TWU organized and

conducted a strike authorization vote among its members and reported that its

membership had authorized a strike.

Negotiations were taking place virtually around the clock as the last day of the

preceding collective bargaining agreement, i.e. December 15, 2005, approached.

Early in the morning of December 16, 2005, Roger Toussaint, President, TWU,

Local 100 announced at a press conference that the TWU Executive Board voted to begin

a series of strikes if no agreement was reached first on two private bus lines operated by


4/13

4

companies which received operating support from the City of New York, whose

employees were not subject to the Taylor Law, commencing Monday, December 19, and

then extended to MTA Bus Company and NYC Transit subway and bus operations on

Tuesday, December 20.

At approximately 3:00 a.m. December 20, 2005, Roger Toussaint and members of

the TWU, Local 100 Executive Board publicly announced that the Executive Board was

calling a system-wide strike against NYC Transit.

As a result, the overwhelming majority of the hourly workforce began to walk off

the job and to shut down all subway and bus service operated by NYC Transit. This

included the membership of the ATUs. Most employees failed and refused to report for

work on December 20, 21, and 22, 2005. Although approximately 2,500 employees

reported to work during the strike, their numbers were insufficient to allow subway and

bus service provided by NYC Transit to resume; similarly, maintenance, cleaning,

security, customer service and infrastructure work provided by the hourly workforce,

with minor exceptions, ceased.


5/13

5

Efforts to Terminate the Strike

On December 11, 2005, the State Attorney General was notified of the strike

threats made against the NYC Transit in accordance with Section 211 of the Civil Service

Law. On December 12, 2005, an application was made to the Supreme Court of the State

of New York, County of Kings, for a preliminary injunction to restrain and enjoin TWU,

and its international, officers and members from violating Section 210 of the Civil

Service Law.

On December 13, 2005, a preliminary injunction was issued by the Honorable

Theodore J. Jones, enjoining the TWU, its officers, directors, executive board members,

members, employees, agents and representatives of these entities from violating Section

210 of the Civil Service Law by conducting, engaging or participating in, through any

manner or any means, a strike, work stoppage, sick-out, slowdown, or any other

concerted activity with the intent of interrupting the normal and regular operations of

NYC Transit. On December 15, 2005, a similar preliminary injunction was sought and

granted against the ATUs.

These preliminary injunctions further enjoined the three unions and their

internationals, officers, directors and executive board members from violating Section

210 of the Civil Service Law by causing, instigating, or inciting a strike, work stoppage,

sick-out, or slowdown against NYC Transit.


6/13

6

In accord with the Judges Orders, NYC Transit mailed out copies of the

injunction by first class mail with a certificate of mailing to all hourly employees and to

the clerical employees represented by TWU; in total over 36,500 employees were mailed

copies of the injunction. Furthermore, the officers, directors, and executive board

members of TWU and the ATUs were directed to forthwith notify all of their members of

their obligation not to strike in accord with the directives of the preliminary injunctions.

This notice was to be by ordinary mail and e-mail, wherever feasible, and by placing such

notification on the websites of all three unions and their internationals.

As soon as the strike was announced, on or about 3:00 a.m. on December 20,

2005, arrangements were made to appear in court to address the issue of contempt. An

order to show cause was signed by the Honorable Theodore T. Jones at approximately

6:00 a.m. on December 20, 2005, and later that day, Judge Jones found TWU to be in

contempt of his earlier order and imposed a coercive fine of $1 million for each day of

the strike commencing December 20, 2005 in an effort to compel compliance with the

Courts order.

On December 21, 2005, the Honorable Theodore T. Jones similarly held the

ATUs in contempt and imposed the following fines for each day of the strike

commencing December 20, 2005:

ATU, Division 726 $50,000 per day

ATU, Division 1056 $75,000 per day


7/13

7

The Unions have appealed these findings of contempt to the Appellate Division,

Second Department. No date has been scheduled for argument of the appeals at this time.

Proceedings before the Court related to the personal liability of the Officers of the

three local unions for criminal contempt were scheduled for December 22, 2005, but have

been adjourned and are currently re-scheduled for March 3, 2006.

During the strike, the State of New York Public Employment Relations Board

(PERB) assigned a team of mediators who met with representatives of the parties and

made several recommendations concerning the basic parameters for a new collective

bargaining agreement. Based upon the mediators recommendations, TWU instructed its

members to return to work on or about 3:00 p.m., December 22, 2005; TWU, Local 100

President Roger Toussaint publicly announced that employees should report for their next

scheduled shift. The ATUs almost immediately thereafter made similar statements to

their memberships.

In addition, a motion is being brought before Judge Jones seeking forfeiture of the dues deductionprivileges of the TWU and the ATUs.


8/13

8

Employees Responsible for the Strike

It is not possible to list all those public employees responsible for causing,

instigating, or encouraging the strike. However, the following top leaders of each of the

three local unions are responsible for approving and calling for a strike by their members:

Roger Toussaint, President, TWU, Local 100

Ed Watt, Secretary-Treasurer, TWU, Local 100

Darlyne Lawson, Recording Secretary, TWU, Local 100

Angelo Tanzi, President, ATU, Division 726

Vincent Serapiglia, Vice President, ATU, Division 726

Daniel Cassella, Secretary-Treasurer, ATU, Division 726

Tom Carney, Recording Secretary, ATU, Division 726

Kenneth Broderick, President, ATU, Division 1056

Antoine Breaux, Vice President, ATU, Division 1056

Luis Alzate, Secretary-Treasurer, ATU, Division 1056

Ira Miller, Recording Secretary, ATU, Division 1056


9/13

9

The following TWU, Local 100 Executive Board members voted to go on strike

at the TWU Executive Board meeting held on December 20, 2005: *

Dennis H. Boyd Mitchell Holmes David M. Thrower

Kevin Cadigan Darlyne A. Lawson Marietta B. Thrower

Roslyn Carr John F. Mooney Anthony G. Vaglica

Ronald F. Carter Michael A. Morales Ricardo Victoria

Anita Clinton Harry Pauling Edward F. Watt

Mary Cooper George Perlstein Henry L. Williams, Jr.

Annette Cruz Normal Pou Neil P. Winberry

Gregory Davis Julio C. Rivera Agnes A. Woolford-Barrett

Eladio Diaz Carol M. Sarauw

Marty S. Goodman Kathryn F. Taylor-Davidson

Strike activity was also undertaken and encouraged by local shop stewards and

similar persons in leadership positions within each of the unions since picket lines and

pre-printed placards were set up and distributed at bus depots, shops, yards, terminals and

other NYC Transit work locations throughout the City of New York.

* This list of TWU, Local 100 Executive Board members who voted to go on strike was published in the January 2006 edition of the TWU monthly newsletter entitled Local100 Express.


10/13

10

Employee Sanctions

It has been determined that a strike occurred commencing December 20, 2005 and

continuing through December 22, 2005. The names of employees who engaged in the

one or more days of the strike, in violation of the Taylor Law (Civil Service Law, Section

210) have also been determined. Notice has been given to the employees who have

already been found to have committed such violation, and of their rights to object to such

determination. Should additional information come to light, further determinations will

be made and notice given.

The chief fiscal officer of the NYC Transit was notified to deduct, not earlier than

thirty nor later than ninety days following the date of such determination (i.e., January 27,

2006), from the compensation of each such public employee found to be in violation of

the Taylor Law, an amount equal to twice his/her daily rate of pay for each day or part

thereof that it was determined that he/she violated the Taylor Law. In computing such

deduction, credit is allowed for amounts already withheld from such employees

compensation on account of his/her absence from work or other withholding of services

on such day or days. Such deductions will begin in March and will continue over two or

more pay periods with approximately one-half of the penalty being deducted from each

pay period.

Any employee determined to have violated the Taylor Law will be given the

opportunity to object to such determination by filing with the Chief Executive Officer a

sworn affidavit supported by available documentary proof containing a short and plain


11/13

11

statement of the facts upon which he/she relies to show that such determination is

incorrect. If it is determined that the affidavit and supporting proof establish that the

employee did not violate the Taylor Law, the objection will be sustained. If it is

determined that the affidavit and supporting proof fails to establish that the employee did

not violate the Taylor Law, the objection will be dismissed and the employee notified

accordingly. If it is determined that the affidavit and supporting proof raises a question

of fact which, if resolved in favor of the employee, would establish that the employee did

not violate the Taylor Law, a hearing officer will be appointed to determine, after a

hearing, whether in fact the employee violated the Taylor Law. The employee shall bear

the burden of proof at the hearing. If the hearing officer determines that the employee

failed to establish that he/she did not violate the Taylor Law, the employee will be so

notified. If an employees objection is sustained or the hearing officer determines, based

on a preponderance of the evidence, that such employee did not violate the Taylor Law,

all further deductions will cease and any deductions previously made pursuant to the

Taylor Law will be refunded.


12/13

12

Current Status of Negotiations

On December 27, 2005, NYC Transit and TWU entered into a Memorandum of

Understanding that was subject to ratification by: 1) the TWUs Executive Board, 2)

members of the TWU, and 3) the NYC Transit Board. The TWUs Executive Board

approved the MOU and authorized its submission to the membership for ratification. On

January 20, 2006, the TWU announced that the membership had voted against ratification

of the tentative agreement.

On December 28, 2005, NYC Transit entered into a Memorandum of

Understanding with the ATUs which were subject to ratification by the membership and

the NYC Transit Board. The membership of ATU, Division 726 ratified the new

agreement on February 10, 2006. On February 16, 2006, the membership of ATU,

Division 1056 ratified the new agreement.

On January 20, 2006 NYC Transit notified TWU, Local 100 that it would petition

PERB the following week to begin the process of interest arbitration and seek the

appointment of an arbitration panel. In addition, NYC Transit invited TWU, Local 100

to meet to discuss the terms of an agreement, if it is so wished. On January 25, 2006,

NYC Transit submitted a Petition for Interest Arbitration with PERB, seeking to begin


13/13

13

the process of interest arbitration with TWU and Transport Workers Union of America,

AFL-CIO, on February 6, 2006, the parties appointed their respective members to the

arbitration panel.

Dated: February 17, 2006

______s/_____________________________

Peter S. KalikowChairman

______s/______________________________

Katherine N. LappExecutive Director

nyct strike report

Documents