Is NYC Transit Strike Contract a Setback? Was Hillary "neutral" on strike?

I'd appreciate it if someone more familiar with these issues than I am could comment on the accuracy of this story.

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2005/dec2005/tran-d29.shtml

Tentative contract a setback for New York City transit workers
By Bill Van Auken
29 December 2005

<edit>

The package includes significant concessions by the union that will be used to further erode workers’ living standards and extract even greater takeaways from other sections of the workforce in both the public and private sectors. It failed to gain amnesty for strikers, who were left open to punishing financial penalties under New York State’s anti-labor Taylor Law. They now face a loss of two days pay for every day on strike. Other penalties sought by the city, including a $1 million-a-day fine against the union for every day of the walkout, are to be finalized by a state Supreme Court judge next month.

Both New York State’s Republican Governor George Pataki and the city’s billionaire Republican Mayor Michael Bloomberg are insisting that there be no waiving of these penalties and fines.

<edit>

The details of the settlement—as far as they have been made public—include a 37-month package that includes raises of 3, 4 and 3.5 percent. The extra month added onto the agreement was designed to shift the next contract’s expiration to after the holiday season. This is a significant tactical concession by the union, which will weaken the transit workers’ position when another confrontation develops three years from now. The Christmas-week deadline was lost as part of the betrayal of the 11-day strike in 1980, and it took the union a decade to win it back, only to have it surrendered again in the current agreement.

While the MTA was compelled to drop its attacks on workers’ pensions—initially a demand to raise the minimum retirement age for new-hires from 55 to 62 and require 30 instead of 25 years of service—it won a significant giveback on health benefits. For the first time, workers will be compelled to pay a premium equal to 1.5 percent of their pay. This giveback, which comes on top of existing co-pays, reportedly also includes a provision that would require the workers to contribute even more if health care costs rise faster than projected.

<edit>

Taken together with the Taylor Law penalties and the loss of pay for the days on strike—which together will total $1,500 for many transit employees—the health care giveback makes it unlikely that this contract will even keep up with the current rate of inflation.

<edit>

As for the Democrats, they lined up uncritically behind the strikebreaking efforts of Bloomberg, Pataki and the courts. State Attorney General Elliot Spitzer, the front-runner for the Democratic gubernatorial nomination in 2006, boasted of seeking the stiffest fines possible against Local 100 and its members, and was prepared to seek jail sentences. Senator Hillary Clinton declared herself “neutral” in the confrontation, while reaffirming her support for the Taylor Law.

more...

neither for or against, yadda, yadda, what good are you?

pension reqires no contribution from employees, health insurance not free but requires employee contribution. it sounds reasonable to me

Eligible for pension at 55 - how many years do you think they should have to work until they're eligible? These are municipal workers like cops and firemen. Do you want 65-year-olds driving your train?

The New York Times



And from blogger Steve Gillard
http://stevegilliard.blogspot.com/