MTA delayed LIRR contract settlement

MTA prolonged LIRR contract settlement

Commuters saying public unions should not be allowed to strike but should have to use binding arbitration are forgetting that the Long Island Rail Road unions went to an arbitration and called for a presidential emergency board twice and the Metropolitan Transportation Authority did not adopt the later board’s finding that the unions had made a fair contract proposal [“Union pressure vexes commuters,” Opinion, May 13]. They also don’t take into account that the MTA has prolonged settling the contract for over three years, which in effect is a free loan.

The top managers get yearly raises and there is never a time when they are working with an expired contract. Workers do not want to strike; they won’t get paid for the days they are on a picket line. Management will still get their $200,000-a-year salaries for their 9-to-5 days with weekends and holidays off, whether the trains run or not.

 — Rick Jordan, Levittown

The real issue is railroad employees should be governed by the Taylor Law, which prohibits strikes by public employees [“MTA changes focus in search of deal,” News, May 13]. This problem can be traced to the 1966 acquisition of the LIRR from the Pennsylvania Railroad.

The MTA should have insisted that all LIRR employees join a new union and in effect be employees of the state. That was doable because there were no other suitors for the LIRR at the time.

 — Robert Palermo, Nesconset

I am all for unions and benefits. But there comes a point where what’s fair is right. For the job concessions that are trying to be addressed — 18 hours of consecutive overtime and double pay to operate two different types of engines etc. — where is this leading to? Times have changed and all workers have had to adjust to changes in their contracts.

I don’t understand how the unions feel they should hold the MTA hostage to uphold these outdated concessions. Shame on them.

 — Nancy deGruchy, East Meadow