If the railroad wants to lay off diesel crews anyway and not have enough workers, they have to pay the penalty. That was the railroad's choice when it decided to cut diesel crews.

Is it inefficient? Sure; employers' labor efficiency is not workers' concern. Their concern is keeping their jobs.

April 09, 2026 - 15:34 UTC

2
0
13
And that seems fair. If the company's sole interest is it's own profits, surely the worker's sole interest being their own profits is equally acceptable.
1
0
4
Except MTA isn't a for-profit company. It's funded by taxpayers.
1
0
2
The entire point of collective bargaining is for workers to extract as much value for their labor as they can without the employer deciding it's better to go out of business. Nobody bats an eye when employers work to maximize profits; when labor works to maximize wages people see it as an affront.
2
1
17
When the person footing the bill is the taxpayer of course people see it as an affront.

And also tons of people bat eyes when employers maximize profits.
0
0
1
I don't think "management works to maximize profits" is an accurate description of the behavior of the MTA.
0
0
3