Transit Strike

The NY Sun has an editorial about the possible transit strike in New York City. The editorial claims that train operators in New York start at 52,000+, double the starting salary of NYPD officers. The question is, given the high salary, why a strike?

Public sector unionism has come under increasing fire from the Manhattan Institute (see Steve Malanga's excellent article, the Conspiracy Against the Taxpayers in the current issue of City Journal).

Public sector unionism has questionable justification. Unlike private sector workers, public sector workers do not bargain at arm's length with their employers. From the early days of public sector unionism, labor scholars were concerned that inelasticity of demand for public services would give excessive leverage to public unions. Hence, while many states and the federal government permit organization, they limit the right to strike. However, the labor literature did not anticipate the public choice effects of public sector unions. Public sector unions do not bargain at arm's length with their employer because they can contribute significantly to the removal of their employer (elected officials). Thus, there is unequal power between public sector employees, who have more power, and elected officials, who increasingly become their marionettes.

My own interest in free market ideas begain when I was 12 years old in 1966 and the Transit Workers Union went on strike against Mayor John Lindsay. It seemed evident to me that something was wrong with a philosophy which would allow a group of employees the power to stick up the city. Nearly four decades later, the city still seems to lack the self-confidence to take full measures against the illegal strike and replace the strikers. Yet many New Yorkers feel that is what should be done.