So today is the second say of the transit strike in New York, which, according to my cousin Izzi, would be called the transport strike in London. Honestly I have not followed this story too closely, as of yet. Looking through the New York Times on the web just now, I read the second article about how New Yorkers are coping with the strike. Some are getting up at 2:30 AM to endure a clogged commute in cars so they can beat the 5:30 AM ban on cars with fewer than four passengers. Some are crowding onto LIRR trains to Penn Station. Many are walking in the brutal cold over the Brooklyn Bridge. That's what you see in the picture below.



Now, something I notice in this and another picture is people walking with bike helmets or with bikes. I also notice the cutie in the matching white hat and scarf. This is actually a very well-composed photo. She almost looks angelic, with the glowing light surrounding her and putting her into focus as those around her are blurry and obscured in darkness. Ok, getting a little carried away...

Ok, back to the subject. I wonder why these people are walking with bike helmets on. Could they be wearing them for extra insulation against the cold? If so, they are foolish, because the air vents are sure to admit enough frigidity to render the helmets ineffective in that capacity. My best guess is that they are walking with their bikes, but we just can't see the bikes because they are blocked by the corpora populi. Sorry, I made that Latin expression up. It probably means nothing.

So this raises the question: why are they walking with their bikes when they could be riding them? Again, their are several possibilities. I would guess that they are walking their bikes so as to not crash into the multitudes perambulating in their midst. Alternately, they may feel too cold when they are riding because of the wind. My guess is the former, so I want to publicly disparage these bicycle wimps for not taking the Brooklyn Bridge carway. If the traffic is as clogged as they say, and this is such a liminal moment, a time outside of time, surely such a rule as not biking on the roadway can be flaunted with impunity. Bikers! Here me! You are the vanguard! You ride the future! Take heed and take what is rightfully yours!

The thought of thousands of bikers gleefully riding between lanes of influid traffic, howling in a combination of joy and pain at the absurdity of the situation is enough to almost make me happy. But of course, any person with a brain would not feel happy that millions are stranded. Millions who do not have bikes, or, God forbid, don't want to ride theirs. I understand this. Biking is not for everyone, especially in subzero weather. This strike is a shame. A big shame.

Reading this one article, aware that I am lacking much of the basic background information to pass judgment, I am struck by Mayor Bloomberg's confrontational tone. He is calling the strikers "thugs," for example. Last night, as we wrapped up a dinner in which I used several recipes from the Jose Andres book, which I will discuss a bit more at length later, Gillian began a discussion with the other attendees that didn't seem to be making much progress. It seemed to be everyone against Gillian, and at first I was tempted to agree with everyone else, but I didn't want to gang up on her. The thing is, Gillian was speaking on a principle that the unions are always the victims and that they are the workers who make relatively little money but serve a vital function. She was saying that there is plenty of money in New York, and people shouldn't blame the unions for wanting to maintain their standard of living slightly higher than the working poor. Now, I don't know the facts in this case. I do know that a starting MTA operator in Los Angeles makes about $18/hour. So one can assume that in New York the pay is comparable. So this is decent pay for that type of work, driving people around. It's not going to make you rich, but it would work out to about $35,000/year, I think. Yeah, corporate lawyers make a lot more. Stock brokers make more. Doctors definitely make more. But starting teachers don't. Of course they should, but not all union members struggle. Registered nurses do pretty well for themselves, as they should, but they certainly could not be called working class, despite representation by the nurses association. Unionized dockworkers of the ILWU make a fortune, I think six digits, and perhaps they should. But the main reason they make so much is that they have skilled jobs that cannot be easily replaced. And they are a crucial link for millions of dollars of cargo every day.

So not all unions are protecting working people from dire poverty. Unions are self-serving and they try to get what they can from their employers. Generally I have no problem with this. God knows I am grateful to have the teachers union getting me a decent wage and excellent benefits, although I could stand to make a bit more. I do have problems with the teachers union as well. I don't appreciate how they protect mediocre teachers and cling to an arbitrary pay structure based solely on seniority and salary points, which are college credits that you earn beyond a bachelors. An amazingly effective and dedicated teacher who only has a bachelors degree could be earning almost $10,000 less than a lazy, ineffective teacher with the same number of years of service, because the indolent educator has paid some fly-by-night online university for bogus college credits. It's a scandal, and the union does nothing to change it.

In this case, therefore, I am reserving judgment. Bloomberg should quit the grandstanding and stop making people blame the transit workers for trying to get their piece of the pie. However, the workers had better be doing what they can to reach an agreement and get back to work, because they are not helping their case by making millions freeze their New York butts off, on the saddle or not.