Maybe You Assumed This Strike Thing Was Over?

Meanwhile, the MTA goes to great lengths to show the new transit worker contract was a good one, sitting down with the media to discuss the details:

The Metropolitan Transportation Authority laid out a detailed defense yesterday of the settlement it signed last week, arguing that an important concession made by the transit workers’ union — having all workers contribute to their health insurance premiums — is worth more than pension demands the authority abandoned.

In an unusual interview with several reporters at noon on New Year’s Day, the authority also announced that it would urge the state to revoke the union’s ability to collect dues automatically, through payroll deduction. The loss of the “dues check-off” — which comes on top of the $3 million in fines the union faces for contempt of court and the fines faced by most workers for engaging in the illegal three-day strike last month — could cripple the union.

The authority’s director of labor relations, Gary J. Dellaverson, said the strike failed to achieve gains for the union, an assertion the union vigorously disputes. “The contract is cheaper and better for the M.T.A. than at the time that the strike commenced,” he said.

The authority’s forceful posture, following weeks of animosity with the union, underscored how bitter relations between the two sides remain, despite the deal.

Good thing there was a gag order on the principals during the negotiations because now the MTA is going on the offensive against the Governor after he claimed the side pension deal was a big surprise:

Mr. Dellaverson, asked about the governor’s claim that he did not know about the side agreement, would say only: “Do I believe he was fully briefed on the costs associated with the collective-bargaining agreement? I believe the answer to that to be yes. Was he engaged in the process? I believe the answer to that to be yes.”

And what’s more, now we’re seeing brinksmanship with the issue of actually voting on the contract:

Complicating matters, a spokesman for the union, Local 100 of the Transport Workers Union, said yesterday that it would delay a contract-ratification vote by its 33,700 subway and bus workers until after the authority’s board voted. The union had planned to conduct its vote by mail early this month.

But Barry L. Feinstein, who represents Mr. Pataki on the authority’s board, said, “The board will not vote until the agreement is ratified by the Transport Workers Union, and that is historically, without exception, the way it’s been done.” If either the authority’s board or the union’s members reject the settlement, negotiations would be reopened and the union could strike again. The last time the union’s membership rejected a contract was in March 1992; the members did not strike and approved a slightly different version two months later.

Oh Lord . . .