TWU Local 100 Regains Dues Check-Off Status

The 2005 Transit Strike hurt many people from the riders down to the actual union who represented the workers who went on strike. Due to their strike, TWU Local 100 was hit with serious penalties including losing their “dues check-off” status. This status enabled them to automatically collect union dues from members’ paychecks. The union tried to get this status re-enabled last year but their request was denied. William Neuman of the New York Times has more on this victory for TWU Local 100 in his report:

A Brooklyn judge on Monday lifted the last remaining penalty against the transit workers union for its 2005 strike, saying that the union could once again begin collecting dues directly from members’ paychecks.

Transport Workers Union Local 100 had lost what is known as dues check-off in the aftermath of the strike, which violated the state’s Taylor Law barring strikes by public sector unions.

The union was also fined $2.5 million.

The dues check-off was suspended in June 2007. As a result the union’s revenues dropped significantly, with the shortfall in collections likely totaling millions of dollars.

Many members signed up to have their dues deducted automatically from their bank accounts. But some members stopped paying dues altogether while others paid only some of their dues.

The union represents subway and bus workers and has about 38,000 members.

Click here for the complete report.

I’m sure Roger Toussaint is thrilled with this victory. I know how hard it was for them to collect dues as many employees I knew did not keep up with paying them.

xoxo Transit Blogger

If you enjoyed this post, please consider to leave a comment or subscribe to the feed and get future articles delivered to your feed reader.


Way to go Roger….way to go.I don’t think you are aware what you did;you just put the almighty dollar ahead of the union and made what we did a waste of time in 2005.In “promising” that we as a union will never strike again,not only killed our right to free speech,expression and our right to strike whether its legal or not,you also made yourself a laughing stock to every local 100 member,the riding public will look at us like we are fools,more fodder from scribes like the NY Post and every union hall out there will look at you like a total idiot by caving in to the pressure from Bloomberg.Now I never liked you as our Union Czar,but I felt you were a maverick in not bowing down to the pressure.Now that you bowed down and kissed and sucked Bloombergs toes,you just cost yourself my vote for your next election.Happy Trails.

Why would this rogue agency ever bargain in good faith now? The only leverage a union has especially against a huge company like the MTA is the threat to strike. The MTA has shown over the last 15 years that they are unwilling to negotiate in good faith even when times are very good like in 2005 when they had a 1.2 billion dollar surplus but said they had zero money for their employee’s.

All of the other unions have been able to get fair contracts of 4% a year minimum during this financial crisis but will the blu collar workers of the TA who move over 7 million people safely a day get that much. I highly doubt if they get any raise. Why are the union members of the TA treated like second class citizens compared to Cops, firemen, sanitation, DC37, teachers?

Hello Crazy Train & Mr. Eric,

Thank you for both sharing your views. I feel the two of you make excellent points. I do not recall when the next election is but I wonder if Roger will get re-elected after this. I will ask family & friends if they plan on voting for him the next go around.

On paper I can understand why he made the promise as the strike almost bankrupted their operations. However I can also completely understand why employees would feel betrayed.

Yes, the strike was illegal but you effectively showed that without your contributions, this city can’t function as it was meant to. In those regards I feel they made a mistake in promising not to strike. Sometimes you have to bite the bullet & be willing to go down for what you believe in. At one time from many accounts, Roger seemed to be someone who would do that but not anymore.

Hopefully the members of TWU Local 100 get a fair deal although judging on past history, I doubt it. I guess bringing the majority of employees to work is not enough to justify the importance of these workers.

Eric…..this time around,I’m looking at addition by subtraction.The addition of Sander and Patterson,and the subtraction of Kallikow and Pataki is an excellent start.Now we have a spiraling economy and the MTA says they are under a huge debt,but I think all 3 will put their heads together and get the job done.If sanitation,firefighters and police (albiet they are city and we are state) are that vital to the city,we are equally valuable in our own way,we move New York and that was proven in 2005.

Crazy Train we are not technically a state agency and we are not a city agency at all even though we pay into NYCERS. This is the biggest problem of why we get zero respect because nobody “claims” us. If we are so important that we are not allowed to strike by the taylor laws then we should be important enough to have the same 20 and out pension as NYPD, FDNY, Sanitation, and Corrections.

I will be shocked if we don’t take at least one zero in this next contract. We are already the only major union to have taken any zero’s in the last 15 years.

Knowing a militarian dictator like Toussaint,anything is possible and yet whatever benefits him and to hell with us is all that really matters to him.He says he was a martyr for going to jail….but after cowering with his tail between his knees and neutering the union members in promising never to strike sends a clear message…his bark is worse than his bite and not that I had much of it for him,but he lost my respect totally.Also as one who walked the cold December line and paid my penalty proudly,he made all 38,000 of us look like fools in the public eye,and makes our strike look insignificant.The only person I feel bad for is Matthew Long,because if Toussaint never called this strike,he wouldn’t have endured unnecessary injuries that ruined his life.

I don’t recall the Matthew Long story. What happened?

That was the firefighter that was riding his bike to work and got hit by a bus rented by a company to transport its workers to and from work.

Matthew Long was the firefighter that rode his bike to work in the city and skidded under a rented bus.He broke his pelvis amongst other internal injuries.He threatened to sue the TWU 100,the members,and Toussaint himself.The suit was thrown out the window.He is a walking miracle,I think he raced in this years marathon too.

Thank you to the both of you for answering my question.

I always say you need to use the nuclear option in terms of striking every 15 to 20 year,only so long you can threaten a strike and not do it,before peopleMTA have that he won’t do it mentality.

This wouldn’t stike in the future,which was so watered down in the wording means nothing,wans’t that what the taylor law was for?

The City knows what kind of power the union has in being able to shut down one of the largest city in the world,certainly the most importnat in terms of finance.
I work in NYC and people can talk about people walking over the bridge and all that,but NYC was shut down for 3 days,I saw on 2 different occasions people in lines 5 blocks long trying to get a bus crying,commutes that toke 40 minutes now toke 4 hours for many people.

If you got that kind of power as union you cna;t be afraid to use it.Now I am reading the MTA/city wants to negotiate the contract and get it done early..I have never once ever heard the MTA ever say that,that tells you the dividends a strike can pay for years to come.

[…] Mealy was under considerable pressure to support the mayor and the speaker, including from the TWU, of which she is a member. The union reportedly had been motivated by its desire to get its dues check-off privileges restored. (It was). […]

MTA may fight panel’s hefty pay hikes for transit workers
By Pete Donohue
Saturday, August 15th 2009

The MTA is considering challenging an arbitration panel’s decision to grant transit workers generous wage hikes, officials said Friday.
A state judge can throw out a contract after concluding arbitrators didn’t properly apply the criteria mandated by the legislation, including an employer’s ability to pay wages and benefits.

The pact grants transit workers staggered annual raises totaling 4%, 4% and 3.5% over the three-year contract.
MTA officials said it would increase costs by $350 million.

The major provisions in the contract crafted by the arbitrators mirror the terms supported last year by MTA CEO Elliot Sander and NYC Transit President Howard Roberts before direct talks with union boss Roger Toussaint ended and the two sides turned to arbitration to finalize a deal. Sander resigned in May.

The MTA under acting CEO Helena Williams tried unsuccessfully to steer the panel away from the framework supported by Sander and Roberts, concluding it spelled a bad financial deal for the authority, even if it included removing conductors from some subway lines.

A union spokesman said the MTA’s legal review is “another attempt by the MTA to mask its incompetence.”

Leave a comment