Quote:
Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos
I saw the guy from the city talking about how they can't allow the "rotating" thing or any action that would disrupt any service so they'll shut the whole thing down before they let it happen.
Would the union be compelled to give 72 hours notice before doing something like abandoning certain routes on a rotating basis, or is the 72 hours a blanket statement saying "in 72 hours we can do what we want" or would they have to specify what will happen like "routes 419, 21, 37 and 256 will not be running in 72 hours"?
I don't like the "game of chicken" (as they put it on CBC) going on here. If the union wants to do some rotating crap then that sucks, but the city shouldn't lock them out. I'd rather transit was running 75% of the time instead of 0% of the time.
|
But if you didn't know if your bus was going to arrive, isn't that almost the same thing as there being no buses available?
Are you going to wait at a bus stop if you don't know if the bus is going to come? If it means you may miss work, then you cannot take the chance. I'm sure most employers may understand if you are late a day or two, but if they don't know when/if you will be showing up for an extended number of days then they may want you to make alternative arrangements.
The only thing a rotating strike would do is allow the union workers to continue to get a partial paycheck and drag the strike out even longer.