Skip to main content

While all attention in the Bay Area has been focused on the BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit) strike, which brought massive traffic jams to Bay Area freeways this morning, thousands of Oakland City workers are out on a one-day "shot-across-the-bow" work stoppage.

Their issues are similar to BART workers and should be familar to almost everyone with a job these days: takebacks and pay cuts imposed in the Great Recession coupled with inflation have caused City workers to have an effective loss of 25% of their wage purchasing power since 2008. They're not going to stand for it any more. As the chants have been ringing out

Enough is Enough!

But City Management doesn't think enough is nearly enough. They want to continue imposing takebacks on health benefits and pensions while offering nothing more than cost of living increases. All the while insisting that they need to train and hire large numbers of new Oakland Police who make, on average (with overtime and benefits), at least three times what other city employees make while costing the City of Oakland millions in civil rights lawsuit settlements, far more per capita than any other major city in California.

Community organizations have come out today in support of City workers: The Justice 4 Alan Blueford Coalition, ACCE, Iraq Veterans Against the War, Fight for $15 (Living Wage), Occupiers and likely members of other groups have all been walking the picket lines at times with union members from SEIU Local 1021 and IFPTE Local 21 at various locations around the city.

Here's some select tweet-pictures from today's activities.



The front door of Oakland City Hall, facing Oscar Grant Plaza

 

 

 


Workers and activists took over 14th & Broadway,
downtown Oakland's main intersection


 

 

 


Deanna Santana is Oakland's City Manager,
 who has stonewalled negotiations for months.


 

 

 


Noon rally at Oscar Grant Plaza amphitheater in front of City Hall






The banner moves in mysterious ways...

Originally posted to jpmassar on Mon Jul 01, 2013 at 02:34 PM PDT.

Also republished by Occupy Wall Street, Hellraisers Journal, In Support of Labor and Unions, and Anti-Capitalist Chat.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Ay Dios Mio (4+ / 0-)

    I gotta go through Oakland tomorrow. I sure these strikes are over.

    “Wall Street had been doing business with pieces of paper; and now someone asked for a dollar, and it was discovered that the dollar had been mislaid.” ― Upton Sinclair

    by gjohnsit on Mon Jul 01, 2013 at 02:49:28 PM PDT

  •  That's a very good show of solidarity. Eventually (4+ / 0-)

    people will understand that the whole system needs to come to a halt, and that means indefinite widespread work stoppages, slowdowns, etc., and coordination with all activist groups.

    The ruling class will not be impressed with one-day actions. I know it is good, this first step, but I'm looking forward to the final awakening when people realize there needs to be a total shutdown of the system--so it can be fixed.

    •  Yep! Shut down the whole system... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jpmassar

      ...for a long time, or forever and ever.  Think up something better!  Deanna Fascianna Santini has no idea what I'm talking about.  She only knows she doesn't like it!!!

      Bradley Manning and Julian Assange are being persecuted for telling the truth. Paul Craig Roberts

      by dharmasyd on Mon Jul 01, 2013 at 09:41:38 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Thanks for Sharing (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jpmassar

    inspiring. I hope the city capitulates in the negotiations.

  •  Who is hurt? (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    dharmasyd, gardnerhill, Sparhawk

    It seems like this work stoppage mostly hurt the people who couldn't afford to be hurt. The Banksters and their pals don't ride public transit. Public service is a personal commitment that nobody should take lightly.

    •  BART is mostly used by middle class folks (4+ / 0-)

      the last time I saw any numbers. And yes, some people were inconvenienced. If we fail to act because it may inconvenience people then no one will ever do anything.

      If debt were a moral issue then, lacking morals, corporations could never be in debt.

      by AoT on Mon Jul 01, 2013 at 05:39:58 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  BART and Oakland workers... (0+ / 1-)
        Recommended by:
        Hidden by:
        radical simplicity

        ...can always quit and get a better job if they are so underpaid.

        (-5.50,-6.67): Left Libertarian
        Leadership doesn't mean taking a straw poll and then just throwing up your hands. -Jyrinx

        by Sparhawk on Mon Jul 01, 2013 at 10:56:33 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  There is always (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          AoT, jpmassar, radical simplicity

          some FUCKING ASSHOLE who says get another job if you don't like it. You are not a left libertarian, you are a teatard. Why don't you like people to make a living wage? Did you even bother to read the article? Probably not, learn what is to be a liberal and take your Ayn Rand delusions elsewhere.

          Hillary Clinton 2016

          by artr2 on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 01:27:05 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  And you can always provide that for them. (0+ / 0-)
        •  Or they can go on strike and win (3+ / 0-)

          a wage increase. You know, like they're doing.

          If debt were a moral issue then, lacking morals, corporations could never be in debt.

          by AoT on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 09:14:36 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Yeah (0+ / 0-)

            Paid for mostly by the poor and middle class in their respective cities, people who can't go on strike and are dependent on whatever the market offers for wages and benefits.

            (-5.50,-6.67): Left Libertarian
            Leadership doesn't mean taking a straw poll and then just throwing up your hands. -Jyrinx

            by Sparhawk on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 09:29:14 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Just because they don't have a union (3+ / 0-)

              yet doesn't mean other people can't have unions. Nor does it mean they can't go on strike. You say that like there's no way to form unions in the private sector.

              And yes, California has a fairly regressive tax code because the Neoliberals started their anti-tax jihad here and passed prop 13 so the state is stuck with a shitty tax situation that benefits the rich. And BART continues to raise fares even when it doesn't pay workers more.

              If debt were a moral issue then, lacking morals, corporations could never be in debt.

              by AoT on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 09:43:38 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  It doesn't matter (0+ / 0-)

                Public unions are never justified, because there's never a justification for paying public employees more than similar private employees.

                If you had a situation where the private sector was 100% unionized, you still wouldn't need public unions because public employees would just jump ship to the superior private sector. The market would force increased public salaries.

                Besides, if it's so easy to set up high paying private union jobs why hasn't it already been done?

                In the current state of affairs, in any case, there are basically no private unions and few well paying opportunities for people with BART worker skill sets, so it's basically a lottery for who can get a BART job, with the losers subsidizing the winners by paying higher taxes or rider fares.

                (-5.50,-6.67): Left Libertarian
                Leadership doesn't mean taking a straw poll and then just throwing up your hands. -Jyrinx

                by Sparhawk on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 09:55:23 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Sigh, you really don't (0+ / 0-)

                  acknowledge reality do you?

                  Besides, if it's so easy to set up high paying private union jobs why hasn't it already been done?
                  I know you aren't an idiot so I'm going to assume that you are purposely ignoring the large number of private sector union jobs that exist and, even more so, the history of unions and how they have been undermined through neoliberalism.

                  If debt were a moral issue then, lacking morals, corporations could never be in debt.

                  by AoT on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 10:38:08 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Re (0+ / 0-)

                    Again, irrelevant.

                    The only question before us is: do you believe there is a justification for paying public workers more than their qualifications in the private sector would otherwise get them? And taking the extra to cover it out of private salaries?

                    That's basically the core issue here. Even if all your theories about neoliberalism and other nefarious activities were true, it still wouldn't be a reason to pay public workers more than equivalent private ones. If public workers want to be paid more, they need to work to drive up private salaries.

                    (-5.50,-6.67): Left Libertarian
                    Leadership doesn't mean taking a straw poll and then just throwing up your hands. -Jyrinx

                    by Sparhawk on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 11:51:08 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  If it's irrelevant then why did you bring it up? (2+ / 0-)

                      It obviously isn't irrelevant.

                      And strong unions are the best way to bring up wages across the board, so I support strong unions. Higher public salaries will increase private sector salaries and put money into the economy.

                      If debt were a moral issue then, lacking morals, corporations could never be in debt.

                      by AoT on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 12:04:13 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Re (0+ / 0-)
                        Higher public salaries will increase private sector salaries and put money into the economy
                        They won't. They can't. If your economic views are based on this fiction, it's hard for us to have a conversation.

                        (-5.50,-6.67): Left Libertarian
                        Leadership doesn't mean taking a straw poll and then just throwing up your hands. -Jyrinx

                        by Sparhawk on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 07:58:54 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

              •  Actually California has one of the most (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                AoT, jpmassar

                progressive tax policies of the states.

                Same income tax rate for capital gains and dividends as ordinary income and a top tax rate of 13.3%.  Try to find another state that comes close to that.

                Sales tax does not apply to food purchased as groceries nor to rent, nor public transit.  There is even a renters tax credit.

                Keep in mind that California has a high concentration of poor people - so it has higher demands for public social spending and raising tax revenues.  While California has about 10% of the US population, it has about 35% of the people living below the Federal poverty level.

                The most important way to protect the environment is not to have more than one child.

                by nextstep on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 12:20:22 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  In regards to property taxes (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  jpmassar

                  was more what I was thinking. The corporation are screwing the state out of tons of money with that one. It should have been reformed already.

                  There is even a renters tax credit.
                  I obviously haven't been paying enough attention when I do my taxes.

                  If debt were a moral issue then, lacking morals, corporations could never be in debt.

                  by AoT on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 12:25:44 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

          •  Wait! Stop the race to the bottom? (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            AoT

            Now that's just crazy talk. [/snark]

            •  All economic improvement... (0+ / 0-)

              ...must start with the private sector. If private sector salaries rise, public ones will rise also. Using politics to raise public sector salaries without organic private sector increases to match just creates a set of winners (public) and losers (private) artificially.

              (-5.50,-6.67): Left Libertarian
              Leadership doesn't mean taking a straw poll and then just throwing up your hands. -Jyrinx

              by Sparhawk on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 06:20:47 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Must? (0+ / 0-)
                must start with the private sector
                Please provide supporting evidence for this extraordinary claim.
                •  It's basic economics (0+ / 0-)

                  (-5.50,-6.67): Left Libertarian
                  Leadership doesn't mean taking a straw poll and then just throwing up your hands. -Jyrinx

                  by Sparhawk on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 07:19:40 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  No. Supply and demand is basic economics (0+ / 0-)

                    The claim that the public sector can't act first is a right wing talking point.

                    Which studies that back up your claim?

                    •  The private sector pays... (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      soros

                      ...for the public sector all the time 100% of the cost.

                      Look at Detroit as an example of a place with a 'strong' public sector and weak private sector.

                      All income to a city or state comes from private activity. Except in very few cases, all income comes from private economic activity, usually sales of exportable goods and services. You can have all the government you want, but when the local factory packs up and leaves town, you are screwed.

                      (-5.50,-6.67): Left Libertarian
                      Leadership doesn't mean taking a straw poll and then just throwing up your hands. -Jyrinx

                      by Sparhawk on Wed Jul 03, 2013 at 08:59:03 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  The private sector pays 9% of the federal revenues (0+ / 0-)

                        Which is down from 26% in the booming 1950s.

                        The Office of Management and Budget's data show the exact opposite of your claim. Huffpo put it in chart form, for the numerically challenged

                        40% is in the form of income taxes paid by the public, and another 35% are the payroll taxes paid by the public.

                        Both public and private sectors provide economic activity. The payee who pays payroll and income taxes can be employed by either public or private sector. School teachers, firefighters, public works employes, town clerks, mayors, military service members, and so on all pay income and payroll taxes. All of those income taxes are being paid entirely due to public sector spending.  Even those living entirely on unemployment benefits are paying income tax on those benefits.

                        So 75% of federal revenues come from the people who are getting paid, regardless of who pays them.

                        Parroting right wing talking points is different from providing citations. Please provide citations for your claims.

                        •  Re (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          soros
                          40% is in the form of income taxes paid by the public, and another 35% are the payroll taxes paid by the public.
                          All of this is paid for by corporations and similar private economic activity. No corporations: no income tax, no payroll tax, nothing. If your local factory leaves town, all of these revenue sources vanish. Regardless of who actually writes the check, the ultimate source of all of these funds is private economic activity. Public activity is supported from private activity, which pays all the bills all the time.

                          (-5.50,-6.67): Left Libertarian
                          Leadership doesn't mean taking a straw poll and then just throwing up your hands. -Jyrinx

                          by Sparhawk on Wed Jul 03, 2013 at 09:29:15 AM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  What an enlightening citation (0+ / 0-)

                            Still refusing to provide any data to back up your claims. I don't blame you, since actually linking to your sources would get you bounced.

                            It's utterly ludicrous to imply that the private sector is the only source of income in a community.  Do you really expect anyone to believe that if a factory leaves town, the town then magically has no firefighters, teachers, police, town clerks, etc.? Really? They all just "poof!" disappear?

                            Since literally everyone in the country lives in a community that has lost private employers over the years, you'll have a hard time convincing them that their towns completely folded up and disappeared in the aftermath.

                          •  Re (0+ / 0-)
                            It's utterly ludicrous to imply that the private sector is the only source of income in a community.  Do you really expect anyone to believe that if a factory leaves town, the town then magically has no firefighters, teachers, police, town clerks, etc.? Really? They all just "poof!" disappear?
                            Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying. With no private sources of income your town dries up and blows away.
                            Since literally everyone in the country lives in a community that has lost private employers over the years, you'll have a hard time convincing them that their towns completely folded up and disappeared in the aftermath.
                            Yeah, because nearly all towns and cities have more than one private employer. But the fewer private jobs there are, the harder it is to maintain those services, until they all vanish.

                            It is impossible to have a town with only police, fire, health care, etc and no export industries. How do you propose to do it? Tell me how the town buys toilet paper from the outside world...?

                            (-5.50,-6.67): Left Libertarian
                            Leadership doesn't mean taking a straw poll and then just throwing up your hands. -Jyrinx

                            by Sparhawk on Wed Jul 03, 2013 at 06:37:47 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Links? (0+ / 0-)

                            You're still missing citations.

                            In the mean time, this discussion isn't about whether or not there should be any private sector, it's about your claim that the public sector CANNOT act before the private sector.

                            You have still failed to provide any links in support thereof.

                            I've provided data from the OMB that shows your "100%" claim to be completely false. Here's a link showing that government spending in the Great Depression got the economy moving again.

                            Total expenditures on WPA projects through June 1941, totaled approximately $11.4 billion. Over $4 billion was spent on highway, road, and street projects; more than $1 billion on public buildings, including the iconic Dock Street Theater in Charleston, the Griffith Observatory in Los Angeles, and the Timberline Lodge on Oregon's Mt. Hood.
                            And
                            The Public Works Administration (PWA), part of the New Deal of 1933, was a large-scale public works construction agency in the United States headed by Secretary of the Interior Harold L. Ickes. It was created by the National Industrial Recovery Act in June 1933 in response to the Great Depression. It built large-scale public works such as dams, bridges, hospitals, and schools. Its goals were to spend $3.3 billion in the first year, and $6 billion in all, to provide employment, stabilize purchasing power, and help revive the economy.
                            There were also the Social Security Act, the institution of Unemployment insurance, the National Labor Relations Act, and the Fair Labor Standards Act, plus the creation of the Resettlement Administration (RA), the Rural Electrification Administration (REA), rural welfare projects sponsored by the WPA, National Youth Administration (NYA), Forest Service and Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC), Tennessee Valley Authority, Agricultural Adjustment Administration (AAA), National Recovery Administration, and so on. In addition, there were a number of laws passed to rein in the financial industry's excesses, and end private wealth hoarding.

                            Most of the funding came from the government printing money, and using it to pay people. Those people then bought toilet paper, among other things, with that money. Ironically, the businesses that provided the toilet paper and other things couldn't tell the difference between the money from the government programs and the money from private employers, and gladly accepted both forms.

                            Once again, I'd like to see links to any proof of any kind that any of your claims in the thread could hold any weight whatsoever.

                            Alas, since we both know you can only find such "proof" at right wing think tanks, we also both know you can't post the links, since it'll result in instant application of the ban hammer. You've been having too much fun promoting this moronic winger tripe here in the great orange den of lefties to let yourself be banned so easily.

    •  Flying Spaghetti monster I'm sick of this argument (3+ / 0-)

      EVERY SINGLE TIME a work stoppage or strike is suggested or done someone comes along and speaks of the poor who will suffer.

      The Loyalists were probably making the same damned argument back in 1776.

      No, the 1% are not going to suffer. No, the 1% are never going to suffer unless we go to a French terror.  The best we can do is create enough disturbance so that politically the wealth that has been transferred to the 1% will start getting transferred the other way.  That will, in the long run, do far more for the poorest than any small disturbance now.

    •  That's what TPTB want you to believe... (3+ / 0-)

      ...Demonize labor!  Shut up!  Look out only for your short term personal needs!  They have been quite successful at persuading the mass populance of thinking this way...to the peril of the very people who are hurt.

      It is essential to rebuild the labor movement, collective bargaining, solidarity, and massive action.

      Bradley Manning and Julian Assange are being persecuted for telling the truth. Paul Craig Roberts

      by dharmasyd on Mon Jul 01, 2013 at 09:46:42 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Yeah. And that bus boycott in the south (1+ / 0-)

      mostly hurt people who couldn't afford to be hurt. They should never have done it. Maybe you should hop in your time machine and tell Rosa Parks to get to the back of the bus....

  •  I was wondering what it would take (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jpmassar, radical simplicity

    to start to move the masses...

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site