Strike! Or the Fine Art of Shooting Oneself in the Foot

"There was no one else but Tariq who did almost everything except that we all joined him and came along to sing national anthem. Everyone was left with no choice but to follow his leadership. It became scary for leaders that if they do not follow they will be left alone. I guess one of the most largest strike in this town is coming soon. The one you have seen it was the preview."
                     Anonymous Tariq Mehmood Disciple

I received this the day after the June 28th "strike." That is to say that Tariq Mehmood was already planning the August 2nd strike before the last one. Just like he'd planned the last one before the one before; or, was it before the one before that?

And, his followers and many admirers like medallion holder Brad Newsham are enthused about this coming strike. They talk about "keeping the momentum going" like it's a football game. They seem to think that if they honk and holler long and loud and often enough the world will give them what they want - whatever that is. They act, in fact, as if the rest of the world doesn't  exist - a common miscalculation among groups that spend too much time talking to each other and not enough time talking to anybody else.

 The World as It Relates to Taxis

Consists of San Francisco officials (Mayor Ed Lee, SFMTA Board, Board of Supervisors) and the public. Would it be wrong to speculate about what they want?

• The Mayor - wants more cabs and better service.
• The MTA Board - wants more cabs, better service, lots of our money and a board meeting with no cab drivers in attendance.
• The Board of Supervisors - wants a lot more cabs, a lot better service and don't want to give cab drivers a raise until these things come to pass. 
• The Public wants better service, more cabs and more taxis that will accept credit cards.

Protests vs Strikes; or Shooting Oneself in the Foot: Part 1.

A protest is a way to tell the government and/or the public about injustices done and policies that should be changed. 

A strike is a way to inconvenience, to intimidate, to punish the government/public for not making those changes.

The public in this country, in this city anyway, tends to cut protesters a lot of slack. People don't mind a little inconvenience. Everyone has the right to complain. It's the American way. But, if the protests go on too often or too long, if the inconvenience grows, the public become annoyed.

From conversations with my riding public on the effects of the the recent taxi protests have exactly followed this path of regress.

• After the first protest, everybody was smiles and understanding. They were on my side.
• With protest two, they were concerned and confused. What was this about again?
• With the protests that called itself a "strike,"it was like, "I just wanna go home."

What the threatened "24 Hour Strike" really threatens to do is alienate the public and turn them completely against us.

Shooting Oneself in the Foot: Part 2.

Brad Newsham wants the SFMTA to get out of the taxi business; or, barring that, he wants to pass a proposition that will keep the SFMTA from spending money taken from the cab industry on anything except cab drivers.

Well - the possibility of the MTA firing itself is pretty slim. The only way to keep the money for the drivers would be to get the public to pass ballot proposition. The best way to get a proposition on the ballot is to have either the Mayor or the Board of Supervisors vote to put it on the ballot.

Whoops.

Mayor Ed Lee, who wants to become a permanent mayor, is unlikely to back a group that alienates the voters and, most of the Supervisors, who have never much liked us much anyway, really dislike us now.

Meaning that the only way to get the proposal on the ballot is finding enough of the alienated public to sign a petition to put it on and then getting enough votes from the same alienated public to pass the measure.

Whoops. Whoops.

Shooting Oneself in the Foot: Part 3.

Perhaps the most consistent complaint that cab drivers have is about the illegal limos, town cars and cabs that steal legitimate cab driver's fares.

Perhaps the most consistent complaint that the public has is that taxicabs are not picking them up with enough frequency.

So, Mehmood and his minions intend to punish the public by making sure that they get fewer cabs than usual?

Now, that's what I call a brilliant strategy - for the illegal limos, town cars and taxis that is. Ubercab and that ilk should have field day.

And, you know? I've yet to hear anybody call Tariq Mehmood a genius.

Shooting Oneself in the Foot: Part 4.

Mehmood has claimed that his drivers would be striking if the MTA didn't agree to compromise on the credit card fees, the electronic waybills and the back seat-terminals. Of course we know this is a lie. He called for this strike before the last protest (see lead quote.)

Besides, the MTA has already compromised, or is considering compromising on all these things. And, this ignores the one thing that the strikers talk about the least. The elephant in the room. The fact that this Board meeting is about passing a meter increase of around 24%.

This means that even if credit card fees are not renegotiated (as the MTA says they will be) the cab drivers will still get a raise of about 18% to 20%. I would call that a compromise. Some drivers want the credit card fees passed on to the public. What do they think a meter increase does?

The only important issue on August 2nd will be to try and make certain that the cab companies do not raise the gates.

Is the MTA more or less likely to do this if they are surrounded by honking cabs who refuse to pick passengers up?

With the probable exception of Supervisor John Avalos, the Board of Supervisors is recommending that the meter increase not be put into effect.

If  drivers are going to strike no matter what the MTA does, the Board might just follow the supes advice.

I'd hate to see Tariq and his troops ruin things for the thousands - the vast majority of San Francisco's hard working taxi drivers - who won't be on strike.

Supervisors Lack a Resolution

The Board of Supervisors failed to pass a resolution "opposing proposed taxi fare increase under consideration by the Municipal Transportation Agency in the absence of improved taxi service" yesterday because it did not have unanimous support.

Sponsored by Supervisors Scott Weiner, Malia Cohen and Mark Farrell, the measure required a unanamous vote because it had not been discussed in a committee.

We didn't realize that the public would be able to address the subject until the Board was already in session so only Mark Gruberg of the United Taxicab Workers, Barry Korengold of the San Francisco Cab Drivers Association and myself argued against the resolution.

Gruberg said that we needed a raise because we hadn't had one in eight years; Korengold mentioned that the SFMTA Board had failed to implement Open Taxi Access which would immediately improve service to the neighborhoods; and I commented on the weirdness of Democratic politicians, the party of labor, refusing to back a cost-of-living raise to working people. We all expressed a sense of unfairness at being punished for problems beyond our control.

The Board, however, had already decided the issue behind closed doors - this time to our advantage. Supervisor Weiner said that the resolution did not have the necessary support so no vote was taken and the measure was tabled until the Board's next meeting.

Weiner went on to say that the resolution was not intended as a criticism of cab drivers but that we needed more taxis on the street. He just thought that any meter increase should be coupled with peak time cabs.

Supervisor John Avalos, from my District 11, true to his labor roots, spoke against the measure saying that taxi drivers needed a fare increase.

Supervisor Malia Cohen, from District 10, remained adamant in her belief that there should be no meter increase until cab drivers start picking up in the Bayview.

Board of Supervisors Again Delays Voting on MTA Budget

Last week's post about the Board of Supervisor okaying the MTA budget turned out to be premature. 

As of yesterday, the Board of Supervisors still has not decided whether to okay the budget or not. Supervisors Chris Daly, John Avalos and others were against okaying the budget because of cuts to transportation while supervisor Sean Elsbernd seemed interested in working out wage concessions from the muni drivers. In the end the supervisors decided they needed more time for negotiation and a majority voted 7 to 4 to put off a decision until next Wednesday, May 27th at noon.

Once again the $15 million budgeted extraction from taxicab drivers was not a subject deemed important enough for discussion.

Before the meeting, however, the San Francisco Cab Drivers Association (SFCDA) held a protest attacking the proposed $15 million theft. The general theme was that "the city should not try to fix it's budget problems off the backs of cab drivers." The action attracted a couple of dozen enthusiastic drivers including former MHA members: SFCDA president Barry Korengold, Victoria Lansdown and myself.

The event was covered by radio and tv.