|
|
| Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch (12718) | |
 |
|
| Home > The Reef | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 10 of 17 |
||
|
| (13168) | |
Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 25 18:48:04 2006, in response to Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch, posted by Fred G on Tue Jul 25 18:42:49 2006. Right, and as was pointed out, this was an IMPROVED, grade separated two track ROW on enbankment.Ron constantly tries to convince people that it's some 1800's ROW that went completely unimproved, like the old LIRR Whitestone Branch, or the current Bushwick Branch which is close to homes, and runs on the surface. The Rockaway line was/is more improved than many of the current in use LIRR lines in QUeens, and even Nassau. |
|
| (13169) | |
Re: Ron's Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Tue Jul 25 18:58:42 2006, in response to Re: Ron's Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 25 18:02:34 2006. It was never ethically acceptable. |
|
| (13170) | |
Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Tue Jul 25 19:01:41 2006, in response to Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch, posted by American Pig on Tue Jul 25 18:31:43 2006. Because he might want to learn something?Oh, wait, you can't be bothered either - if it's not in the computer or not in the shul or not on a subway train, it doesn't exist. Morris, you really are a doofus today, much worse than usual... |
|
| (13171) | |
Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 25 19:05:49 2006, in response to Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch, posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Tue Jul 25 18:37:32 2006. IS that where the Home Depot is today? The enbankment runs right next to the Home Depot Parking lot. It's fairly high up from the parking lot too. The Home Depot is about a block or two past Metrolitan Ave, on the other side of Metropokitan from where the old Parkside station was. |
|
| (13172) | |
Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 25 19:09:06 2006, in response to Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch, posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Tue Jul 25 18:34:09 2006. And any stations would probably be in the general vicinity of where the LIRR had it's stations. (If you don't cound Rego Park, which was technically on the mainline), only Metropolitan Ave (Parkside) and Jamaica Ave (Brooklyn Manor) Platforms are gone, but the space is still there.Woodhaven and Ozone Park station platforms are even still there (they would have to obviously be rebuilt, but they are there. I have been on the Woodhaven platforms some years ago, and they are the typical station width, with two tracks of course. |
|
| (13173) | |
Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 25 19:10:40 2006, in response to Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch, posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Tue Jul 25 18:32:03 2006. ....bored drinking teenagers..... |
|
| (13174) | |
Re: Ron's Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 25 19:11:39 2006, in response to Re: Ron's Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch, posted by RonInBayside on Tue Jul 25 18:58:42 2006. Absolutely not acceptable, but it is an outdated excuse just the same, a remnant of NIMBY excuses from the 70's and 80's. |
|
| (13175) | |
Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Tue Jul 25 19:17:18 2006, in response to Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch, posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Tue Jul 25 18:34:09 2006. "No rail vehicle needs 50' of lateral clearance. Those are simply constraints to station locations."You're thinking rails and cars. I am thinking landowners and people. |
|
| (13176) | |
Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Tue Jul 25 19:18:09 2006, in response to Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch, posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Tue Jul 25 18:32:03 2006. "I'd rather have trains running through my back yard than bored teenagers hanging out at night."OK. But in this case the residents have outvoted you. |
|
| (13177) | |
Re: Ron's Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Tue Jul 25 19:21:22 2006, in response to Re: Ron's Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 25 19:11:39 2006. I hope you are right! |
|
| (13178) | |
Re: NIMBY motivations |
|
|
Posted by The Port of Authority on Tue Jul 25 19:23:39 2006, in response to Re: NIMBY motivations, posted by streetcarman1 on Tue Jul 25 15:53:55 2006. green acres mall... |
|
| (13179) | |
Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch |
|
|
Posted by The Port of Authority on Tue Jul 25 19:27:32 2006, in response to Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch, posted by R36 #9346 on Tue Jul 25 17:50:09 2006. brooklyn manor wouldn't make any sense. uninformed riders may actually think the station's in brooklyn.better to leave it as jamaica avenue. |
|
| (13180) | |
Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch |
|
|
Posted by American Pig on Tue Jul 25 19:43:24 2006, in response to Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch, posted by RonInBayside on Tue Jul 25 19:01:41 2006. Maybe I'm trying to be more like you. |
|
| (13181) | |
Re: Ron's Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Tue Jul 25 19:57:34 2006, in response to Re: Ron's Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch, posted by RonInBayside on Tue Jul 25 19:21:22 2006. No you don't. You, Dr. Ron M. Aryel of Kansas City, have stated that you think the plan to build a trail is "fine." This, on a railfan message board... |
|
| (13182) | |
Re: NIMBY motivations |
|
|
Posted by SUBWAYMAN on Tue Jul 25 20:08:41 2006, in response to Re: NIMBY motivations, posted by The Port of Authority on Tue Jul 25 19:23:39 2006. Green Acres Mall is located in Valley Stream. It is not located in Queens. |
|
| (13183) | |
Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch |
|
|
Posted by J trainloco on Tue Jul 25 20:16:58 2006, in response to Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch, posted by SMAZ on Mon Jul 24 01:13:18 2006. Point taken, but I would make sure that the A would still run to Rockaway Park during peak hours, otherwise you would have the kind of never-ending discussion similiar to the Lefferts situation. (which I favor to keep as is)Not exactly. The Lefferts Branch during rush hours gets the same number of tph now, with 1/2 of the A trains as it would if it were served by C trains. As such, there's no reason to get rid of Lefferts A service, at least not during the rush. |
|
| (13184) | |
Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch |
|
|
Posted by J trainloco on Tue Jul 25 20:20:01 2006, in response to Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch, posted by R7 Torresdale Express on Fri Jul 21 18:26:35 2006. What about the Bay Ridge Line? It runs parallel to the heaviest portion of the B6/B6 LTD and could serve as a valuable transfer between Brooklyn's subway lines. It would branch off at Livonia, and terminate at 62/New Utrecht (no point in being redundant to the L or N lines). It would be served by either rerouting half of the L trains or extending the V train.My idea has always been to build a new tunnel from Chruch LL, and hooking it up to the Bay Ridge ROW heading east. Then, you'd have through service on the line, on a line not being used to capacity. Hooking it up at the other end (the L line) would require too long a travel time for one-seat riders. |
|
| (13185) | |
Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 25 20:24:35 2006, in response to Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch, posted by J trainloco on Tue Jul 25 20:20:01 2006. Hooking it up at the other end (the L line) would require too long a travel time for one-seat riders.Not to mention that the two track L line, which is already bursting at it's seams couldn't handle all the extra load. |
|
| (13186) | |
Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch |
|
|
Posted by J trainloco on Tue Jul 25 20:27:23 2006, in response to Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch, posted by The Port of Authority on Sat Jul 22 16:26:56 2006. Oops, I forgot that I'm speaking to the most anti-LRT person on this forum. Never mind then.I don't think he's the most anti-LRT person on this forum. |
|
| (13187) | |
Re: NIMBY motivations |
|
|
Posted by Sir Ray on Tue Jul 25 20:27:55 2006, in response to Re: NIMBY motivations, posted by SUBWAYMAN on Tue Jul 25 20:08:41 2006. Living within a mile or so, and having been there many times, Green Acres mall (which technically is in the unincorporated area of 'South Valley Stream' (target is in the Village of Valley Stream) is pretty much on the border of Queens (Rosedale) and Nassau - a few dozen metres to the Multiplex movie theatre, and about 2-3 short block equivalent to the Mall proper (which is adding even more stores in a separate area on the west side parking lot - not sure which retailer but looks to be more big-box) - it would make a decent enough destination... |
|
| (13188) | |
Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch |
|
|
Posted by J trainloco on Tue Jul 25 20:28:02 2006, in response to Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch, posted by RonInBayside on Sun Jul 23 10:30:16 2006. Not really much use for it in NYC. |
|
| (13189) | |
Re: NIMBY motivations |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 25 20:28:57 2006, in response to Re: NIMBY motivations, posted by SUBWAYMAN on Tue Jul 25 20:08:41 2006. Actually, you would use the Valley Stream station to go to Green Acres mall. I used to do that quite a lot when I was a teenager. You can walk from the Valley Stream station to the mall. |
|
| (13190) | |
Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch |
|
|
Posted by David of Broadway on Tue Jul 25 20:40:48 2006, in response to Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch, posted by J trainloco on Tue Jul 25 20:28:02 2006. I generally agree.This might be an exception. Another exception -- mind you, I'm biased here, since I'd find this particular line very useful myself -- might be a light rail line from the Sheepshead Bay subway station (inside fare control) across the Bay and along the waterfront to the KCC campus. What I am definitely opposed to is light rail that runs on streets most of the way. Especially in Manhattan, where such proposals invariably ignore the multitude of bus routes that typically run along the corridor. Are you going to convert all of them to light rail, or are you going to leave some of them on the newly narrowed roadway? |
|
| (13191) | |
Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch |
|
|
Posted by Fred G on Tue Jul 25 20:44:52 2006, in response to Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 25 18:48:04 2006. They probably acquired more ROW between the 1800's and the 1920's, too. Or not...the age of that ROW suggests it was there while the adjoiners were milking cows, so it could be that it's current width is what was deeded originally.your pal, Fred |
|
| (13192) | |
Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 25 20:48:49 2006, in response to Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch, posted by Fred G on Tue Jul 25 20:44:52 2006. Yes, however, there was a two track line on enbankment there, and there is the typical slope on either side that an enbankment line would require. It's not like it's two tracks just running between buildings on the surface would be, like the Whitestone line was, or think of the width of the Bushwick branch which while it's only one track, was a two track ROW I believe....but again, completely on the surface and unimproved unlike the Rockaway line was. They must have widened the ROW when the line was grade separated. |
|
| (13193) | |
Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch |
|
|
Posted by Fred G on Tue Jul 25 21:00:19 2006, in response to Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 25 20:48:49 2006. That's entirely possible. Even today they grant easements, at least, for slope rights.your pal, Fred |
|
| (13194) | |
Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch |
|
|
Posted by J trainloco on Tue Jul 25 21:10:28 2006, in response to Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch, posted by David of Broadway on Tue Jul 25 20:40:48 2006. This might be an exception.Another exception -- mind you, I'm biased here, since I'd find this particular line very useful myself -- might be a light rail line from the Sheepshead Bay subway station (inside fare control) across the Bay and along the waterfront to the KCC campus. Of course, there are exceptions. Staten Island is a possible candidate. However, LRVs are at their best when they can run at street level in the outer, less populated areas and then duck into a tunnel for the dense, downtown areas (a la Philadelphia). The geography of NYC makes this extremely expensive (to the point where it doesn't make sense), and many of the corridors that are busy enough to merit LRVs cannot do so without severe adverse effects on regular traffic, or LRVs that would be stuck in amongst the traffic. |
|
| (13195) | |
Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch |
|
|
Posted by David of Broadway on Tue Jul 25 21:14:30 2006, in response to Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch, posted by J trainloco on Tue Jul 25 21:10:28 2006. No argument here.Have you been to Buffalo? It has a backwards light rail system: on the street through downtown, then in a tunnel out to the suburbs. It also has a major ADA glitch: trains are two cars long. Underground, both are wheelchair-accessible. Above ground, the high platform only reaches the front car. So if you board the second car underground and ride until the train surfaces, you're trapped. (Passing between cars is impossible, and the train is "fumigated" at the last stop.) I don't recall seeing any signs warning wheelchair passengers of this feature. |
|
| (13196) | |
Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Tue Jul 25 21:21:13 2006, in response to Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch, posted by David of Broadway on Tue Jul 25 20:40:48 2006. "Another exception -- mind you, I'm biased here, since I'd find this particular line very useful myself -- might be a light rail line from the Sheepshead Bay subway station (inside fare control) across the Bay and along the waterfront to the KCC campus."I like that idea. I think that would provide more than just commuting value. Good tourist value. |
|
| (13197) | |
Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch |
|
|
Posted by David of Broadway on Tue Jul 25 21:23:37 2006, in response to Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch, posted by RonInBayside on Tue Jul 25 21:21:13 2006. Why would tourists be interested in going to the KCC campus?During the summer, it has a beach. But the rest of the year? |
|
| (13198) | |
Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch |
|
|
Posted by R7 Torresdale Express on Tue Jul 25 21:47:32 2006, in response to Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 25 20:24:35 2006. I was kinda hoping either CBTC would fix that or that at some point in the future we'd get management that could get the proper capacity out of the line. Besides, the portion between Broadway Junction and Canarsie could easily give up every other train to a Bay Ridge service, and extending the V over it would be even better because it wouldn't eat into the L's passenger capacity. |
|
| (13199) | |
Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch |
|
|
Posted by R7 Torresdale Express on Tue Jul 25 21:56:09 2006, in response to Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch, posted by J trainloco on Tue Jul 25 20:20:01 2006. That'd require a bit of tunneling to get from 39 St (or wherever the heck the LL ends) to Avenue H, but it's an interesting idea. I never thought of it before.Hooking it up at the other end (the L line) would require too long a travel time for one-seat riders. Depends where you're coming from. Hooking it up to the F would have the same problem for people in Flatlands & Canarsie. Maybe hook it up at both ends and extend the V, splitting it into two routes south of Broadway-Lafayette, one going counterclockwise via Chrystie-Bway-Canarsie-Bay Ridge-S Bklyn-Rutgers, and the other going clockwise via Rutgers-S Bklyn-Bay Ridge-Canarsie-Bway-Chrystie, which would be redesignated X and Y, respectively. |
|
| (13200) | |
Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch |
|
|
Posted by R7 Torresdale Express on Tue Jul 25 22:00:05 2006, in response to Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch, posted by David of Broadway on Tue Jul 25 20:40:48 2006. A trolley (preferably historic or replica) along the Coney Island/Brighton Beach waterfront serving the amusement areas, the aquarium, Kingsborough, and at least one of the subway stations (preferably Brighton Beach or Stillwell) would be a nice idea. I can't imagine how it would be routed though. |
|
| (13201) | |
Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Tue Jul 25 22:39:27 2006, in response to Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch, posted by R7 Torresdale Express on Tue Jul 25 21:47:32 2006. Hmmm, yes, that would work. If you spilt the service, it would not eat capacity where it's needed most, west of BJ, and more specifically, west of Myrtle. |
|
| (13202) | |
Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch |
|
|
Posted by David of Broadway on Tue Jul 25 22:43:02 2006, in response to Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch, posted by R7 Torresdale Express on Tue Jul 25 22:00:05 2006. You mean a ferry.I'm proposing a much shorter route that would serve KCC commuters much better. |
|
| (13203) | |
Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch |
|
|
Posted by J trainloco on Tue Jul 25 23:18:57 2006, in response to Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch, posted by R7 Torresdale Express on Tue Jul 25 21:56:09 2006. Depends where you're coming from. Hooking it up to the F would have the same problem for people in Flatlands & Canarsie.I've always felt that the heaviest ridership area would be at Utica. Would it be quicker to go via my Culver route from there, or via the L route? I'm thinking the Crosstown, with its express tracks, would be faster, perhaps even from areas even more easterly than that. |
|
| (13204) | |
Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Tue Jul 25 23:23:33 2006, in response to Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch, posted by David of Broadway on Tue Jul 25 21:23:37 2006. "During the summer, it has a beach. But the rest of the year? "Who cares? It carries commuters year-round, and during the summer it catches beachgoers and tourists. Where there's a trolley you can put in other things that tourists like. "Why would tourists be interested in going to the KCC campus?" It's not that hard to introduce things people will like. Spend money on the trolley, spend a little on "accessories" along the way... |
|
| (13205) | |
Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch |
|
|
Posted by David of Broadway on Tue Jul 25 23:28:51 2006, in response to Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch, posted by RonInBayside on Tue Jul 25 23:23:33 2006. Um. Somehow I suspect you've never been to the KCC campus. I was there a few hours ago, and I'll be there again in a few hours.The neighborhood is entirely residential, except for two short blocks (at opposite ends of the neighborhood) with businesses on the north side of Oriental. Then at the tip of the peninsula is the campus itself. If you want a glitzy trolley to attract tourists, put it somewhere the tourists might want to go. I'm looking for a form of transportation that will provide a good alternative to the unreliable and crush loaded buses to the campus. |
|
| (13206) | |
Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Tue Jul 25 23:44:07 2006, in response to Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch, posted by David of Broadway on Tue Jul 25 23:28:51 2006. "except for two short blocks (at opposite ends of the neighborhood) with businesses on the north side of Oriental. Then at the tip of the peninsula is the campus itself."There's plenty of opportunity spelled out in that sentence. |
|
| (13207) | |
Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch |
|
|
Posted by David of Broadway on Tue Jul 25 23:45:43 2006, in response to Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch, posted by RonInBayside on Tue Jul 25 23:44:07 2006. Run it by the residential community and the college and tell me what they say. |
|
| (13208) | |
Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Wed Jul 26 00:05:01 2006, in response to Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch, posted by David of Broadway on Tue Jul 25 23:45:43 2006. They are going to object to a Nathan's hot dog stand operating at the end of the trolley on the beach? And if they did, would they have any standing? |
|
| (13209) | |
Re: Ron's Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch |
|
|
Posted by Mr Mabstoa on Wed Jul 26 02:08:12 2006, in response to Re: Ron's Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch, posted by RonInBayside on Sun Jul 23 22:10:52 2006. There is no TWU ignorance. Its a matter of NYC Transit having a CONTRACT AGREEMENT with the TWU concerning the length of trains that can be OPTO and NYC transit VIOLATING that contract. |
|
| (13210) | |
Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch |
|
|
Posted by David of Broadway on Wed Jul 26 07:36:07 2006, in response to Re: My Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch, posted by RonInBayside on Wed Jul 26 00:05:01 2006. On campus property? Most certainly yes to both questions. |
|
| (13211) | |
Re: OPTO implementation |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Wed Jul 26 08:53:00 2006, in response to Re: Ron's Route Suggestion of the Old Abandoned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch, posted by Mr Mabstoa on Wed Jul 26 02:08:12 2006. You're right about the contract, but wrong about TWU's ignorance. As far as I am concerned, after the current contract is over (which I agree MTA tried to violate, which was bad), MTA can start phasing in OPTO. If TWU refuses to sign off on it or work cooperatively with MTA to redefine conductor jobs into something else and set up "buy-outs" to compensate conductors, and strikes instead, then MTA can run a skeletal service and start firing conductors and T/O's in bunches and replace them with non-union labor. Eventually they'll be signed into a unio again, but the C/R job description will be gone. |
|
| (13212) | |
Re: OPTO implementation |
|
|
Posted by mambomta on Wed Jul 26 10:42:20 2006, in response to Re: OPTO implementation, posted by RonInBayside on Wed Jul 26 08:53:00 2006. You're right about the contract, but wrong about TWU's ignorance. As far as I am concerned, after the current contract is over (which I agree MTA tried to violate, which was bad), MTA can start phasing in OPTO. If TWU refuses to sign off on it or work cooperatively with MTA to redefine conductor jobs into something else and set up "buy-outs" to compensate conductors, and strikes instead, then MTA can run a skeletal service and start firing conductors and T/O's in bunches and replace them with non-union labor. Eventually they'll be signed into a unio again, but the C/R job description will be gone. You are the last person who should talk about ignorance. Both parties are still bound by contract even after the contract is "over$quot; until another contract has been agreed upon. |
|
| (13213) | |
Re: OPTO implementation |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Wed Jul 26 10:47:49 2006, in response to Re: OPTO implementation, posted by mambomta on Wed Jul 26 10:42:20 2006. "Both parties are still bound by contract even after the contract is "over$quot; until another contract has been agreed upon."Only partly true. If the contract expires and TWU strikes in violation of the Taylor Law, MTA is under no obligation to honor anything. Every last TWU member could be sent to the unemployment line. |
|
| (13214) | |
Re: OPTO implementation |
|
|
Posted by mambomta on Wed Jul 26 10:50:02 2006, in response to Re: OPTO implementation, posted by RonInBayside on Wed Jul 26 10:47:49 2006. Only partly true. If the contract expires and TWU strikes in violation of the Taylor Law, MTA is under no obligation to honor anything.Proof? Every last TWU member could be sent to the unemployment line. And then NYC would grind to a halt and slowly die because noone could get to work for the next several months. |
|
| (13215) | |
Re: OPTO implementation |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Wed Jul 26 10:50:21 2006, in response to Re: OPTO implementation, posted by RonInBayside on Wed Jul 26 10:47:49 2006. If the contract expires and TWU strikes in violation of the Taylor Law, MTA is under no obligation to honor anything.PROFF? Or is this just your opinion (which you so often try to pass as FACT)? |
|
| (13216) | |
Re: OPTO implementation |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Wed Jul 26 10:54:07 2006, in response to Re: OPTO implementation, posted by mambomta on Wed Jul 26 10:50:02 2006. And then NYC would grind to a halt and slowly die because noone could get to work for the next several months.While that would probably hurt Ron M. Aryel MD, MBA, at least financially, it seems he would be quite excited about the decrease in foaming. |
|
| (13217) | |
Re: OPTO implementation |
|
|
Posted by Goumba Tony on Wed Jul 26 11:36:10 2006, in response to Re: OPTO implementation, posted by RonInBayside on Wed Jul 26 10:47:49 2006. Only partly true. If the contract expires and TWU strikes in violation of the Taylor Law, MTA is under no obligation to honor anything. Every last TWU member could be sent to the unemployment line.So should the upper management at the MTA for violating the law as well. Oh wait, in this world, the corporate-like big wigs do nothing wrong. Scartch my last comment. |
|
|
Page 10 of 17 |
||