Washington Votes Forum

Discuss issues, ideas and legislation related to the Evergreen State.
Welcome to Washington Votes Forum Sign in | Join | Help
in Search
Latest post Sat, May 22 2010 10:59 AM by Proud State Worker. 2 replies.
Page 1 of 1 (3 items)
Sort Posts: Previous Next
  • Mon, Jan 1 2001 12:00 AM

    • admin
    • Top 10 Contributor
    • Joined on Wed, Nov 19 2008

    2010 House Bill 3209 (Managing costs of the ferry system)

    Introduced in the House on March 1, 2010, modifies collective bargaining between representatives of ferry workers and the state, including eliminating the limitation that an arbitrator may only select from the final offers submitted by the parties at bargaining impasses and changing the factors that an arbitrator takes into consideration in making its decision. The bill allows WSDOT to perform maintenance and preservation work on ferry vessels and terminals if the cost of the work is less than $120,000 versus the current limit of $60,000. It also appropriates $7.3 million from the Puget Sound Operating Account to the WSDOT for the purpose of funding travel time associated with ferry employees

    The vote was 90 in favor, 8 opposed and 0 not voting

    (House Roll Call 0 at House Journal 0)

    Click here to view bill details.
  • Thu, Mar 11 2010 8:28 PM In reply to

    • KeyPen
    • Top 25 Contributor
    • Joined on Sat, Feb 7 2009

    Re: 2010 House Bill 3209 (Managing costs of the ferry system)

    Amendment offered by Rep. Doug Ericksen, (R-Ferndale) (R) on March 5, 2010, to require the Department of Transportation (DOT)to transfer to a private vendor all aspects of management of the Washington State Ferries system.

    And the amendment failed???

     

    I believe that the Navy has found that tranfereing the operation of Sub Base Bangor  effective. I think itis time the state starts looking at the same program. This would be fewer people on the state payroll and more people on the payroll of a firm that is paying taxes in our state. This only makes sense when revenues are needed. Of course it would not be as simple as taxing the businesses that are already here. At least you can tax them till they leave for Idaho.

    Filed under:
  • Sat, May 22 2010 10:59 AM In reply to

    Re: 2010 House Bill 3209 (Managing costs of the ferry system)

    I don't see any facts offered as to why the Navy finds Bangor more effective now.  From discussions with Navy Crews stationed there, things are NOT running as smooth with private contractor EJB as when Fed Workers ran it.  Simply put, spending some time listening in at the VFW and hearing them say how well it used to be runs counter to your statement. 

    As to the State trying "the program" I'd like you to explain how I, with 11 years service and a home owner in our fine State, Father, Grandfather, don't pay taxes in this state?  We (Wa State Residents) are taxed higher than many other states.  We have a Contractor remodeling one of our State Facilities and I am appalled at the constant attempt to short change, poor quality, safety violations for what you and I are paying for.  As one of our State Building Inspectors overseeing it, they spend as much effort trying to cheat as to do the damn job to specs.

    Here is a good example...call any of the maritime diesel firms and see what they charge for a turbo change out on a EMD 16 cyl ferry engine.  Ask them to come in at 2230 tonight (thats 1030 pm for you landlubbers) and have it up and running by 0445 yomorrow.  Most will need a minimum of two days notice-WSF Crews do it all the time

    Our facility had a contractor make a USCG required engine parts for years; one set cost 14,000 each replacement.  We purchased the tooling required (3100) and built the for 9000- add the tooling and it is still less tahn the contractor.

    As for wages, I'm paid 13 dollars an hour less than the contractor pays his workers.

Page 1 of 1 (3 items)
Powered by Community Server (Commercial Edition), by Telligent Systems