Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

akmalhot t1_j7kcxro wrote

Reply to comment by ObjectivePitiful1170 in MTA spent twice as much on Second Ave subway consultants as it did on its construction by NYY657545

There was zero other equipment or trucks at the site. Literally nothing

−7

TheGazzelle t1_j7ki3w0 wrote

There are union and Osha regulations that need to be followed depending on weights of materials.

If there is a construction task that day and it cannot be lifted with a piece of equipment I must staff a job so that the max weight lifted is less than 80lbs/ea. If there is equipment I am able to halve the number of men; but sometimes I still need manpower If I am handling something that is 2,000 pounds for 10 minutes at 6AM and the rest of the day the guys are sweeping. The guys are getting paid for the day regardless if they are there for 2.5 hrs or all 8. Sometimes there is nothing for them to do and they do busy work. Unless you want to deregulate OSHA there isn't a ton to be done.

5

akmalhot t1_j7ki9g8 wrote

And, that isn't a little ridiculous?

−4

doughie t1_j7klwvv wrote

Kind of ridiculous to blame the laborers doing dangerous difficult work instead of the capitalist grifters making hundreds of thousands in consulting fees while sitting in an office. Corruption, needlessly complicated bidding, exorbitant lawyer fees so that the contractor and the city can sue each other. These are the big differences between the Parisian state run system and the NYC 'free market' system. You really think the French have looser labor laws and tougher working conditions?

5

akmalhot t1_j7kqilx wrote

I'm blaming all of them, but the comment I replied to implied the union contracts had no effect on the costs .

They've gone way to far with things , when they were redoing the intersection at 29th /9th Ave there was minimum 4 slow/stop people at all times during active construction.. I used to live close by so I saw it regularly. Sometimes there was 6. Sure it's a semi odd intersection bit it was insane.

4

doughie t1_j7l14fv wrote

Fair enough. I'd be interested in seeing an actual journalist/accountant dig into the labor breakdown rather than NY Post cherrypicked BS. I would guess the difference between NYC and other major metro systems around the world is more about how litigious and corrupt we are than our labor standards though.

1

ThinVast t1_j7mxubp wrote

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/28/nyregion/new-york-subway-construction-costs.html

An accountant discovered the discrepancy while reviewing the budget for new train platforms under Grand Central Terminal in Manhattan.

The budget showed that 900 workers were being paid to dig caverns for the platforms as part of a 3.5-mile tunnel connecting the historic station to the Long Island Rail Road. But the accountant could only identify about 700 jobs that needed to be done, according to three project supervisors. Officials could not find any reason for the other 200 people to be there.

“Nobody knew what those people were doing, if they were doing anything,” said Michael Horodniceanu, who was then the head of construction at the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, which runs transit in New York. The workers were laid off, Mr. Horodniceanu said, but no one figured out how long they had been employed. “All we knew is they were each being paid about $1,000 every day.”

$200,000 grifted everyday for who knows how long.

2

doughie t1_j7nde4p wrote

Thanks for that article. I'm not sure if you're agreeing with my point or not. This still doesn't say that it's our labor or safety standards are the reason for expenses, instead it shows rampant corruption. Sounds like 200 politically connected people were getting absolutely insane rates off the government dime. I would love to see some real investigative journalism about who this money is going to. I guarantee those 200 imaginary laborers are giving money to political bosses. Short staffing the actual workers or cutting their safety precautions would not fix this issue, right?

0

binghamtonswag t1_j7ljd2l wrote

Anecdotes just aren’t very convincing in light of The data presented by the article.

1