I'll restrain myself from commenting on the potential trademark issues inherent in the suspiciously McDonald's-like 'M' on the awning in the photo and I will try to focus on the rat. As it happens, Sr. Rata is a hot item in New York these days. No, not just in front of ethnic restaurants of dubious culinary standards. Rather (just when you thought you knew where this post was going), Rattus picketus is a favorite inflatable metaphor propped up by striking workers to protest those who cross their picket lines. In fact, "rat" is apparently a multinational term used to refer to those who frustrate the cause of said workers -- even in India:
हड़तालभंजकहड़तालभंजक् (noun): rat; someone who works (or provides workers) during a strike.*
In New York City, strikes are the topic de jour (or perhaps I should say de jure). I haven't forgotten the New York City transit strike (i.e. subway strike) back in December 2005, which crippled traffic and purportedly resulted in hundreds of millions of dollars in lost revenue among Manhattan businesses during the height of the holiday shopping/tourism season. Of course, the strike also forced many of the seven million New Yorkers who ride the subway to find other more environmentally-friendly means of getting to work. Faced with the glut of increased automobile traffic in NYC, the police even closed several major Manhattan streets to motor vehicles to allow emergency vehicles and displaced subway riders an open route through the city. I experienced the joy of riding my mountain bike down the middle of 5th Avenue on a weekday afternoon, as the NYPD gave cyclists like me the all-clear rather than dirty looks for a change. I suppose that every cloud has a silver lining.
But I digress.
Massive strikes are hard on the public. In premise, the union vs. employer conflict makes sense: it positions two powerful bodies against one another in order to level the playing field and protect the interests of the otherwise somewhat-powerless common man. This is the very same principle that our bi-partisan political system is built around. It's the two-sharks-in-a-tank analogy: if the sharks are busy circling around one another, the common man is less likely to be victimized, as the sharks keep one another in check. And this nearly works in our government model -- candidates and elected officials alike in opposing parties and on opposite sides of sensitive issues have to answer to one another. But this system is also imperfect and subject to manipulation. In particular, the inherent protections of this premise collapse when the public at large becomes a tool of leverage rather than the real party at interest.
None of this is rocket science and certainly it has been addressed by pundits wiser than me, but the impact bothers me enough to rant about it, particularly since my arrival in New York a few years ago. New York City's sheer population and volume of commerce make it a target for this kind of impact.
Now Amtrak is threatening to strike, which will effectively cripple New Jersey Transit, since New Jersey Transit is one of Amtrak's tenants on several of its key rail lines and the major carrier of New Jersey commuters who work in New York City. If this happens, it will almost certainly result in a massive increase in the quantity of vehicles attempting to commute between New York and New Jersey. The impact felt by Amtrak will be far less than the cost -- both economically and environmentally -- to the public.
Meanwhile, the Writers Guild of America strike rambles on in its twelfth week. Yes, the WGA strike costs its opponents (the film and television producers) millions of dollars, but those producers can arguably afford it. The real impact is being felt by those who are peripherally affected. This ripple extends to everyone from the actors and crew who work on TV and film productions (e.g. soap operas) to the businesses who have come to rely on patrons of those productions.
It seems to me that while massive strikes like the New York transit strike and the looming Amtrak strike may protect the interests of the workers, they typically do so by using the public at large as a pawn in their negotiations. And while the potential detriment to the public and resulting backlash may be the sharpest arrow in a union's quiver, it is one that I don't think should ever be nocked.
As to the rats, I think that some perspective is in order. I believe that I hear scurrying on both sides.
UPDATE: As it happens, the rat in front of the Indian restaurant (which has been there all week) really IS there to protest the conditions at the restaurant. The protesters' pamphlet cites vermin, cockroaches, and a variety of other things, but the fine print also mentions that the workers are underpaid, which I'm guessing is the real story.
* Your browser might not be able to view the Hindi characters here, so you'll just have to trust me on this one.
