Although I won't try to debate most of your points--I think we'll have to agree to disagree--I do think you're being unfair to say that a strike is extortion. The striking workers are also suffering. Every week that the strike continues is a 2% pay cut for this year. After a few days of the strike, commuters will have adjusted and the transit union leadership will start hearing it from their members and the "balance of power" will shift back towards the BART management. Eventually, there will come a point where the workers are begging to come back to work and the union's power will have been blunted for many years.
Not much else to say, just wanted to point out that the decision to strike is not taken lightly by any union. The potential downside is huge.
The fact that employers can't permanently replace striking workers puts the power in the Union's hands. Perhaps it's not extortion (since no laws are broken), but I would call it coercion.
Think about it from the employers' views. Employees says they're not happy with work, they don't show-up for work (unexcused absence). Employer can't fire them, and have to employ them should they return. So they hire some temporary workers, but can't keep them long term. The ones willing to work (temps) get the boot, and those that complained that their job is so bad (union workers) get to return anytime.
True, it is not the legal definition of extortion but the term extortion is "often used loosely to refer to everyday situations where one person feels indebted against their will, to another, in order to receive an essential service"[1]. Clearly no crime has been committed here since they have a right to strike. I always think of coercion as slightly different but I guess it is the more technically correct word.
It is also hard to even hire temps. They must cross the (sometimes aggressive) picket line, get called names (like scab), etc. Then there is the chance that the would-be temps are also in a union and therefore unable/unwilling to take the temp job.
There was that one time that all the striking air traffic controllers got canned and permanently replaced[2]. But that was federal and Pres. Reagan got in on it. So that is not likely to be an option with BART.
Their suffering is of their own doing (unless they are among those that voted against the strike. they're suffering as well). They don't have to beg to come back to work. They could come back tomorrow if they were not being so unreasonable.
Not much else to say, just wanted to point out that the decision to strike is not taken lightly by any union. The potential downside is huge.