Town Square

Post a New Topic

BART contract details

Original post made by Joe, Another Pleasanton neighborhood, on Nov 6, 2013

Time for a little arithmetic here.

The union's original demand was a 20.1% raise over three years. The end result was 15.4% over four years. Another way to look at this was a 6.7% per year demand and a result of 3.8% per year for the first three years, with an extra half-percent in year four. Roughly speaking, the union got 57% of their original demand.

Fees for health care went up, from the current $92 per month to $141 per month in year four.

Pension contribution went from zero, previously, to 4% of compensation in year 4. For a worker making $75,000 a year, the worker's contribution will be $3,000.

There were also significant work rule changes. The rules traditionally demanded by the union are specifically designed to maximize the inefficiency in the system, by maximizing the number of hours worked by union employees. I'm amazed at the abuse of fare and tax dollars caused by these so-called "work rules" that BART management allowed to continue for so long until now.

(1) BART may now schedule 4 x 10 hour work weeks. This by itself will significantly decrease the practice of paying workers for a full day (8 hours) when they work as little as 4.5 hours, if that's what it takes to complete two round trips.

(2) BART workers can no longer take an unpaid day in the middle of a work week, then take an extra work day that same week, and get paid overtime for that extra day.

(3) BART is now able to use technology like electronic messaging and handhelds in order to improve operational efficiency. Previously, the union contract demanded that work orders be transmitted via written orders or by fax.

(4) BART "extra" train operators (operators used to fill in for missing operators that are sick or in training) now travel to the system endpoint where roundtrips begin. Previously, they reported to one of the BART maintenance yards, and were then paid to travel to the endpoint. The new rules send operators directly to the point at which they will begin work, saving time and money.

The employee pension contribution and medical plan costs are now closer to reality than they were previously; however they are still low compared to workers in the private sector.

Comments (38)

 +   Like this comment
Posted by John L. Lewis
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Nov 6, 2013 at 10:20 am

Yup, from the get-go BART was out to really hose down the workers. Wonder what the outcome would have been were workers not unionized? Walmart here we come! A union made up of rank and file workers, run by rank and file workers, and for rank and file workers. This can only be achieved by means of organization.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Cholo
a resident of Livermore
on Nov 6, 2013 at 12:36 pm

I'm delighted that the unions taught others a lesson in fair play!

That's what happened...the whiners were given their come-uppins by the workers and now the matter is settled.

Next time around, expect to be taught another lesson!

tee hee...


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger
a resident of Vintage Hills Elementary School
on Nov 6, 2013 at 7:25 pm

Kathleen Ruegsegger is a registered user.

I still haven't seen the permanent source of funding for this agreement--increased fares, no doubt. This notion of "organization" disregards the number of riders who will be hurt by the likely increase in fares. This was never about helping "the little guy." And Joe, those contributions aren't close to other public agencies either.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by daveg
a resident of Birdland
on Nov 6, 2013 at 9:54 pm

From reading about the actual details of the agreement, it appears that the general public is once again the loser.
Web Link


 +   Like this comment
Posted by John L. Lewis
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Nov 6, 2013 at 11:33 pm

There's da-veg looking for what he calls "actual details" in a right-wing newspaper editorial statement that is shamefully short on facts.

And preceding him is Kathleen, whose ideal worker model is akin to Walmart's. Doesn't know the details about the strike and its conclusion, but is able to divine that fares are going to go up.

Both da-veg and his ideational soulmate, Kathleen, have been ballyhooing for weeks, ad nauseum, about how the transit workers are unskilled and undeserving of the wages they earn. Then management puts itself in charge and a day later two workers are killed. Don't hear them spouting their nonsense about skill level this time around. Gee, I wonder why?

But, really, truly, both of them care so genuinely deeply about the "little guy." I mean, their humanitarianism just oozes off the page. Well, at least here we've been spared Kathleen's unending screech about how Bart workers ride the trains for free. Because she's so concerned about the "little guy." Laugh a minute with these two. So.... Let the heels rise, the hands start flailing, and the face-saving begin.

Well, Cholo is right. Prepare for a next round where solidary workers will again teach us a thing or two about the importance of organization.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger
a resident of Vintage Hills Elementary School
on Nov 7, 2013 at 7:30 am

Kathleen Ruegsegger is a registered user.

I said "likely". So, I'll ask for the umpteenth time "John" what is the permanent source of funding for the giveaways in the contract? I haven't seen the conclusion for why those two people died. And while it was truly a tragedy no matter where the blame is placed (no one ever died while BART ran as usual?), it was not a reason for management and the board to cave.

Here are the facts from the SEIU site: Web Link

Neither you nor Cholo care about those riding the trains. Prior to this agreement, 49% of riders made less than the average BART employee. How has this agreement you both revel in helped any of those people? Try not to say they will benefit, because it has been already been posted that gains by unions do not raise all boats.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger
a resident of Vintage Hills Elementary School
on Nov 7, 2013 at 7:35 am

Kathleen Ruegsegger is a registered user.

Sorry, that is the wrong link. Still looking.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger
a resident of Vintage Hills Elementary School
on Nov 7, 2013 at 7:51 am

Kathleen Ruegsegger is a registered user.

Interestingly, there is no access to the contract yet; not even from the newspaper who claims to have the info. I'll post it when it is available, unless someone else does.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Cholo
a resident of Livermore
on Nov 7, 2013 at 8:03 am

Write or Wrong, I will always support organized labor. It makes sense that Union employees have a voice. Hard working employees are not slaves.



 +   Like this comment
Posted by Cholo
a resident of Livermore
on Nov 7, 2013 at 8:29 am

My primary concern for all BART riders is that they remain safe as they're transported across the bay.

Fortunately, now that the contract has been signed by Union membership, others will have a wonderful time shopping and knowing that they will be safely transported from point A to point B! HOORAY!

VIVA ORGANIZED LABOR! GORA!

Were it not for striking Unions, BART management would have continue to allow innocent passengers to travel under conditions bordering on the criminal. NOT!


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Cholo
a resident of Livermore
on Nov 7, 2013 at 8:31 am

Correction: ...continued to allow...

Thanks to Union leadership, passengers are SAFER!

Thank you! Gracias!

i rest my case...


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Joe
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Nov 7, 2013 at 8:31 am

According to the Mercury News, "BART leaders didn't just cave -- they got rolled." One of the details that is yet to be made public is the fact that the work rule changes haven't been agreed to. Instead, changes need to be suggested by management, and then a binding arbitration process will make the final rule changes decision. The editorial goes on to blame BART management for missing an opportunity to fix the overall situation, even though public support was with management and not the unions.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Scott Walsh
a resident of Pleasanton Valley
on Nov 7, 2013 at 9:50 am

As this banter goes back and forth, lets look at and compare all Salaries, both rank and file and Management salaries and benefits. What salary raises will BART MANAGEMENT, EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT WITH PERKS WILL THEY RECEIVE? Hardly ever publicized. What about bloated job positions? I would respect the media if investigative journalism took place instead of biased media that has played out on both sides. A contract was Negotiated. It is obvious that communication is valued little and all this crap happened. Failure of both sides Maybe?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Cholo
a resident of Livermore
on Nov 7, 2013 at 11:10 am

Where were all the cry-babies when this creature was in her glory?

Web Link

duh...i rest my case...tee hee hee...

no mercy for cry-babies...hahahahahahahahaha...


 +   Like this comment
Posted by local
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Nov 7, 2013 at 11:43 am

That is part of the problem. When the rank in file receive raises, management has the 'me too' clauses. So this contract increase will really be costing more that already publicized.

I would not call this a 'negotiated' contract. True negotiations can only happen when both sides are not unduly influenced. On one side you have the unions. On the other side you have the board which has their elections financed by the unions and meddling by elected officials which are financed by the unions. The taxpayers and riders will always lose in these scenarios.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Sam
a resident of Oak Hill
on Nov 7, 2013 at 12:40 pm

Joe wrote: "Time for a little arithmetic here. The union's original demand was a 20.1% raise over three years. The end result was 15.4% over four years. Another way to look at this was a 6.7% per year demand and a result of 3.8% per year for the first three years, with an extra half-percent in year four. "

Some slight corrections: A 20.1% raise proposal over three years works out to 6.3% per year, not 6.7%. Also, a raise of 15.4% over four years works out to 3.65% per year.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by John L. Lewis
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Nov 7, 2013 at 1:46 pm

Even at 3.65% per year, the BART management caved, it got rolled, I tell you, it was forced to eat the big enchilada. The public has been fleeced yet again as the new contract is now shoved down our throat. When is the public going to stand up to these ravenous union thug-wolves who want to swallow up our tax dollars? They're not skilled, and pay no mind to the two bodies lying over there on the tracks. ANYbody could have caused those deaths; skill or competence had NOTHING to do with it. I mean people die every day. Now there's no reason we should be paying these thugs more than the state-imposed minimum wage. Walmart manages to find competent workers at that wage. Why not Bart workers? I'd rather see them lined up at the SNAP food stamp office than RIDING THE BART TRANSIT CARS FOR FREE! That just rankles me to no end. I haven't read the contract yet. I'll get back to you with these same views after I've read it, which as you all know will not change my thinking on this matter one iota. Rolled I tell you. Rolled.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Cholo
a resident of Livermore
on Nov 7, 2013 at 4:58 pm

Just because a few of like to run off at the mouth, I rest my case...

tee hee...


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Robot
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Nov 8, 2013 at 12:01 pm

I have a solution that will solve the problem of BART workers striking forever. Automate the whole system. Make it work like a horizontal elevator. It would be safer and the savings associated with elimination of the train operators would probably pay for the automation upgrade in just a few years.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Cholo
a resident of Livermore
on Nov 9, 2013 at 9:31 am

robo = bad news bear!

humans created BART and they can manage the machines...no need for more automated robots...

i rest my case...case closed!

the UNION won fair 'n square...the whiners please take a hike! tee hee...

BEGONE AND I MEAN IT!


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger
a resident of Vintage Hills Elementary School
on Nov 9, 2013 at 10:31 am

Kathleen Ruegsegger is a registered user.

Cholo, What is the permanent source of funding for the new agreement?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Cholo
a resident of Livermore
on Nov 9, 2013 at 12:33 pm

the strike is over...can we all get along?

lets call the strike over and moveon.com

OK? tee hee...

Question: How come so many folks are so unhappy with the UNION/BART compromise?

i rest my case...

signed,

moveon.com


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Cholo
a resident of Livermore
on Nov 9, 2013 at 12:41 pm

how come it's not enuf for a few upset posters that the UNION + BART agreed to something and sooooooo many of you are unwilling to moveon.com?

today i'm taking my boys out for a dog run and play day! yup...we're almost ready to go out 'n play! HOORAY!

THE UNION GOT A FAIRLY GOOD DEAL. I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT EVERYBODY WOULD BE HAPPY AND OFF 'N RUNNING...BUT, I GUESS NOT? hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm...?

signed,

Cholo Pololo Mololo! GORA!

ps can we all get along?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger
a resident of Vintage Hills Elementary School
on Nov 9, 2013 at 4:15 pm

Kathleen Ruegsegger is a registered user.

Same question, Cholo, what is the permanent source of funding for the agreement? How is "the fairly good deal" getting paid for? Why is the agreement not available to the public?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Cholo
a resident of Livermore
on Nov 9, 2013 at 5:52 pm

you can ask the same question until the cows come home...

the info is available but you will have to drive up to alaska and tap tap tap on the head of the first teen moose that you see...if the moose says hello Kathleen, wait for 5 minutes near the tree...when the wind gets too cold, go indoors and have a beer and warm your mittens

the public does not have a need to have answers for everything, that's the way it is...when money is involved, secret people play their cards close to their chest

anybody can ask the same question over and over and over and and the cows never come home...contact BART or Union DECIDERS, you won't get the because nobody cares what you know or don't know...certainly not this one...best,

cholo & buds...tee hee anjoying chili beans with homemade crackers...and, pecorino!

ps How is it you don't know...you've been arguing for weeks and weeks and weeks, what where you arguing about...the sky? has the sky fallen yet?

tee hee...


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Cholo
a resident of Livermore
on Nov 9, 2013 at 6:02 pm

another itsy bitsy correction: ...HOORAY!

we're all off to the kitchen for hot tea and cookies...

VIVA UNIONS! VIVA!


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger
a resident of Vintage Hills Elementary School
on Nov 10, 2013 at 9:34 am

Kathleen Ruegsegger is a registered user.

Thankfully, Cholo, BART has to disclose what they agreed to. And thanks to the Contra Costa Times/Bay Area News Group for insisting the contract be provided to paper.

Web Link

Turns out we don't have only to worry about the permanent source of funding, much of what BART management is spinning isn't accurate. As pointed out elsewhere, some of the claimed concessions are subject to arbitration and, likely, additional compensation. Also, the whopping $37 a month more for benefits (slow increase to the membership over four years) is only good for the life of the contract--it is not permanent.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger
a resident of Vintage Hills Elementary School
on Nov 10, 2013 at 10:02 am

Kathleen Ruegsegger is a registered user.

Here is a piece from Zakhary Mallet, one of the BART board directors: Web Link

"For example, even though future employees must now vest 15 years before receiving retirement medical, all current employees will be grandfathered. But the net present value of the many-decades' savings from this action is being provided as a "credit" to current employees.

"It amounts to a "new employee-to-current employee" subsidy. In addition, for every 1 percent contribution in pensions, our employees were given a mathematically equivalent wage increase to offset their pension contributions."

So much for the notion of members looking out for each other or the little guy or anyone for that matter.

To balance Mallett's piece, we have this from two East Bay BART directors. We probably need to ensure they are not reelected. Web Link

"Employees will now pay more toward their medical premiums, helping BART address rising medical costs." No mention that it is only for four years and will have to be renegotiated.

"Now, thanks to the BART board making a stand, BART management gains the right to roll out technological improvements, needing only to "meet and confer" with unions about such changes." No mention that it is arbitration and that compensation for these "improvements" can be included.

"Employees who take an unpaid day off will no longer be eligible for overtime pay if they haven't worked 40 hours that week." No explanation that this is for those without sick or vacation pay. In other words, you can be sick or take vacation and still get overtime.

"The work stoppages cost people time and money they could ill afford to lose -- service industry employees who risked being docked pay for being late, single mothers who paid extra money for child care, disabled people who had to scramble to find alternate ways to get to appointments." All people who probably can't afford the potential increase in fares or taxes. It appears neither the BART Board (at least a majority), and even though they had the backing of the public to hang tough, nor BART union leaders really cared about what "people . . . could ill afford to lose."




 +   Like this comment
Posted by Cholo
a resident of Livermore
on Nov 10, 2013 at 12:13 pm

A contract between BART and the Union is a legal document

po po losers...just can't accept legal documents
Nobody who signed the contract on the union side cares what you think or dig up Kathleen...I sure don't! nope...the Union and BART voted yup...lets sign on the dotted line...they both signed knowing what it meant...
Please call the Union Kathleen and find out what they think of your research skills...tee hee...Kathleen is waaaaaaaaaay over...i mean waaaaaaaaay over...and bitter?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Cholo
a resident of Livermore
on Nov 10, 2013 at 12:14 pm

wonder why BART is even lying to you K...? hmmmmmm...cause you don't matter to BART admin.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Cholo
a resident of Livermore
on Nov 10, 2013 at 1:13 pm

How much did it COST TO HIRE ATTORNEY NEGOTIATOR?

Web Link

HMMMMMMMMMMMMM............!

Can anybody please explain how come he got sooooooooooooooooooooo much money to be such a loser...the UNION got the better deal! tee hee hee...


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Cholo
a resident of Livermore
on Nov 10, 2013 at 1:19 pm

nota bene: my BESTEST advice to all BART employees is to promise that you always give your employer at least a 50% return on their investment...tee hee

if you agree...say tee hee hee...


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger
a resident of Vintage Hills Elementary School
on Nov 10, 2013 at 2:38 pm

Kathleen Ruegsegger is a registered user.

Legal, public documents, Cholo. It isn't about whether BART and their union cares. It's what the voters think that will matter. Attorneys are hired, paid, and their counsel ignored all the time--50/50 change it happened here too.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Cholo
a resident of Livermore
on Nov 10, 2013 at 6:51 pm

don't agree


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger
a resident of Vintage Hills Elementary School
on Nov 11, 2013 at 12:53 pm

Kathleen Ruegsegger is a registered user.

It doesn't matter whether you agree or not; it's law: Web Link There's plenty more to be found on the topic if you are uncertain.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Cholo
a resident of Livermore
on Nov 11, 2013 at 4:34 pm

the negotiations are over...BART crawled out of the proceedings on ALL 4's

NOW HEEL...I MEAN IT!

tee hee hee...


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Cholo
a resident of Livermore
on Nov 11, 2013 at 4:36 pm

now fess up Kathleen...who got the best deal and how did it happen? Please esplain...I mean it!


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger
a resident of Vintage Hills Elementary School
on Nov 11, 2013 at 6:06 pm

Kathleen Ruegsegger is a registered user.

Tomfoolery.


Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.

Email:


Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: *

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields

Good news for downtown Livermore and the performing arts
By Tim Hunt | 3 comments | 1,075 views

November Ballot Prop 2 Devils or Angels in the Details?
By Tom Cushing | 2 comments | 981 views

Why we need the Water Bond
By Roz Rogoff | 13 comments | 869 views