At the request of BART administration, Brown appointed the three-person board, saying in a statement that a strike would “significantly disrupt public transportation services and will endanger the public’s health, safety, and welfare.” State law forbids any strike or lockout while the board finishes its investigation.

The board’s investigation will include the facts of the dispute and the respective positions of the parties but will not contain recommendations. The report will be made available to the public.

”The board is directed to provide me with a written report within the next seven days,” Brown said in the statement. “For the sake of the people of the Bay Area, I urge — in the strongest terms possible — the parties to meet quickly and as long as necessary to get this dispute resolved.”

The planned strike would have been the second this summer, following the expiration of a 30-day temporary agreement after July’s five-day strike. On Thursday, BART unions gave 72-hour notice of a strike that would begin Monday morning if a contract agreement was not reached between BART and BART unions Service Employees International Union Local 1021 and Amalgamated Transit Union Local 1555.

In July, negotiations focused on wage increases for BART workers and the ability to pay into their own pensions. The unions have also requested better security to protect themselves from violence on the job and general improvements such as better lighting on the tracks.

BART leaders said they opposed a strike, saying it unnecessarily harmed passengers.

“As we saw in early July, the effect of a public transit strike is a complete disruption of the Bay Area economy,” said BART President Tom Radulovich in a letter to Brown asking for a cooling-off period. “We believe the public should not be deprived of this essential public service unless all alternatives to prevent a work stoppage have been utilized.”

But union leaders, such as Pete Castelli, executive director of SEIU 1021, said that although BART employees and administration share the common goal of avoiding a strike, he is dissatisfied with BART’s management of the negotiations — especially the administration’s choice to hire Thomas Hock, a $400,000 outside consultant.

Hock left negotiations earlier this month to go on vacation and has only recently returned.

Union negotiators were informed of Hock’s availability ahead of negotiations, said BART spokesperson Rick Rice.

“Mr. Hock is an experienced negotiator, and the district has faith that he’ll get us through to a good contract this time,” he said.

Contact Jacob Brown and Madeleine Pauker at newsdesk@dailycal.org.

The post BART strike averted for seven days as Brown steps in appeared first on The Daily Californian.

Alex Mousouris/Staff

BART and union officials announced that wage negotiations resumed at 6 p.m. on Tuesday, following BART employees’ strike beginning on Monday, which delayed thousands of Bay Area commuters.

As of Tuesday at 7:30 p.m., the strike is set to continue into Wednesday, with no indication of when negotiations will be resolved. In a press release Monday, BART called on union leaders to end the strike, while AC transit officials said they do not expect a strike on Wednesday.

“This strike is not necessary and we call on union leaders to end it and join us at the table so the Bay Area can get moving again,” said BART spokesperson Rick Rice in a press release on Monday. “We are prepared to negotiate the significantly improved proposal we delivered on Saturday.”

Negotiations have been ongoing for several months, with both parties unable to reach an agreement before employee contracts expired on Sunday night.

The inability to reach an agreement comes from the opposing parties’ inability to reach a consensus on what should be prioritized, with BART focusing on employees’ increasing pension and medical costs and unions focusing on employee safety.

Union leaders feel that their employees should be compensated for having stagnant wages since 2009. Another grievance that unions have is the lack of safety for their employees, citing the documented increased violence faced by BART employees over the last year.

Two of the unions that represent most of BART employees, Amalgamated Transit Union Local 1555 and Service Employees International Union Local 1021, filed an unfair labor practices lawsuit against BART on June 24 under the allegation that BART management was unwilling to negotiate over employees’ safety.

Carlos Rivera, a spokesperson for SEIU 1021, said that he expected negotiations to be slow, which is why he thought it was necessary to warn commuters.

“We sincerely apologize for inconvenience to any Bay Area residents,” Rivera said on Monday. “We tried to make sure people knew ahead of time of alternate ways of travelling. We gave a 72-hour notice so that people could start making alternative plans.”

Because of the BART strike, many commuters found themselves trying to navigate the AC Transit system for the first time. Some bus lines, such as the F line or transbay line, had twice as many passengers as normal on Monday, according to Clarence Johnson, a spokesperson for AC Transit.

In a press release on Tuesday, AC Transit officials called ongoing negotiations with ATU a signal that they will be “providing bus service as usual” on Wednesday.

Extra AC Transit lines and early-morning shuttles were offered from the most congested areas, such as downtown Oakland and routes into San Francisco. AC Transit also ran six more trips than normal of the F line to account for additional passengers.

On Monday, Caltrans officials urged commuters to find alternate ways of getting to their destinations. There was heavy traffic all day on many of the major highways, with officials estimating an extra 60,000 vehicles on the road today.

Despite efforts to help commuters get to work, many found themselves either late or having to stay with a friend to avoid a difficult morning commute.

“It was just not knowing how crazy things would be today,” said Helen Jentzen, a UC Berkeley library employee. “I’d much rather stay overnight and make sure I have a way to get to work Monday morning as opposed to have to deal with any kind of craziness.”

However, many passengers who rely on BART to get to work found it unfair that they had to suffer due to the ongoing negotiations between BART management and its employees.

“My impression of the strike is that the labor contract is up, and the union is taking advantage of that by asking for higher wages,” said Suzi Ferguson, a UC Berkeley alumna who works at One Medical Group in San Francisco. “It’s a shame that they are holding a huge portion of the workforce hostage for this demand, especially in a time when jobs are not plentiful.”

Contact Jose Hernandez at jhernandez@dailycal.org.

The post No agreement reached after second day of BART strike appeared first on The Daily Californian.

That is why last Tuesday’s announcement of a deficit-reducing pension deal between Berkeley city officials and the Service Employees International Union Local 1021 — which represents the city’s maintenance and clerical workers — is so refreshing.

The ability of the city and the union to come to an agreement regarding pensions is a welcome sign of a government ready to address budgetary concerns.

This deal shows the necessity of compromise when dealing with budget issues and that unions are not the budget-busting stalwarts so many have painted them to be.

Essentially, unions must have a seat at the table when discussing budget solutions, and as this pension reform deal shows, unions can be willing to act responsibly in the best interest of the city.

Though the pension deal addresses a small portion of the the city’s budget deficit, it has many positives — deferring salary increases and lowering the percentage that workers receive after retirement from 2.7 to 2 percent of their highest annual salary are the standouts — and the resulting savings are a step in the right direction.

These concessions, though painful for some, are absolutely necessary for the financial solvency of the city. Thus we commend the union and its workers, who overwhelmingly adopted the deal, for their pragmatism and understanding.

But because the cost of living is in constant flux, the possible necessity for pension reform in the years to come cannot be disregarded.

While we fully endorse the current deal, citizens, workers and officials cannot become complacent. The city still faces a large deficit that must be dealt with in a timely manner.

Though the deal was an overall victory for the financially prudent, the city must still make difficult decisions regarding the budget.

We hope that this is the beginning of a series of budgetary compromises that will maintain the integrity of city services while balancing finances.

The post The noble necessity appeared first on The Daily Californian.

After nearly four months of negotiations, an agreement that would work to decrease the city’s $12.2 million deficit for the next fiscal year was reached with the Service Employees International Union Local 1021. The union represents the city’s maintenance and clerical workers.

The agreement would affect about 525 of Berkeley’s maintenance and clerical workers, according to city spokesperson Mary Kay Clunies-Ross.

The result of the reductions in Cost-of-Living Adjustments — which would include this agreement with the union — should garner a net savings of $411,000 in the 2012 fiscal year with an annual ongoing savings of $389,000, according to the memorandum of the agreement between the city and the union.

Under the revised pension system, new employees hired after Jan. 1, 2012, could retire at age 55 and receive 2 percent of their annual highest pay salary, instead of the current 2.7 percent they currently receive at 55. This amount would also be multiplied by the number of years the employee has served in Berkeley, according to Gladys Gray, president of the maintenance chapter of the union.

Though the union was also scheduled to receive a 4 percent increase in 2012 — a 2 percent increase before December and an additional 2 percent increase after December — under the new agreement, the union would defer this increase and has agreed to only receive an increase of 2 to 3 percent for the year, according to Sandra Lewis, president of the clerical chapter of the union.

“This reduction saved employees from going out the door, because this saved employee services from being cut,” Lewis said.

Lewis said she attributes these cost-cutting measures to the city’s progressively deteriorating economy.

“Five years ago, we never thought these concessions would occur when we thought of the economy, but the city is trying to get through these rough times,” Lewis said. “As employees, we feel that we have to do our part so that the citizens of the city do not feel the budget is all on their backs.”

Lewis said this is the second concession that they agreed upon to help ease the city’s looming budget. However, Gray said the maintenance chapter could not make such a concession at that time.

During the last fiscal year, Lewis said the clerical chapter began a program for members to volunteer to take time off without pay, when offices closed two days each month. A few members also reduced their work schedule to 37.5 hours a week, moving their status to below full time, she said.

Lewis said union members were overwhelmingly willing to adopt these concessions, with 90 percent voting in favor of the agreement — a level of support she said she attributes to the union’s ongoing education of the city’s fiscal crisis.

“I want to thank the (union) for having leadership and stepping up to have a real discussion about the city’s fiscal situation by agreeing to open their contracts, reduce their salary’s increases and looking out for the long-term benefit of the city by looking at some real pension reform,” City Manager Phil Kamlarz said at the meeting Tuesday. “The SEIU 1021 really stepped up to the plate.”

According to Kamlarz and Gray, both parties said the open communication they experienced during the negotiations helped foster the development of a good working relationship between city officials and employees.

Kamlarz said he believes this is a first step to show how such collaboration can benefit the city.

The City Council is set to consider the recommendation at its June 28 meeting.

The post City officials and workers compromise on pension reform appeared first on The Daily Californian.