Muni Drivers Try to Block Service Restoration
You just can’t make this stuff up.
The Muni operators’ union, TWU Local 250-A, filed a brief with the California Public Employee Relations Board (PERB) to block the restoration of 61% of the service cuts that took effect in May. The restoration is supposed to take place Saturday, but if the board grants TWU an injunction, the service cuts will remain in place. SFMTA Executive Director Nathaniel Ford says Muni is moving forward with the restoration, at least for now.
One thing is clear: TWU has given up even the slimmest hope of defeating Proposition G. Having alienated San Franciscans thoroughly by insisting on pay increases during a severe budget crisis, just as other city workers were accepting pay cuts, they’ve decided to go for broke and litigate their way to cushy jobs for union leadership and less service for Muni riders.
PERB isn’t scheduled to meet until October 14, according to its web site. It’s hard to say from here whether that’s a good thing or a bad thing for Muni riders.
Wouldn’t restoration provide more work for Muni drivers? This does not make any sense. Is this an accurate report?
the argument is over attendance/sick leave policies. Gaming the rules has cost Muni many millions every year.
Yes, the report is accurate. For the union, much of it seems to be a matter of principle. SFMTA has paid the salaries of the union’s division chairs to do union work on city time; when SFMTA ended that policy and ordered the division chairs back to driving vehicles and providing service for riders, the union got angry and claimed that the “meet and confer” aspect of their contract had not been met.nnWhat does and doesn’t constitute “meet[ing] and confer[ring]” is a frequent subject of dispute in labor contracts.
[…] Rescue Muni Policy « Muni Drivers Try to Block Service Restoration […]
Good catch. The issues here are two.nnFirst, MUNI did this unilaterally, breaking their agreements with the union over how they’re supposed to do this sort of thing. And it’s essentially a good way to bone the workers: if the union sits there and takes it, then there’s precedent and MUNI gets to do the same thing next time. If they protest, then MUNI gets to publicize it and it makes prop G even more likely to pass. Win/win for MUNI.nnThe other thing is, from what I hear, MUNI is doing this on the cheap. They’re pulling people off of other tasks, including maintenance, in order to increase hours. They are also adding some money, but nowhere near enough to restore service without cutting other things.nnWhat puzzles me is the endgame for all of this. If you look at cost of living, the Bay Area is the most expensive in the country outside of NYC proper. But there are plenty of places within an hour’s commute of NYC that are affordable to live; there essentially aren’t any within an hour of SF. So really, the Bay Area is the #1 most expensive place for lower-income people to live in the United States. But we’re APPALLED by the idea that we might pay our transit workers the highest salary in the country.nnWell, we know how MUNI is now. I guess we’ll see if it’s any better when we’re paying our transit workers $10/hour, and they’re living in the central valley and driving two hours each way to work. Somehow I don’t think that’s a recipe for good service, but what do I know?nnMaybe if each driver has a manager with a whip sitting next to him. It would be more expensive, sure, but it would be the MANAGERS getting paid outrageous amounts of money. And nobody ever complains about that.
I don’t believe your assertion that the Bay Area is the #1 most expensive place for low income people to live. Please back up this statement with facts.