Hearst Owned SF Chronicle Threatens Anti-Strike Legislation To Force Concessions

Hearst Owned SF Chronicle Threatens Anti-Strike Legislation To Force Concessions
http://www.sfchronicle.com/opinion/editorials/article/No-more-BART-labor...
No more BART labor delays
5:08 PM

After a brief strike, two cooling-off periods and a team of fact-finders dispatched by the governor, BART and its unions appear no closer to a labor agreement. If nothing changes, there will be a devastating strike in less than a month.

That deadline, coming on Oct. 10, should be time enough to settle a labor dispute. Both sides in the BART standoff are scheduled to meet next week and could work out a settlement. But the gap between the two sides - and the deep animosity that divides them - make the stalemate especially nasty and dug-in.

Riders are all but forgotten in this quarrel and should be angry. Encouraged to use public transit, they are now at its mercy. Through bonds, sales taxes and fares, Bay Area residents have built a far-flung system that over 400,000 daily riders rely on with no reliable alternative. If a strike happens, there will be economic losses, traffic jams and disrupted lives.

The specter of a strike should alert public officials to pressure both the BART board and union leaders to craft a deal. These same political leaders - mayors, state legislators, local supervisors and council members - were notably absent in recent months, frozen by loyalties to labor though mindful of polls showing voter sympathy with management. It was a colossal lack of courage and failure of leadership.

The issues on the table are major. Past labor deals papered over fundamental problems and put off serious choices on health and retirement costs, which have jumped sharply. Credit management with drawing a sharp line under the unsustainable nature of BART employee costs.

BART workers, for example, pay $92 per month for health coverage and nothing toward retirement. Despite this sweet deal, union leaders want a 21.5 percent wage boost over three years, justifying the sky-high number on the lack of a raise for the last four years.

Management has moved from a no-raise offer in April to a bid of 10 percent over four years plus higher fringe payments by workers.

This week the board signaled it wasn't willing to fall back on past habits when it voted to spend a $5.7 million surplus on upkeep and improvements. BART Director James Fang got nowhere on his suggestion to spend the money in another aimless effort to buy labor peace without serious negotiations.

If the board and unions continue to avoid serious deliberations, it's time to consider the labor world's version of the nuclear option: a law banning public transportation strikes along with binding arbitration of disputes. Such a law exists for police and fire because public safety must be guaranteed.

But in a traffic-clogged Bay Area, where one major transit system is an everyday essential, it may be time to add BART workers. The idea is anathema to labor, which prizes the right to strike, but a prolonged and paralyzing walkout jeopardizes an entire region.

Both sides should step back from the brink of a strike. It's time to settle.