|
 Late Friday, the contract with San Francisco Bay Area Rapid
Transit's two largest unions appeared to be facing uncertainty as
the agency said that it was seeking the renewed talks.
After a closed-door meeting during the afternoon to discuss the
issue and review its likely costs, BART officials said a family
medical leave provision giving its 2,300 union workers up to six
weeks of paid time off each year would be too expensive.
On Thursday, BART officials announced that the provision had been
"inadvertently" included in the agreement, which was signed off by
transit and union negotiators in October. The board, which is set to
vote on the contract Nov. 21, has now ordered the agency's general
manager to restart talks with representatives from the unions —
Amalgamated Transit Union Local 1555 and Service Employees
International Union Local 1021. A new chief negotiator is expected
to be announced.
"We are not comfortable with the potential liability that could
result from the adoption of this contract provision," the board said
in a statement issued Friday night. It was "never the District's
intention to include the disputed Family Medical Leave Act proposal
in the contract," it added, indicating the medical leave provision
was "erroneously" included in the contract language by an unnamed
temporary employee in July.
By BART's accounting, 7.4% of its ATU and SEIU workers have taken
leaves for family care, at an average of 4.3 weeks and costing about
$1.4 million a year. But in its statement Friday, the agency
suggested it is worried up to 33% of the union employees might take
six weeks of paid leave under the new provision, costing the agency
$10.5 million.
"The Board is disappointed that this error occurred and was not
caught earlier," it said.
SEIU Local 1021 Executive Director Peter Castelli said by telephone
Friday that it would likely be a few days before his union made a
decision on how to respond.
"We're not ruling anything out, but we're not inclined to go back to
the bargaining table," Castelli said.
Later, in a statement Friday night, he added: "Make no mistake,
there was no confusion or glitch in the agreement. BART's
high-priced chief negotiator Thomas Hock, Assistant General Manager
Paul Oversier, and Labor Relations Manager Rudy Medina, signed an
agreement that would allow BART workers time off to care for their
family members with a serious illness."
BART management and its two largest unions agreed to a tentative
deal on Oct. 21 after six months of agonizing negotiations and two
strikes that caused headaches for hundreds of thousands of
commuters.
The disputed proposal would require the agency to provide workers
additional paid leave for six of the 12 weeks allowed under the
Family Medical Leave Act. Prior contract language required workers
to use sick leave and vacation time first.
[to top of second column] |
A BART attorney notified the unions in an email on Nov. 7 that a
provision on medical leave was signed by the agency in "error."
"I had assumed that you would recognize this for the error that it
clearly is," BART counsel Vicki Nuetzel (cq) wrote. "As I have
stated, given the Union's positions, (Management) cannot ratify the
contract.
"It is most unfortunate that the efforts made by all parties to
reach what we believed to be a fair resolution will be wasted, but
there is no choice."
Board Director James Fang called the error unfortunate.
"We're going to discuss the options and one of them is to not to
approve the contract," Fang said Thursday. Fang said BART management
had known about the issue since last week after conducting a final
review of the deal, but that board members didn't find out until
Tuesday.
ATU Local 1555 President Antonette Bryant criticized the BART
decision.
"Today, the BART Board of Directors chose to walk away from a deal
it negotiated with our attorneys and leaders over a six month span.
On behalf of our riders, our members and the entire Bay Area, we are
angered, shocked and disappointed," Bryant said in a statement
released early Saturday.
On Friday, Bryant said that the language in the contract was not
inadvertent and that the deal is valid.
"An agreement is an agreement. BART has buyers' remorse," Bryant
said. "Now that we have a deal, BART managers think they made a
mistake, but they could have and should have identified that long
before 2,300 union members voted on the new contract.
"We feel that this is a valid contract," Bryant concluded.
If the board votes down the contract on Nov. 21, the unions may
consider going on strike for the third time in three months.
SEIU's Castelli questioned BART officials' competence and good
faith.
"It's a further demonstration a combination of incompetence and no
real desire to get an agreement," he said. "I've been bargaining
union contracts for over 25 years, and I have never seen anything
like this happen, ever."
[Associated
Press; CHANNING JOSEPH and
TERRY COLLINS]
Copyright 2013 The Associated
Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. |
