BART Strike Back On Workers Isolated by Own Unions

The strike is on again in San Francisco after a long tango between BART management, their lead anti-union negotiator, Thomas Hook, and Amalgamated Transit Union Local 1555 and SIEU Local 1021. The fist strike back in July was called off by the unions and further delayed by the intervention of State Governor Jerry Brown who sought and obtained a court ordered 60 day cooling off period. That cooling off period has expired and with the unions and BART management making little progress the strike is back on again.

According to one report "The strike is an expression of deep opposition among transit workers to the demands of BART management, which is backed by the political establishment and media in the Bay Area and California. These demands include significant cuts in health care and pension benefits, along with changes in job rules designed to significantly reduce pay and increase management power."

The unions involved in the negotiations have conceded to most of management's demands but they know that such concessions remain deeply resented by their local membership who are unlikely to vote in favour of a sell out deal at their expense.

The sister local to ATU 1555, ATU local 192, representing bus drivers employed by AC Transit issued a strike notice after its members twice voted down sell out deals recommended to them by their leadership. During the first strike AC Transit was an essential tool in BART management's strategy of blunting the impact of the strike by running buses across the Bay area. While there was expressions of solidarity between BART workers and AC Transit drivers prior to the first strike, the ATU leadership deliberately sabotaged the tactic of a united union front in the face of management intransigence during the negotaitons by both BART and AC Transit officials.

A worker interviewed   at a rally in support of the strike "noted that, just as with the first BART strike in July, the transit workers were not receiving any strike pay. Workers will receive a meager $25 a week in strike pay only if it lasts more than two or three weeks, he said." For many workers this second strike appears to be a continuation of the first one, which was shut down by the unions with the promise that management would bargain fairly. “This is pretty much a continuation of the first strike,” said one worker. “They never really negotiated so I think of this as the sixth day of our strike.”

Workers are aware and deeply suspicious of the role their unions have been taking in the strike, knowing full well that Governor Brown would seek the court imposed injunction, and instead of devising a common strike strategy between BART workers and AC Transit drivers, deliberately keeping them apart so that AC Transit drivers would be forced to work as scabs in the event of a strike by BART subway workers.

Only one day after the strike began two BART maintenance workers who were checking a section of track were struck and killed by a San Francisco Bay area commuter train. Because of the ongoing transit strike a non-union employee was operating the train. According to  the police deputy chief for Bay Area Rapid Transit the driver in the accident was “qualified.” Apparently at the time of the accident, the train was "being run in automatic mode under computer control."

BART Assistant General Manager, Paul Oversier,  told reporters that one of the two workers, whose names were not released, was with the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, Oversier said. The union is not on strike but had asked members to show up on picket lines to support other workers. The employee "chose to come to work," Oversier said.

In its twitter feed ATU Local 1555 said it would suspend picketing for one day due to the recent tragedy and out of respect for the families involved. On Saturday night, picketers held candlelight vigils for the two workers killed. The Local 1555 twitter post stated "Our hearts go out to any @SFBART comrades involved in today's incident. In the midst of this #BARTstrike, NO ONE deserves to die."

ATU 57th Convention Proposes Service Councils

The 57th Convention promises to change the way negotiations are done by increasing the use of "service councils" that the ATU constitution already provides for. The idea is to create service councils consisting of several locals with a common employer. The service council would discuss issues, respond to problems and centralize arbitrations. They would also negotiate a single contract for all members working for a common employer. The councils would be made up of the of the president and financial secretary of the local included in a particular council. Are you suspicious of how these service councils are going to work? Take a look at how this kind of centralization played itself out in the SEIU. Is this how the International is going to take "our" voice away? Is the real purpose here to stop members from having a say in their local. And is this just a vehicle to allow the International to keep the dues money flowing in while negotiating concessionary contracts with employers?

Back in 2009, Stan Lyles was a rank-and-file California hospital worker who attacked SEIU for being undemocratic, cutting backroom deals with Bosses, and selling out the union’s members. Listen to what he has to say about the actions of the International and how the membership of his local dealt with the situation.

Watch Video

Local 192 Rank and File Speak Out Vote "NO" to AC Transit

Facts For Working People reports that AC Transit workers, members of Amalgamated Transit Union 192, rejected a contract yesterday by a vote of 576 to 257. The local's executive board had recommended the contract by a 8 to 5 majority. This is an extremely important result in that BART workers are also still in contract talks although the state has stepped in and imposed a 60"cooling off" period preventing a strike. The train operators at BART are members of ATU 1555, the bus driver's sister local.

The no vote reflects the strong opposition to a concessionary contract and an organized campaign for rejection among the ranks of local 192. A solidarity committee composed of workers from other unions and the community also provided support and solidarity to local 192 members.

This is an opportunity for labor to go on the offensive and to do that we must raise our expectations.

By this I mean reject the propaganda from the bosses and their media (and echoed by the union officialdom) that concessions have to be made and that there is no money in society. The last 40 years have shown that this concessionary bargaining has no end to it---damage control doesn't work. The more we give, the more they want. Transit unions should demand that public sector pensions and benefits that are being blamed for the crisis of capitalism should be expanded to all workers. Sociey has the money, it's simply a matter of what we do with it.

Any time the rank and file of a union rejects the leadership's recommendation in instances like this, it is no small matter. This vote will send shock waves in to the boardrooms of the corporate and investment community we can be certain of that.

In the aftermath of this vote, the bosses will be working with the union hierarchy behind the scenes to get something passed and put an end to this. The membership must be brought to their senses as defined by the 1% and their representatives. Any sign of unity in action between the various unions will be met with counters by the employers. Attempts to divide the workers, blue collar against white, bus drivers against train operators, must be fought. One local will be offered the carrot in order to break intra-union unity. This will be done through the leadership and the ranks that have spoken through this vote must ensure this is not successful. The involvement of the community will also increase these divisive tactics from management as well and the best way to combat this is through active committees of rank and file workers and the community.

Congratulations to ATU members who have taken a stand and have no doubt given a great boost to our brothers and sisters at BART. But the war will heat up now. The dirty tricks, lies and propaganda will intensify in subtle and not so subtle ways. The union officialdom at the international level and throughout the AFL-CIO will be working behind the scenes with their allies in the Democratic Party to derail what could develop in to a movement that would undermine their view of the world, and that threatens the relationship they have built with the bosses based on labor peace. Any union official that breaks from this approach would be a positive but the best security is the conscious intervention of the rank and file.

The following video presents the voice of rank and file members of Local 192 on the negotiations and the representation they are getting from their union officers in the ATU; Don't Piss On Me and Tell Me It's Raining

ATU Backs Down Agrees to Sell Out Contract

This report is from the World Socialist Web Site

Late Tuesday night, the Amalgamated Transit Union (ATU) called off the strike scheduled for Wednesday morning and announced that it had agreed to a new contract with AC Transit (ACT) the public bus system for the East Bay in Northern California.

The ATU represents bus drivers, dispatchers, maintenance workers, and clerical staff at AC Transit, which has a daily ridership of approximately 180,000. AC Transit workers have been without a contract since the beginning of July. At stake in the negotiations were workers’ demands for higher wages and ACT’s demand for concessions on health care contributions. According to one driver, the transit workers have not had an effective raise in 15 years.

The final deal agreed to by the union leaders and management includes a 9.5 percent raise over three years and employee contributions to health care that rise to $180 a month in the third year. For a worker who makes the average income of $55,000 this would mean a net loss over the life of the contract. The average three year inflation rate in the US has stayed above eight percent for the past several years and the increased health care contribution amounts to a 3.5 percent wage cut for the average worker.

AC Transit workers have clearly shown their willingness to fight for a better deal, but they have been held back by their union. Before the contract expired, ATU members voted 97.4 percent in favor of a strike. The contract expired on July 1, the same day that BART workers, also represented by the ATU, saw their contracts expire.

In the face of widespread support for a common struggle by BART and ACT workers, the ATU leadership refused to let the two groups go on strike at the same time. The ATU demonstrated what they considered “solidarity” by agreeing to increase bus service during the BART strike, essentially pushing their members to act as strikebreakers.

During the strike AC Transit workers repeatedly complained that their union was not giving them information on contract negotiations and that they were not being respected at union meetings. To stem growing discontent among their members the union announced last Monday that it intended to strike Wednesday morning. Rather than actually follow through with the strike, the union leadership accepted an offer that was substantially the same as the management had proposed before the strike notification.

The last thing the ATU leadership wanted was any kind of combined strike which would have immediately brought the unions into conflict with public officials in the Democratic Party. California state governor Jerry Brown, a Democrat, has fiercely slashed budgets and championed public pension “reform,” which amounts to an end to defined benefit plans and an across-the-board assault on benefits. Brown and the Democratic Party enjoy the full-throated support of the unions, which function to block any opposition developing among workers to these policies.

The fact that the ATU leadership felt the need to announce a strike they had no intention of conducting points to a growing militancy of their membership. During the BART strike workers were often heard saying that if AC Transit and BART struck together, “that would be a shot heard round the world,” and “management would fold in a day.”

The 1968 Chicago Transit Strike

This may be the only video in existence about the Chicago Transit Authority (wildcat) strike of 1968. There is no wonder that official Chicago history has somehow buried this story in a deep crypt, but this video brings it back into the daylight, along with rare archival stills and film footage, and exclusive interviews with now retired CTA drivers who played key roles. Here is the 60s Civil Rights movement intersecting with the class struggle in a big North American city, engaging a major public sector employer. Adding to this mix was the fact that many of the drivers were returned Viet Nam veterans with combat experience and not inclined to back down from a fight. Now back in Chicago, the drivers confronted racism not only in the bus company but in the company union (warning: coarse language in video). "You could stand up in that union hall -- McNamara was the President -- at Van Buren and Ashland. Before you opened your mouth - whack! - you're out of order," recalls Rodgers Harmon, ret. 36 years CTA bus driver. "We didn't have any real representation in the union...the strike was not so much against the CTA, it was against the union with no representation," recalls Claude Brown, ret. CTA Bus Driver.

Go to video>>

ATU Leadership Fail - Lessons of the BART Strike

Richard Mellor is a retired Afscme Local 444 member in the Bay area and he has been following and documenting the issues around the recent BART strike in San Francisco. The ATU Local 1555 represents BART workers and initially went on a 4 day strike at the beginning of July of this year when bargaining with BART management reached an impasse. Workers for Bay area transit buses, AC Transit, are also represented by the ATU although a different local (Local 192), and were in a legal strike position at the time but choose not to go out on strike in solidarity with BART workers. AC Transit used their buses and workers to provide additional transportation services in the Bay area during the 4 day strike by BART workers.

The 4 day strike was called of by the union leadership in favour of a 30 day period of negotiations with BART management in spite of the fact that BART management had previously hired the well known union buster Thomas P. Hock, the VP of labour relations at Veolia Transit, as their lead negotiator. The 30 day period did not produce any meaningful progress and BART management then called on State Governor Jerry Brown to intervene. The strike has now been postponed indefinitely by the Governor and is subject to the outcome of a board of inquiry hearing which may result in the imposition of a state mandated further 60 day cooling off period.

The strike underlines a key failure of the leadership of the trade union movement today as it faces ongoing decades long decline in union density, introduction of right to work legislation and prohibitions and restrictions on the right to strike. Mellor's analysis of the ATU's failure to bring a class based approach to the BART strike are a lesson in where rank and file activists have to start in order to reclaim their unions from labour bureaucrats and to resurrect a moribund labour movement. The following are some highlights of a longer article he wrote on the situation at BART available at the Facts For Working People blog site.

"...there are some important lessons that arise in situations like these, one of them being the class bias of the mass media. In US society there is a massive and permanent ideological war waged by the mass media that Wall Street controls aimed at obscuring and actually denying the class nature of society, and indeed, that class struggle even exists, but when workers are forced to defend our interests in the way the BART workers are presently doing, the class nature of society is laid bare for all to see.

Jerry Brown, a politician representing the interests of the bankers, hedge fund managers and other coupon clippers----in short, the US capitalist class-----claims he stepped in to this dispute to save us all hardship. If the dispute cannot be resolved in this seven days through the intervention of the board of inquiry, then “Brown is expected to make a swift decision on seeking a 60-day cooling off period.”,the San Francisco Chronicle reports this morning. Brown will ask the courts to impose this 60-day cooling off period and if the court decides that a strike “Will significantly disrupt public transportation services and will endanger the public’s health, safety and welfare.”, a strike will be illegal.

But Brown’s justification for stopping the strike at the last minute Sunday night was that the strike would, “significantly disrupt public transportation services and will endanger the public’s health, safety and welfare.”. Why would the courts reverse that? Is it likely that a strike deemed by the state through one of its major representatives a threat to our health and safety last Sunday, will be declared fine and dandy a week later or 60 days later?

We are not stupid. In our communities, Brown and other representatives of the 1% are ordering fire stations closed because we can’t afford to keep them open they say. Might this be a tad dangerous for us; put us at risk? Might closing fire stations, schools and health care facilities in a society where national health care is dismal, “..endanger the public’s health, safety and welfare.” We know it would. Brown knows it does but it is a political decision Brown and his class colleagues make as a necessary part of their agenda to put the US workers and middle class on rations. It is necessary to shift the crisis of capitalism in a global economy on to our backs and take back all the gains that have been won by working people over a century and a half of struggle. It is part of the declining influence of US capitalism on the world stage. We have to be more competitive and that means, work cheaper, faster and without unions that actually go on the offensive to oppose this strategy. Profits come before safety in capitalist society.

We only have to stop and think for a second to remind ourselves amid the mass of lies and propaganda that their claims of public safety are a smoke screen. Every American worker knows that the people in power in this country don’t give a damn about the rest of us. Everything we have in this country, every social benefit, every political advance, every material gain, has come about by doing what the BART workers are doing. The capitalists have capital, the media, the police and the courts, and the military when they need to call on troops to fire on their own kin, ( a risky business) but we have labor power. Without the ability to strike we are left to the mercy of the institutions of the 1%.

The 1% is using all their “legal” tricks to halt the possible success of a BART strike. It’s profits yes, but there is the effect on morale as well as after years of defeats and declining living standards any victory by labor over the forces of capital would inspire all of us, would show us that we can win, that we can make gains, that we can drive back this offensive and austerity agenda of the bankers, the hedge fund wasters and all the coupon clippers who plunder the wealth of society.

The US bosses actually fear the potential power of the US working class, fear that the stifling bureaucracy at the helm of the trade union movement might not be able to control their members and derail and undermine every movement from below as was done in Wisconsin, the strikes of the 1980’s and the Occupy Movement and its attempts to build strong links with organized Labor. This is what’s at stake here for them. It was to stem that power that Taft Hartley legislation was introduced after the mass strikes of the 1930’s and the huge strike wave of 1946. We have to have a mass defiance of these anti worker laws.

As is always the case the strategists atop organized Labor (and lets not kid ourselves, the bigwigs at the AFL-CIO and the CTW coalition in Washington are in on all this behind the scenes) are doing what they can to ensure that things don’t get out of hand. Our power lies in our ability to stop production and draw the rest of the working class and our communities in to this struggle. I was at a solidarity meeting for the BART workers over the weekend and when I left that meeting with 7 hours to deadline, representatives of the union representing BART train drivers and Station Agents as well as the Executive Director (Sounds a bit like a business doesn’t it) of the Union representing other staff like custodians for example, stressed that they were in strike mode. They were going to strike at midnight as management was not showing any effort to negotiate in good faith.

In fact, this is what the Executive Director of SEIU 1021 repeated on the TV news a few hours later; management was refusing to negotiate in good faith. These are two major themes that arise, the bosses won’t negotiate in good faith and we want a contract. He nor any other official had anything to say about workers needing to fight for more at the expense of the 1% or the public’s needs and how the union was fighting for more transit, free fares for seniors, half fare for the unemployed, more jobs, 24 hour trains or increased routes and transit for the disabled and how this can be paid for by the rich and ending trillion dollar wars.

He certainly never mentioned any solidarity committee and how the public could get in touch with it to join organized labor in our struggle for a better life for all. This is because the official union strategy doesn’t include an agenda for the working public so they have no intention of broadening this struggle to include the communities. The appeal to the community is merely a tactic to get some (normally well meaning leftists and some not so well meaning ones) to help organize a few rallies and such here and there to pressure the bosses to be a little less aggressive. Many seasoned leftists/activists know this but refuse to point this out so the left bureaucracy can play this game safe in knowing that the strategy will not be challenged.

The response to these two points the officials raise should be obvious: (1) the bosses never negotiate in good faith. (2) They want a contract too. The difference is what is in that contract.

This is at the heart of the matter. This particular dispute is not about the right to a contract but what’s in the contract. The problem is that the Union officialdom from all three locals immediately involved do not want to discuss this issue in depth. Like the leadership of organized Labor as a whole, they accept that some concessions have to be made, or more accurately they have no intention of doing what needs to be done to make gains, not just for the BART workers but for workers as a whole including those that have to use BART every day and who will be adversely affected by a strike.

The reality is this. We cannot counter the massive propaganda war against the BART workers in the media if the Unions aren’t fighting for those workers who depend on BART as well as those who work for BART. We have given many examples of some issues that can be raised. But not only must these issues be raised in the media, they must be raised at the negotiating table on behalf of the communities and with real rank and file community activists involved which they can be through a real solidarity support committee. I say this as when the Union hierarchy talks of linking with the community, they generally mean with leading business or religious and pro establishment figures in these communities rather than the folks at the grass root level who are serious about changing the present situation.

The bosses are serious about taking away from us as all the gains made through the great struggles that took place with the rise of the CIO in the 30’s and the Civil Rights movement. We cannot defeat them alone, no one local can stop them in isolation nor can individual communities. We have to start where we are, if in a union by building rank and file opposition caucus based on a program and strategy that demands what we need rather than what is acceptable to wall Street and a “fight to win” strategy for accomplishing these goals. In the communities we do the same and in each case we link these struggles together as well as reach out to workers internationally.

The AC Transit drivers (also in ATU but a different local) contract ends at midnight on Wednesday and they are threatening a strike if their issues are not resolved although there is no reason to think they would strike when they refused to at the time they were strongest. When BART workers struck, under the direction of the leadership, the AC Transit drivers union weakened the strike and their own member’s interests by picking up some of the slack. Only a short time before, the unity and mood between these two groups of workers was strong and there was no doubt in my mind they would have used their united power to win a better contract for all had the leadership been willing to lead. (We should not discount the role of the International leadership in these instances as they undermine any local leadership that violates the relationship they have with the bosses based on Labor peace by going on the offensive.) The leadership atop these organizations are deathly afraid of their own members.

We cannot win if we blindly obey laws that are made by politicians of the 1% in the interests of the 1%. Mass violation of the law is unavoidable if we want to stop this assault on workers and the middle class. We all want a peaceful life, but they won’t let us have a peaceful life, unless we passively agree with their agenda which is to drive us down to the wages and conditions of third world countries. They’re already on the way to doing that here in many industries especially the service sector and industries that employ women and minorities. But they have also successfully cut wages in half in auto with the help of the leadership of the UAW leadership.

If they are successful in defeating the BART workers especially if they successfully deny them the right to strike which Governor Brown is doing temporarily but is on the cards in a more permanent fashion, it will be a huge setback for all Bay Area workers. A strike is disruptive, not just for the public but for the workers involved, and it is obvious that I am critical of the how the heads of organized labor conduct these affairs as well as their role in general. But we must sift through the rubbish we hear and read in the 1%’s media and support these brothers and sisters."

ATU 57th International Convention Structural Exploration Committee, What's it all about?

Have you been digging around the internet lately trying to find out more info on the great ATU initiative around this so-called "Structural Exploration Committee" that is being proposed by Int. Pres. Hanley? Not having any luck because you can't find a damn thing anywhere on your Local's web page, and nothing at all on the web site of the International? Even the latest copy of the glossy ATU InTransit magazine had nothing in it explaining what this process is all about.

Fortunately, there is a report by an actual member of the ATU's Structural Exploration Committee handpicked by International President Hanley himself, on what has been going on with this process - which must be top secret because there is so little information available to regular rank and file members about it. Go to the link below which is to the web page of ATU Local 1741 in Lafayette, Indiana representing Bus Operators, Maintenance Personnel, and Paratransit Operators employed by the Greater Lafayette Public Transportation Corporation, doing business as CityBus. The President of Local 1741, Bryan Walck, was appointed by International President Larry Hanley to serve on the ATU's Structural Exploration Committee.

The Committee was formed in accordance with a resolution passed at the 56th International Convention and is tasked with examining all aspects of the ATU's structure and operation. Committee recommendations will be drafted into resolutions and presented to the delegates assembled at the 57th International Convention later this summer. Local 1741 President Walck will serve as one of the fifteen members of the Committee which met between May 28th and May 31st near Washington, DC. The International apparently provided airfare, hotel accommodations, most meals, and all training materials.

A very detailed report on what transpired at each day of the meeting can be found on the President's Blog section of the the Local 1741 web site. The report actually starts midway to the bottom of the web page and you have to scroll up to follow the daily reports for the 3 day meeting.

Looks like the bigwigs were there, Hanley and International VP Javier Perez. Perez seems to be Hanley's right hand man these days - he is running the show in Chicago with respect to the ongoing trusteeship of local 241. Now apparently the resolution on "Structural Change" is an attempt by the ATU to address issues that are currently facing transit unions such as privatization, the needs of the Locals, challenges for the future, and the direction the ATU will be moving in.

The committee is discussing how success is to be defined and how they plan to build ATU power. They have prepared a detailed list of issues that the ATU confronts such as Privatization Legislation; Bargaining; Rising Healthcare Costs; Leadership Skills; Corporate Lobbying; Reporting and Recordkeeping; Funding; Organizing; Attacks on Defined Benefit Pension Plans; Grievance/Contract; Arbitration Costs; and Training.

When it comes to the matter of how to best use resources and capacity to build power within the ATU the committee appears to have focused on measures the International is taking to significantly cut operating costs and direct money back into the field where it's needed most. The field being talked about here is that of political campaigning and lobbying which requires turning members dues money into dollars for democrats.

That this is the underlying agenda becomes clear when the committee addressed the issue of how to empower ATU Locals and to shore up their strength and stability, especially small Locals with no full time officer. The committee is not looking at ways to increase member involvement in their local, to increase the participatory and democratic procedures within locals or the International, or how to increase transparency and accountability at the local or International level. 

What is being proposed is the increased use of top down bureaucratic structures within the existing International Constitution and General Laws of the ATU such as Joint Bargaining Councils, and Joint Service Councils in place of local officers and representatives. In this respect the purpose and goals of the Structural Exploration Committee are profoundly anti-democratic and seek to impose top down administrative control over ATU locals by the International. It is in essence a way of imposing conditions of trusteeship over locals without some of the political dissension and opposition generated by the formal trusteeship process.

The problems with the ATU were clearly exposed by the failed New York School bus drivers' strike this last winter. This is a union that has lost connection with its membership, where the leadership at the local and international level is more concerned with advancing their own careers as full time well compensated union officials and bureaucrats. The inevitable result for the membership is sell-out contracts, concessionary bargaining, loss of benefits, lower wages and loss of job security. The ATU has clearly abandoned all interest in defending the class interests of its membership and has become an intermediary for the state and private capital assisting and enabling the imposition of cutbacks and austerity politics throughout the transportation industry. 

Unions Ought to Ditch "Cone of Silence" Approach to Bargaining

Bosses prefer that bargaining takes place between small groups of well-behaved representatives of both sides, under a "Cone of Silence." Why does this happen, and more importantly, why do unions go along with it?

The sharing of detailed information about the status of negotiations with union members or with the public is frowned upon. The process culminates in a tentative agreement - often little better than the one that came before it and sometimes worse - which is trotted out to a membership that has had no involvement in its negotiation, no clue how the extensive bargaining proposals they saw many months prior have shrunk to next to nothing, and no real idea of why any of this is good for them. Small wonder that working people who have been sidelined are less than enthusiastic when asked to strike or to ratify the lackluster package that has been hammered out under the cone of silence.

The "Cone of Silence" approach to bargaining is very popular with management because they serve management's purpose. A disempowered membership is unlikely to strike or to engage in a prolonged strike. Disconnected members aren't likely to come out in support of brothers and sisters who are on strike. A public that is oblivious to what is going on under the "cone of silence" will never know enough to care.

If unions are to begin to deliver the goods to their members at negotiations, they are going to have to chuck the rulebook and dump the "Cone of Silence." The days of keeping members in the dark and excluding all but a select few from the bargaining process need to end. There will be no breakthroughs in bargaining until this happens.

There is clear evidence from union organizing campaigns, that the most effective strategies have not been those based on professional organizers, but rather those based on a worker-to-worker, grassroots approach. What the evidence suggests is that unions are more likely to win certification campaigns by using a grass roots, rank-and-file intensive strategy, building a union and acting like a union from the very beginning of the campaign. The campaigns where the union focused on person to person contact, house calls, and small group meetings to develop leadership and union consciousness and inoculate workers against the employer's anti-union strategy were associated with significantly higher win rates than traditional campaigns which primarily utilized gate leafleting, mass meetings and glossy mailings to contact unorganized workers.

What this experience has shown is that leaflets and mailings act as a proxy for traditional campaigns, where the union's energy is focused on indirect means of communication, rather than on personal contact and leadership development necessary to build the union and counteract the employer campaign. Unlike leaflets and mailings, person to person contact through house calls and small group meetings is an essential and effective means for organizers to listen to workers' concerns, allay their fears and mobilize them around the justice and dignity issues that matter enough to them to challenge the employer and win, regardless of the brutality and intensity of the employer campaign.

It is also clear that Unions were also more successful when they encouraged rank and file participation in and responsibility for the organizing campaign. More than any other single variable, having a large, active, rank and file committee representative of all the different interest groups in the bargaining unit was found to be critical to union organizing success, increasing the probability of the union winning the election by as much as 20%. With employers aggressively campaigning against the union eight hours a day in the workplace, these committees are the most effective vehicles for generating the worker participation and commitment necessary to counteract the fears and misinformation created by the employer campaign.

Representative rank and file committees are also essential in order for the union to keep in touch with the issues and concerns of the workers they are attempting to organize. However, most important of all, these committees give workers a sense of ownership of the union and the organizing campaign and a sense that they are democratic and inclusive organization.

If these tactics work during organizing why wouldn't the same principles apply during bargaining? After all, the employers' motives are the same in each case - to retain control and to minimize the power of the workers. Employer tactics during organizing are not dissimilar from those used during bargaining. 

So what would an aggressive and intensive bargaining strategy free of the "Cone of Silence" look like?

• Actively involving rank and file members throughout the process.
• Encouraging bargaining committee members to speak, ask questions and engage the management committee in discussion.
• Polling members throughout negotiations to determine their priorities and positions on key issues.
• Person to person contact to report on the status of bargaining, preparation for job action and community support.
• Wider representation on bargaining committees of worker members so that a wide range of interests can be represented.
• Open, frequent communication about the status of bargaining with members and with the community.
• Engaging the community and applying pressure by communicating with customers, suppliers and community groups.
• Demanding that the employer open the books and supply proof whenever poverty is being alleged. (The timing for this kind of demand couldn't be better given the growing list of examples of how "figures don't lie but liars figure").

The list of possibilities for involving members and giving them ability to use their full power is probably endless.

Connections between people are far more powerful than the typical union leadership believes. If an open, inclusive approach during organizing helps build support, solidarity and commitment, why would a similar strategy not generate similar results during collective bargaining?

Would an informed membership not be a more supportive membership in the event that a strike is called? Would wider member participation on bargaining committees not generate greater commitment to the union and reinforce to the employer that the members are a force to be reckoned with? Would publicizing, in advance of and during negotiations, the union's position on the issues not generate interest and, possibly even support from the community? The "Cone of Silence" accomplishes none of these.

During organizing campaigns, employers try to prevent workers from accessing their power (collective action), and during bargaining, employers' seek to prevent workers from using their power. The "Cone of Silence" keeps workers in the dark and disconnects them from their union and each other.

Knowledge is power. Interaction precedes action. It's time our unions woke up to this. (From the Uncharted web site).

ATU Local 587 Supporting the 1%

According to a recent Report the ATU has fought hard for concessions in the last round of contract negotiations in order to bail out Metro Transit in Seattle, which is facing a huge budget deficit and has had to resort to the foolproof strategy of "Austerity Economics" to save the transit system. Here are some of the salient details.

Metro Transit, one of the main public transport systems available in Seattle and its suburbs, has announced far-reaching cuts to service announcing plans to eliminate one third of the routes and reduce services on another third, if a projected funding shortfall of $75 million is not met. Metro depends on sales taxes for 60 percent of its operating income, and obtains the rest from fares paid by passengers. From 2008 through 2015, a drop in sales tax revenue has projected a revenue shortfall of $1.2 billion. $750 million of this gap has already been closed by service cuts, increasing fares by 80 percent over four years, using property taxes, coupled with lowering wages and benefits of metro employees.

Metro General Manager Kevin Desmond referred briefly to the support given by the Amalgamated Transit Union (ATU) in these efforts in pushing through a concessions contract on transit workers. In November 2010, the ATU agreed to a three-year contract in which transit workers received no cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) for the first year, effectively freezing their wages. In the next two years, drivers were given below-inflation raises of 0.7 percent and 0.6 percent respectively. Whereas the previous contract had secured a 3 percent floor on the COLA based on local inflation, the 2010 contract has a 0.0 percent floor, which means the wages cannot be decreased, but may not increase either.

The contract also allowed part-time operators to do more overtime work than their full-time counterparts, for which they would be paid less. ATU Local 587 President Paul Batchel was quoted as conceding that the agreement means “fewer employees working longer hours” with “fewer benefits packages being purchased.” There was a reduction of 100 staff positions following this concessions contract.

The attack on public transit is part and parcel of the ongoing destruction of public institutions that provide basic services to working people, in the process shifting untold billions of dollars into the pockets of the rich.

The city’s claim that “there is no money to be found” to fund transit and other vital social services rings hollow when the state of Washington is home to eight billionaires on the Forbes 400 list. This includes Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos, Steve Ballmer and Paul Allen. The combined wealth of these four individuals alone is a staggering $120 billion.

According to a report by Citizens for Tax Justice & the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, Boeing, the airline manufacturing giant based in Washington state, having made $9.7 billion in profits over the 2008-2010 period, actually got a tax refund of $178 million from the IRS over the same period. Another report by Citizens for Tax Justice concludes that Boeing avoided $6 billion in taxes in 2008-2011.

Makes one wonder at what point a union crosses that line that simply makes it another management tool to force workers to accept less.

When a Union Doesn't Pull It's Weight

Here is a story coming out of the State of Michigan, recently the nation's 24th Right to Work State, involving a group of school bus drivers unhappy with their union representation. Contrary to what some news articles have claimed this is not about an anti-union group using the new legislation to break up their union. There is much more going on here and the leadership of the official trade union movement should take the time to have a closer look at what these union members are saying. Their story may hold the key for Labour's fight against the imposition of Right to Work legislation by legislators in the US and Canada.

These 36 employees worked as bus drivers and monitors for the Dexeter Community Schools Transportation Department and were represented by Local 324 of the International Union of Operating Engineers. The conflict between Dexter's bus drivers and monitors had been brewing for several some time and began when Local 324 absorbed another labor group three years ago. The former labor group, whose personnel, practices and bylaws were superseded by those of the Bloomfield Hills union, had a more democratic way of working with those that they represented in the Dexter area. the conflict grew to a head when a contract was negotiated two years ago and then the contract was never brought to the membership for a ratification vote.

Fearing a repeat during negotiations this year, a group of reformers within the union pushed for an election to replace former chief union steward Mary Sullivan and alternate union steward Mike Johnson. A petition to hold a new election was signed and presented to the international rep of local 324, who allowed the election. It resulted in the election of a new chief steward and alternate union steward from the ranks of the reformers. Not agreeing with the election results the International rep toghether with the union president informed the membership that their election was illegal and against our by-laws. According to the by-laws, stated the International, the business manager retains the right to appoint whomever he wants, and in this case and in light of the election results he was not going to give up that right.

Using the right to appoint the Chief steward under the by-laws the International went ahead and reappointed the old Chief Steward and Alternate Steward against the wishes of the majority of the Dexter drivers and monitors. IN response to this action by the International Dexter's 36 drivers and monitors filed a petition to decertify Local 324 and recertify as their own collective bargaining unit. According to a report in the Dexter Leader the employees had their vote and West Washtenaw Bus Drivers and Monitors Association was the result. Now those employees are trying to get their local bargaining union up and running in time to negotiate a new contract that is at least influenced by initial dialogue between the new bargaining unit and its membership, presented to the members for review and feedback as its hammered out during negotiations with district officials, and presented in a final or near-final draft form to the members before both sides agree to the new contract.

The new union secretary and treasurer Michael Dendy said that "With Local 324 we had an expectation that we would be able to voice our opinion." He added that the employees in Dexter looked at other existing unions to join in the region, but one potential replacement for Local 324 was in the midst of a corruption scandal, so he and his colleagues decided to go down the road of forming a local union. "All we wanted was for them to do their job," he said. "When 324 left they left nothing else on the table but a new union."

He clarified for The Dexter Leader that this situation isn't about making any statements about unionization in general or the right-to-work debate that continues to rage throughout Michigan: "This is not about getting rid of 'the' union -- this is about the union we had was not pulling their weight ... one of the (new) stewards is a retired GM employee, the other is retired police, (and) both are lifelong union members," Dendy said. West Washtenaw Bus Drivers and Monitors Association will pay $15 or $16 in dues each month, as opposed to $25 to $40 to Local 324, according to Dendy.

Transit Workers Face Worst Conditions Since Great Depression

These are the worst conditions for mass transit since the Depression reports Chris Hedges in a recent article in TruthDig.

The wreckage of the nation’s public transportation system is staggering. Greyhound, before government deregulation in the 1980s, had 20,000 unionized members. It now has 2,500. The company, before deregulation, along with Trailways ran a national bus network that provided public transportation to towns and remote corners of the country. But once the bus industry was deregulated, companies such as Greyhound and Trailways were no longer required to serve remote or poor areas. Pensions and wages, especially as new non unionized bus companies arose, were reduced. Greyhound bus drivers, once the highest paid in the country—in the 1970s their yearly pay was more than $100,000 adjusted for inflation—now make between $40,000 and $50,000 annually. And the company has eliminated perhaps as much as 80 percent of its former nationwide service.

Many bus drivers no longer work full time. And a loophole in federal law exempts intercity bus drivers from Fair Labor Standards Act overtime provisions. There were some 3,000 bus companies in the country four decades ago. Today there are 152,000. Most of these companies have only a few buses. Public transportation is increasingly part of the underground economy. Working conditions are punishing and often unsafe.

According to the National Transportation Safety Board, 36 percent of motorcoach crash fatalities over the past decade have been due to driver fatigue. It is the No. 1 cause of fatal accidents, far above road conditions, which account for only 2 percent, or inattention, 6 percent. Legislators, federal agencies and carriers, however, refuse to address the problem of driver fatigue.

The deterioration of the nation’s public transportation, like the deterioration of health care, education, social services, public utilities, bridges and roads, is part of the relentless seizing and harvesting of public resources and programs by corporations. These corporations are steadily stripping the American infrastructure. Public-sector unions are being broken. Wages and benefits are being slashed. Workers are forced to put in longer hours in unsafe workplaces, often jeopardizing public safety. The communities that need public services most are losing them, and where public service is continued it is reduced or substandard and costlier.

This process of destroying our public transportation system is largely complete. Our bus and rail system, compared to Europe’s or Japan’s, is a joke. But an even more insidious process has begun. Multinational corporations, many of them foreign, are slowly consolidating transportation systems into a few private hands. Of the top three multinationals that control transport in the U.S. only one, MV Transportation, is based here. FirstGroup, a multibillion-dollar corporation headquartered in the United Kingdom and a product of Margaret Thatcher’s privatization of British mass transit, now owns First Student, which operates 54,000 school buses in 38 states and nine Canadian provinces and has 6 million student riders. FirstGroup also has a controlling stake in Greyhound. Veolia Transportation, a subsidiary of Transdev, a conglomerate headquartered in France, has 150 contracts to run mass transit systems in the United States. It was Veolia, after Hurricane Katrina, that took over the New Orleans bus system. And Veolia did what it has done elsewhere. It stripped bus workers of their pensions.

New York’s Nassau County bus service, once part of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA), was turned over to Veolia after the French corporation hired former three-term Sen. Al D’Amato of New York as its lobbyist. Veolia—which when it takes over a U.S. property, as in New Orleans or Nassau County, refuses to give workers a defined-benefit plan—is partly owned by a pension fund that covers one-third of French citizens. U.S. workers are losing their benefit plans to a company created to provide benefit plans for the French. Veolia is currently lobbying Rhode Island and Atlanta to privatize their bus services.

The battles in towns and cities across the country usually pit 100 or 200 beleaguered union workers in a local bus system against a powerful multinational and its lobbyists. For 50 years we have been trained to negotiate, trained to litigate, trained to arbitrate, trained to legislate, all the things society requires of a good, well-trained, well-groomed union,” says the leader of one of the largest transit unions in North America. “And then all of a sudden they said, guess what, we are going to pull the plug. You are no longer even going to have the right to negotiate. We are going to take away your bargaining rights. What good is it to have 500 well-trained officers in my union who know how to arbitrate a grievance when you haven’t got a contract and you have no grievance procedure?”

The Man in Black on Taking Back Our Unions

Members of Local 501 of the Operating Engineers have been having a long struggle with the leadership of their union. The Man in Black has been a key figure in organizing the resistance movement and mobilizing the membership to reclaim their union. Here is his latest email to the members of Local 501. I think it has relevance to all of us working to reclaim our local unions and ensure that the will of the membership prevails.

Hello Brothers and Sisters,

Now, for the bad news! I'm moving in to your house! But its okay. I heard if I move into your house I can spend your money without your knowledge. I heard if I move into your house, I can do what ever i want, and you won't say anything. I heard that most of the time you're too busy to do anything at your house, so I'll have complete run of the place. I heard that basically I can do whatever I want, and YOU DON'T CARE! Awesome! So send me your keys!

Sounds pretty stupid huh? Well, unfortunately, its true. You just don't care! What am I talking about? Well, somewhere along the line you forgot that your Union IS your house! We pay the rent, we pay the salaries, we pay the gas, the electric, the cable, the phone, and yet most of you are too busy to take an active interest in whats going on!

Now, let me ask you this: If this was literally the house you lived in, would you allow that? I know most of you will say, "Hey Johnny, thats DIFFERENT!" But really, its not.

If you're receiving this e-mail, you are a Union Member. And being a Union Member means more than paying your dues and expecting something for it. You have a DUTY. You wouldn't let your home get run by someone who wouldn't follow your rules would you? When your teenage kid started barking orders at you, you sure as hell wouldn't take it, would you? You wouldn't be "too busy" to show up and put a stop to it, would you?

Well why did we allow this to happen in our Union Halls? When did the organization we built become staffed with elite people who we became afraid of, afraid of being blackballed, afraid of being threatened, afraid of speaking our mind? In my own Union Hall, the infamous Local 501, we have four District Meetings every month. This coming Tuesday is the District 1 meeting (in case any of the 501 folks "forgot"). Fewer and fewer members take the time out of their schedule to attend these meetings, and the consequences are dire. We've lost our houses.

So here is the FIRST thing you can do to start the long process of taking back your house: SHOW UP!

Oh, there's plenty of news to share, but I thought after rebuilding all these lists I'd start with a simple e-mail...just to get the ball rolling!

I'll be back in a day or two with more, but for now, welcome to the Resistance.

I'll see you soon,

The Man in Black (Johnny)

US Greyhound Drivers Ratify New Contract

According to the president of ATU Local 1700, Bruce Hamilton, a new contract has been ratified between Greyhound USA and the union representing over 4,500 drivers and mechanics in the United States. The Local 1700 web site reports that 71% voted in favour of the new deal and 29% voted no.

In the words of the president of the local this is an "historic deal" because over the course of the contract more time on the job will become paid time, and by the final 5th year of the contract, regular and extra-board drivers will be paid from sign-on to sign-off – in what is claimed to be a first in the history of Greyhound Lines.

The term of the contract is from April 1, 2013 to April 1, 2017. Over that period of time operators will see their top driving rate increase from $24.00/hr to $25.00/hr (4.17%) and their non-driving rate from $5.00/hr to $9.50/hr (90%) - see pp. 45 - 46 of Tentative Agreement for details. Time at work that is now unpaid (sign-on, sign-off, stops over 30 minutes, layover time) will be phased in until all is paid by the final year of the contract. The company also agreed to an increase its contributions to the Health and Welfare Trust, from the current $622 to $840.23 per participant over the life of the contract representing an increase of 35%.

Other significant changes are that the agreement establishes a new $125 per day minimum pay for regular runs, the minimum extra-board assignment is increased to $80, the deadhead rate goes up to 100% of the driving rate in the last year of the contract, the meal allowance goes up to $30 per day, and Extra- board drivers are guaranteed their earned days off.

Another contentious issue was resolved as the agreement requires that all Greyhound work in the Southwest that had been subcontracted to Americanos and Crucero will be returned to Local 1700 drivers, and that all 1700 members will work those runs at full rates – not at discounts the company originally proposed. It is notable that this agreement was negotiated and settled in advance of its' scheduled expiry date at the end of March 2013, because members in Texas sparked a rebellion over the company’s unfair use of Americanos drivers on Greyhound Express runs. Management agreed to settle the issue after weeks of picketing and a huge demonstration at corporate headquarters in Dallas. The company responded by asking Local 1700 to negotiate a “global settlement” covering all Greyhound work.

There appear to be a lot of positive changes made in this new contract, and the fact that it was finalized and placed before the membership for a vote a month before it was due to expire is a good sign. A lot of these gains make up for the concessions that were made during the strikes in the 80's and 90's. With this contract the members of Local 1700 are still for the most part trying to make up lost ground. It should be noted that the impetus and motivating force behind these contract negotiations were an activist and mobilized membership base in Texas that opposed Greyhound's attempt to use Americanos drivers on greyhound runs in the Southwest.

How Two Tier Anything is Poison to Unions

When your company bosses and your union bosses start telling you how great and wonderful a "two tier" anything can be brothers and sisters you should know that someone is pissing on your leg and telling you it's only rain. This Two Tier stuff is part of the whole Austerity program that workers are being asked to buy into these days.

From the employer's side the argument always goes something like this - there's only so much money in the pot, and the pot itself is not very big, so that it is not a matter of how much the union can negotiate for its members, but rather a question of how this rather limited pot of money will be distributed among the workers. So first, they go for outright concessions and threaten layoffs if they don't get the cost savings they want. And once they have milked that for all it's worth they go for some form of "Two Tier" solution where new hires are subjected to some form of employment discrimination like longer probationary periods at reduced wages, provisional or part time status at lower wage rates and little or no benefits with the possibility of full time status years down the road, or membership in a 401(k) pension plan instead of membership in the defined benefit pension plan.

From the union side the argument is that jobs have been saved, or new jobs are being created, and that means someone who didn't have a job and was living on food stamps now has the chance to pull themselves up by their own boot straps and become a dues paying union member, although at the lower wage rate with less benefits and they're still going to be living on food stamps. It's all Motherhood, Apple Pie and the American Dream.

It has always been the strategy of the powerful to destabilize the solidarity of the masses by playing favorites, and this has often been achieved by inseminating and utilizing prejudices associated with race, religion, country of origin, citizenship and even sex. But today, if employers wish to take advantage of this sort of discrimination, they have to make some cosmetic changes to the language, and most importantly they have to pick on a new kind of minority, one that hasn't been fighting back over the last century, and preferably one that is not yet well organized or represented.

So let's think real hard and figure out the ideal vulnerable candidate, a minority without a voice. Bingo! - That's it! - Future employees! Don't buy into this nonsense brothers and sisters, don't start selling your future brothers and sisters down the river.

Equal pay for equal work, an injury to one is an injury to all. Read more about this Two Tier B.S. at this web site. No More Tiers

ATU Agrees to Contract Concessions For Fresno Drivers

Local 1027 of the Amalgamated Transit Union, representing 220 Fresno bus drivers, backed down in a fight with Mayor Ashley Swearengin over contract negotiations. The contract for about 220 FAX drivers expired in June 2011. Months of negotiations stalled with the city demanding concessions -- pay cuts, reform of overtime rules, more help with health-care premiums. The union wanted the status quo, saying its members had gone more than four years without a raise according to a report in the  Fresno Bee.

Rick Steitz, president of Local 1027 of the Amalgamated Transit Union, had initially worked out a deal with the City that included a 3% salary cut and overtime rules that were somewhat favorable to the Union. This didn't go over well with the Drivers and around 100 of them showed up at a labor hall in December and voted down the proposal by a 2-to-1 margin. One driver of 23 years said that he'd "rather stand up and fight them than get on my knees and have them beat me up." At the same time the drivers sanctioned the ATU to call a strike. The Mayor's response was to impose a 3% salary cut and tougher overtime rules.

Steitz claims that after the Mayor's imposition of new contract rules several driver's came forward and told him they were sorry they voted down the initial proposal. So instead of mobilizing the membership and opting for strike action, he went back to the Mayor's office and asked that the driver's be given a second chance to vote on the December proposal. On Thursday the drivers voted by a nearly 2-to-1 margin to accept the same one-year deal they had defiantly shot down in mid-December.

There were good reasons for Local 1027 leadership to pursue strike action or other job actions rather than rolling over as they did to the implacable position taken by the City in contract negotiations. By state law a mediator/fact finder had to be called in to investigate the dispute and make recommendations. It is significant that in the their Report the independent fact finder did not support pay cuts to the workers saying that “These employees have gone four years without a wage increase in this unit, where other employees in this same unit have gotten wage increases." Another issue that the City raised in negotiations was what they perceived as a high rate of absenteeism which was driving up overtime costs. The real reason however had more to do with work related injuries arising from poor or out dated equipment and repetitive strain injuries. On any given day according to the union there would be between 13 to 23 employees off on work injury.

Like everywhere else the City of Fresno is taking part in the frenzy of Austerity politics and looking to download costs on workers. One of the ways this is being done in Fresno is to turn transit operations into an enterprise department so that it is entirely a fee based service. As a result the enterprise fund has been losing about $1.2 million a year because the gasoline tax, state, federal grants that provide the additional funding for operations were all dropping due to the economy. The funding problem was further exacerbated because the City has been reluctant to raise transit fares. The last fare increase came in 2011 and prior to that there had been no increases in fares for the prior 10 years. Further restrictions to properly fund transit operations are due to a municipal cash flow problem brought about not only by a shortage of revenue, but by the past administration’s decision to float revenue bonds to help pay for a baseball stadium, parking garage and other city projects. City officials say those bonds just about doubled the general fund debt service.

In order to deal with the revenue shortfall the city says it has to bring its expenses in line with its revenues. The plan includes $2.5 million in franchise fees from the privatization of garbage collection and waste disposal services, and getting compensation reductions from all city employees across the board.

Combine all the above with a weak union leadership that seems to treat the membership as a rubber stamp for decisions made by the executive board and the rank and file gets sold out. That there are problems with the leadership of ATU Local 1027 became evident recently when the former secretary-treasurer was arrested in December of 2012 on charges of embezzling union funds and submitting false financial reports according to the Fresno Bee. From April 2006 to April 2009, Adam C. Raimer, 42, of Madera allegedly used his position as the union's secretary-treasurer to make unauthorized purchases for his own use from Office Depot, including big screen TVs, cameras, and a GPS navigator, according to an indictment that was handed down in August. He also allegedly used a union account to pay his personal cell phone bill and PG&E utility bill. The loss to ATU Local 1027 is alleged to be more than $41,000. Union president Rick Steitz has declined to comment on the arrest and to date the International has taken no action.

Read more here: http://www.fresnobee.com/2012/12/20/3108831/former-fresno-transit-union-official.html#storylink=mirelated#storylink=cpy

Except in the most extraordinary circumstances, there is no acceptable reason for a union to bargain concessions. The results of concession bargaining over the last two decades should stand as proof that concessions do not benefit workers, and the results here with the Frenso bus drivers is further proof of this. Where union leaders have bought in to management's campaign as they did in Fresno, "message discipline" from the union office will help to persuade the membership until it eventually capitulates and accepts the employer's terms. The gloom and doom is always positioned as if it were fact although for the most part, it is highly speculative, grossly oversimplified and designed to spread fear, uncertainty and a sense that cuts are inevitable and workers should be happy to have jobs on any terms. It's important not to fall prey to the psychological manipulation of "message discipline" or get caught up in distracting talk about unprofitable operations. The admission by Local 1027 president Rick Steitz,  that the proposed contract "is the best answer for the situation at this time" is a clear indication that the membership of 1027 didn't have a chance going into this round of contract negotiations.

What happened to the city bus drivers in Fresno should be a lesson for rank and file members in all unions. Don't leave the task of negotiations to your leadership alone. It is vitally important for rank and file members to set up a communications system so that they can keep one another informed about what is going on in contract negotiations. This is even more important where the union leadership operates as secret society that excludes the membership from participating in the negotiating process. The first step is to get organized and set up a contact list. This can be as simple as collecting e-mail addresses or setting up a Facebook group.

Read more here: http://www.fresnobee.com/2013/01/24/3146961/fax-bus-drivers-change-minds-approve.html#storylink=cpy

Once you have a list of contacts and a way of getting the message out here are some further suggestions from the people at Uncharted:

If you're hearing noises about concessions:

(i) Find out what's going on: Be sure to attend any meetings management is holding with workers to talk about the business, and any meetings that your union is having, to discuss negotiations.

(ii) Ask your union leaders if management is going to be seeking concessions and what the union's position on this will be.

(iii) Make it clear that you are opposed to concessions. Get that message across every time the subject comes up.

(iii) Educate your fellow members about what's really up when it comes to concessions. By presenting a united front to management (and union leaders who may have bought-in) you can minimize the possibility that your hard-won gains will be bartered away because management isn't doing its job.

(iv) Remind anyone trying to persuade you to accept rollbacks of the following three simple points:
(a) the real financial position of the business as presented in their own documents;
(b) that it is management's job to make the business profitable;
(c) that wage concessions have never helped workers and you have no reason to believe that they will benefit you.

Read more here: http://www.fresnobee.com/2013/01/24/3146961/fax-bus-drivers-change-minds-approve.html#storylink=cpy

Read more here: http://www.fresnobee.com/2013/01/24/3146961/fax-bus-drivers-change-minds-approve.html#storylink=cpy

School Bus Drivers Vote to Strike in Right to Work South Carolina

Here is some good coverage on strike activity in the State of South Carolina by school bus drivers
by Rosa Shahnazarian of the the World Socialist Web Site. The State has been a Right to Work state since 1954. Bus drivers and attendants in every other South Carolina school district are barred by state law from striking and collective bargaining because they are public sector employees. Workers in Dorchester, Charleston and Beaufort County were able to join the Teamsters because their employer, Durham School Services, is a private company. Durham, the second-largest provider of student transportation services in the US, is a subsidiary of National Express Group, a profitable multinational corporation based in Britain.

South Carolina’s State Board of Education voted unanimously to allow Durham School Services to hire scabs from other states to transport children for up to 90 days in two school districts if unionized bus drivers and monitors go on strike. The strike-breaking measure was prompted by strike authorization votes by unionized school bus drivers and monitors in both the Charleston County School District and Summerville's Dorchester County School District 2, who voted unanimously to strike if negotiations fail between Teamsters Local 509 officials and their employer, Illinois-based Durham School Services. These workers have been without a contract since August.

These changes are part of a continuing effort in state government, led by Republican Governor Nikki Haley, to privatize the bus system. South Carolina is the only state that owns and maintains a statewide bus fleet. The efforts in the state government to privatize the school bus system are aimed at serving the interests of private companies, while divesting districts of the responsibility to pay for workers’ benefits. Durham School Services has better driver retention than local counties that do not contract with private companies, largely as a result of better pay. Low school bus driver retention has been a problem in the state for over a decade. Any reduction in pay of workers at Durham would likely result in a return to previous low rates of driver retention.

Charleston school officials claim that the drivers are currently paid an average of $14.65 per hour and that the union has requested a roughly 44 percent pay and benefit increase in the first year of a new contract and a 20 percent increase in the two years after that. Teamsters Local 509 President Fletcher refused to provide the correct numbers, claiming that he “want[s] to see how far they’ll go with their lies.” However, by keeping negotiations secret, the World Socialist Web Site maintains that Fletcher is acting in collusion with company management to prevent any broader discussion among workers of the conditions faced by Teamsters Local 509 drivers and attendants. The union would prefer to isolate any strike that takes place.