Subway workers, represented by Local 1555, went on a 4 day strike back in July which was called off by union leaders in exchange for closed door negotiations with union busting negotiator Thomas Hook, hired by BART management to shut down union demands for wage increases and improvements in working conditions. It was no surprise that no progress was made in working out an agreement, and just as it appeared that the strike was back on State Governor Jerry Brown intervened and imposed a 60 day cooling off period.
During the first 4 day strike union leadership at Local 192 representing Bay Area bus drivers took no solidarity action to support the striking subway workers and went along with AC Transit management plans to run extra buses to help BART move people during the strike.
AC Transit workers were also in a strike position and could have gone out on strike with the subway workers, but this type of solidarity action was to be actively discouraged by the union leadership of both Locals 192 and 1555.
Eventually, a deal was reached by Local 1555 and BART management that awarded workers a 11.7% net raise over the 4 years of the contract. This was a slight improvement over management's initial offer of 8%. But even this modest gain failed to make up the ground lost going back to the 2009 contract negotiations where BART unions accepted $100 million in concessions at the height of the recession. And while an 11.7% wage increase seems like a good deal you have to remember that this is the Bay Area where the cost of living is estimated to have risen by 18.9% over the past 3 years for a family of four according to a recent report.
With the complicity of the union leadership BART management and the management of AC Transit were able to successfully isolate and immunize themselves against the possible threat of a common strike by both subway workers and bus drivers.
AC Transit workers were in turn subjected to a State imposed 60 day cooling off period and never got to walk a picket line. The union leadership of Local 192 brought a tentative agreement to its membership on two separate occasions recommending that their membership accept them only to have both deals voted down.
The first contract offer provided a 9.5 percent pay increase over three years, but it also required workers to begin paying a share of their medical insurance premiums, $70 a month in the first year, $140 a month in the second, and $180 in the third. This offer was voted down with 576 against the deal (70%) and 257 supporting it. AC Transit workers also voted down a second offer 561 to 369 latter in October which provided for lower health care contributions and raises of 3 percent in the first two years and 3.5 percent in the third year of a 3 year contract.
In late December a deal was reached and AC Transit workers voted in favour of a 9.5-percent wage increase over the next 3 years with workers making a flat monthly contribution of $120 per employee for health care. But the vote was a close one with 567 union members voting in favor of ratification and 465 against.
With the potential of a transit workers' strike averted in the economic hot zone of the Bay Area, the ATU has firmly abandoned any pretense of moving in the direction of building a class struggle organization capable of launching an offensive against the assault by municipal and state governments against unionized workers. Marching in step with management ATU leadership, at both the local and international levels, has become a shell of what a union is supposed to be, and has completely distanced itself from the implementation of the basic strategy of solidarity - an injury to one is an injury to all.
With the potential of a transit workers' strike averted in the economic hot zone of the Bay Area, the ATU has firmly abandoned any pretense of moving in the direction of building a class struggle organization capable of launching an offensive against the assault by municipal and state governments against unionized workers. Marching in step with management ATU leadership, at both the local and international levels, has become a shell of what a union is supposed to be, and has completely distanced itself from the implementation of the basic strategy of solidarity - an injury to one is an injury to all.
