SAN JOSE — Three days into a strike of Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority workers, the transit agency has turned to legal action to seek a swift end to the strike, while union leaders maintain the best path forward is to return to the negotiation table.
Members of Amalgamated Transit Union Local 265 walked off the job Monday after contract negotiations ended in an impasse last week. VTA filed a lawsuit Monday night alleging that ATU’s decision to go on strike was a violation of a “no strike” clause in the previous contract.
As of Wednesday afternoon, the union had yet to be served with the lawsuit, said ATU president Raj Singh, and the union said that the best path to a resolution is to resume negotiations.
“I think the best course of action for everybody, the agency, the union and the public, is to get back to the table and resolve this,” Singh said. “We’re really kind of confused by (the lawsuit).”
At a press conference Wednesday, VTA Deputy General Manager Greg Richardson said that the agency is “hopeful for resolution soon.” Bus and rail lines will remain closed until then, continuing to impact VTA’s estimated 100,000 daily riders.
“We do need ATU to come to the table willing to negotiate and find some solutions to some of these open points,” Richardson said. “From a legal point of view, with the action that was taken over the last couple of days, I would just simply say that both sides clearly have different interpretations of the contract language.”
In the lawsuit, VTA argues that the existing language in the contract still applies despite its expiration on March 3 because of language that states that the contract continues “from year to year thereafter” the expiration date. VTA also said the contract states it “shall remain in full force and effect” during negotiations, including the no strike clause, according to court filings.
“That’s their interpretation at this point, and that’s not how it’s been interpreted before,” Singh said. “If we went by their interpretation, then the contract is never ending. I’m just saying that that would make it kind of illegal, at least in our opinion.”
Singh said that VTA sent out emails and communications over the past few weeks that acknowledged that the contract was expiring.
“Apparently they want to take a different position, so I’m not sure what they’re doing there,” Singh said. “We’re really not.”
Singh added that the union is still waiting to see exactly what the VTA’s claims are when they receive the paperwork for the lawsuit. The lawsuit caught the union off guard, he added.
Singh also said that the union has not received any invitation from VTA to return to negotiations. Despite the lawsuit, the union continues to plan to strike until a deal can be reached, he added.
Richardson added that the VTA is also seeking a “cooling off period” through Gov. Gavin Newsom’s office.
“We’ll use all options available to encourage the continuation of negotiations with ATU in an effort to find a meaningful solution,” he added. “From my perspective, it’s not so much the legal piece. It’s more about getting service back on the road, and this was the one avenue that we we felt like we could pursue.”
Bus and rail operators are currently paid a base salary of $42.88 per hour, and bus and rail dispatchers get $48.61 per hour, according to the previous contract between ATU and VTA.
Related Articles
VTA files legal action against union as strike hits second day
Two picketers injured in collision with vehicle on first day of VTA strike
As VTA strike begins, Santa Clara County commuters seek alternate transit options
VTA commuters urged to make backup plans as possible strike looms
UC health and research workers in two unions stage statewide strike
The union is seeking an 18% raise over three years and wants to add a clause guaranteeing arbitration for contract disputes. VTA’s last and best contract offer in negotiations would give workers a 9% raise over three years.
A court hearing for the lawsuit has yet to be scheduled, Richardson added.
“We’re open to having the dialog,” Richardson said of returning to the bargaining table. “I’m not aware of anything that’s been requested as to a scheduled time or anything like that, but we are open to putting that on the calendar and getting it on.”
