After reading recent comments by Randy Grove, human resources director at Paratransit Services, I’m wondering if bulbous red clown noses are a management perk.
Grove says BAT workers want a 135% wage increase totaling $2.8 million. I’ve been following the transit union negotiations pretty closely, and I sure don’t recall numbers that come remotely close to these outrageous claims.
The fact is BAT workers start at $11 an hour and haven’t seen a raise in five years. Paratransit’s so-called “best and final offer” amounted to a three-year wage freeze at $12 an hour. BAT workers would still be paid 40% less than city employees (who recently won wage increases) and Bend-LaPine school bus drivers. BAT workers deserve pay equity, dignity and respect.
I haven’t been to Paratransit’s Bremerton, WA headquarters, but I wouldn’t be surprised if the motto over the door reads, “We’re all bozos on this bus.” Apologies to Firesign Theatre, who deserve better than association with the clowns in charge of Paratransit.
Michael Funke, Bend
This article appears in Apr 24-30, 2008.
MAKE LOCAL JOURNALISM HAPPEN
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
The first comment is mine. Forgot to submit it with name attached.
The drivers want a contract that amounts to a 40% raise over what they make now.
BAT currently spends $16 per rider trip.
The transit system was implemented after the voters rejected it by an arrogant, cash flush, ill-informed (that is to be kind and not call them ignorant and unknowledgeable)that decided in a ‘build it and they will come’ fashion to move forward on its own.
Horrible capital equipment purchases,an unsustainable market, and low fares have led to a system that bleeds red ink and is draining the general fund.
Tax revenues have declined–the city is laying off employees as quickly as they can–fire and police services are threatened–and the bus drivers union thinks that the funds are there not only to sustain the system, but increase a primary cost by 40%.
Continued funding for BAT is being placed before the voters in the form of a $79 per $100k property tax levy when people are scrambling to pay bills, mortgages and inflating food and energy prices.Do I want to pay another $250 per year for a system that doesn’t go where I want when I need to get there? Does anyone? Anyone?
BAT Drivers, enjoy it while it lasts. Funding is going to be denied by the electorate. Your $11 or $12 an hour will look awfully good when compared to what unemployment will net you. I, too, would like a 40% raise–but the fatted calf called the taxpayer is not there to cover my aspirations.
I guess I’ll have to fulfill them the old-fashioned, non-union way.
I will gladly provide written documentaion of the following:
1.) BAT wage levels (found in the city’s contract with Paratransit).
2.) The union’s real proposal for a one-year contract including a $1 an hour increase in wages. One dollar on top of $11 is about 9%. Just because the Bulletin and Paratransit say the union is demanding a 44% wage increase,doesn’t make it so. Jeez, guys, do some homework before you make such absurd claims. I can back up everthing I say with paper from the city, Paratransit and the union. Can you?
Maybe we can get some teenagers to drive the buses. Would that make you feel safer?
3.) Documentation of the 44% differential between what entry level BAT workers make and what the lowest paid netry level city worker makes (city records).
Michael
RE:
#1. BAT wages–I accept they are $11 an hour–no one I have heard or read contests that.
#2. The $1 per hour raise is/was on the table–Paratransit offered it over a three year contract period–my understanding, the first year–no further increases after that for two additional years. No benefits were mentioned in their proposal–no information provided by anyone.
#3. Is the goal of ATU 757 parity with the city workers? If it is, doesn’t that constitute a 40% increase?
Let’s avoid the non sequiturs–no one is advocating hiring teenagers.
Instead of arguing about who has presented what wage proposal, terminate BAT. The only financial metrics that matter are: $16 per rider trip vs. $1 fare per rider trip.
Stephen,
The goal would certainly be parity. Which is fair, I think. But, no one expects to get this all at once. Paratransit’s proposal–$1 an hour over three years–won’t close the gap, unless the cost-of-living falls over the next three years. Indeed, $12 an hour in 2011 may well be worth less than $11 an hour this year. The union proposal, presented in bargaining with a federal mediator at the table, was $1 an hour for one year. That would begin to close the gap. The city recently bargained a one-year contract with city employees, so a one-year contract is not unusual in these circumstances. The company’s $1/three year proposal was actually not delivered in bargaining. It came a few hours after the April 16 bargaining session ended, in the form of a letter stuffed into every BAT workers’ mailbox. Paratransit called lots of workers and urged them to accept this offer, which they called generous. Twenty seven of 40 bargaining unit members cast their ballots in a secret ballot election that I witnessed. They all said No. It seems to me that Paratransit is way out of touch with its workforce if they thought this thing would fly. That says more about the company than the employees. The company has decided to bargain via advertisements in the Bulletin, with the assistance of Bulletin editorials, rather than face to face with the workers. The union can’t even get the Bulletin to run an ad. Apologies for the tennager comment. I just get so exasperated that the workers and union have to prove and prove again what is accurate and Paratransit just gets to say whatever they want and people accept it. Like, for example, the PT comment that the union proposal will cost the city $2.8 million. That’s an outrageous claim with no basis in fact. Yet, they got to say that in an ad in the Bulletin with jo one at the paper doing the math. I’d love to see PT forced to explain that number. But no one even asks.