Unions Fear MTA Seeks to Break Up Bus System

LOS ANGELES -- As the Metropolitan Transportation Authority strike lurched toward the end of its second week Wednesday, the issues separating unions and management appeared to extend far beyond existing labor contracts, the Los Angeles Times reported.

Among the questions lingering in the aftermath of the abrupt end to negotiations Tuesday--and an exchange of charges Wednesday--was whether many of the current MTA board members, particularly Los Angeles Mayor Richard Riordan, see the talks as a way of undermining transit unions and dismantling the giant transportation agency as it now exists.

Many believe that the current MTA board envisions a much slimmed-down agency, focusing mostly on rail, with bus operations parceled out to other, smaller transit agencies.

The board's demonstrated preference for rail over buses led to a major lawsuit by bus rider advocates alleging that the MTA was discriminating against its mostly poor and minority bus riders. To avoid a trial, the MTA board agreed to sign a federal court consent decree requiring reductions in overcrowding and improvements in bus service.

When it became apparent that the decree would require the agency to buy hundreds of additional buses beyond what it anticipated, the MTA appealed a federal judge's order. A decision of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals is pending. The settlement of the lawsuit also established limits on how much the MTA can raise fares.

The big stumbling block to breaking up the sprawling bus system is the powerful unions, which not only have won good contracts for their members, but also have protection in the contracts that would make it prohibitively expensive for private bus operators to take on current MTA drivers and mechanics.

The implications of the MTA's bargaining stance in what is now the longest transit strike in Los Angeles in 20 years are not lost on labor.

"They are trying to achieve things that go far beyond money," said Goldy Norton of the United Transportation Union, which represents the 4,400 bus and rail operators who are leading the strike.

The distance separating the two sides is so great and the passions so intense that prospects for a quick end to the strike seem remote, and the dispute could portend a new era of deeply adversarial labor relations at the transit agency.

Fueling such anxieties were comments Wednesday by Riordan during his monthly show on KFWB-AM (980).

Rather than trying to quietly mend fences with the union and get buses back on the road for the MTA's 450,000 weekday passengers, Riordan took his case to the airwaves, saying he supports breaking up the nation's second-largest bus system into smaller geographic operations, known as transit zones. He conceded that such a move would weaken the unions.

The mayor told his radio audience that transit agencies of the MTA's size are inefficient and give unions too much clout.

"The unions do not want to have separate transit zones," said the mayor, who controls four of 13 seats on the MTA board. Unions, he said, like big public agencies, "which they can control much better [because] they only have to negotiate one contract and go on one strike."

The unions were quick to fire back, both at Riordan and the five Los Angeles County supervisors, who sit with him on the MTA board.

"We have seen during the transit strike what a tower of arrogant power the MTA has become," said Miguel Contreras, executive secretary-treasurer of the Los Angeles County Federation of Labor. "Members of the county Board of Supervisors sit in that tower, and it's time for the walls to come tumbling down."

Shortly after Riordan finished his radio show, he joined Supervisor Yvonne Brathwaite Burke and seven other MTA board members in a news conference at the Hall of Administration.

Burke conceded that the MTA board wants the unions to surrender work rules, overtime schedules and other benefits that previous boards agreed to in contracts, including those signed just three years ago.

She attributed the agency's current hard line to its unwillingness to live with earlier contracts.

"The reality is [the] MTA may have made mistakes in the past," she said. "There were concessions that were made over the years in order to prevent a strike. But the fact remains today that we are trying to correct not all of these things," but some of them. She and other board members insisted that the strike is about "antiquated" work rules, high costs, a huge operating deficit and the need to provide more service to riders--the transit-dependent poor.

Union members countered that concessions on such issues as overtime would destroy the middle-class lives of many MTA workers, who have built overtime pay into their monthly housing budgets. They say surrendering gains from earlier contracts is a poison pill they will never swallow.

Norton, the drivers union spokesman, alleged that Riordan wants to cement a breakup of the MTA before he leaves office next year.

"This is all about the mayor getting his transit zones," he said. "He knows he has got to destroy our ability to avoid transit zones, because he isn't going to be around any longer than next April."

Overshadowing the talks from the beginning has been legislation now awaiting action by the governor that would protect the unions if a new breakaway transit district were created in the San Fernando Valley or if the San Gabriel Valley zone operation, currently run by Foothill Transit, were to be expanded. Political and business interests in both areas are pushing MTA board members to give up more of the agency's territory to transit zones.

Backers of a San Fernando Valley zone include Riordan, county Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky and members of the influential Valley Industry and Commerce Assn. Yaroslavsky, an MTA board member, also serves as chairman of the interim San Fernando Valley zone agency.

The interests are so closely linked that the law firm--Riordan & McKenzie--that played a key role in the creation of Foothill Transit was headed by Riordan long before he ran for mayor of Los Angeles. And Foothill's present attorney is involved in efforts to create another distinct transit zone--this time in the San Fernando Valley.

If created, the new agency would take over MTA routes in the Valley. The MTA's bus drivers and mechanics who serve the Valley would be transferred to the new agency. With that in mind, MTA unions won legislative passage of a bill by Sen. Kevin Murray (D-Culver City) that would require any new transit zone created in the Valley or elsewhere in the county to abide by the MTA's union contracts for at least four years.

Since the contracts are three years long, the bill could conceivably provide protection for the zone employees for up to six years.

Gov. Gray Davis has until midnight Saturday to decide the fate of the legislation. Last year, he vetoed a similar bill but served notice that he believed the issue should be decided locally--by the MTA board.

In his veto message last fall, the governor said he would prefer that the MTA recognize "existing collective bargaining agreements and not use the establishment of transportation zones as subterfuge for denying worker rights for which they have already bargained."

MTA board members are urging Davis to veto the latest bill. Yaroslavsky said the measure basically "would put zones out of business" by requiring them to pick up the MTA's union contracts.

Unions feel just as strongly that should a transit zone be created without protections, their members would not survive in the new setup.

Neil Silver, president of the Amalgamated Transit Union, which represents 1,860 mechanics who are honoring picket lines in the strike, said the Murray bill weighs so heavily on the minds of MTA negotiators that they refused to talk Wednesday about any issue other than transit zones.

Silver said MTA negotiators even tried to pressure him to ask Davis to veto the Murray bill, even though Silver's union was one of its sponsors.

When Silver said no, "negotiations abruptly ended," he said of Wednesday's session between his union and the MTA, one of the periodic meetings that have been held pending the outcome of the drivers' strike.

The "MTA is doing the bidding or negotiating for the small group of businessmen in the Valley," Silver said. "They are holding the public hostage, not us."

---

As MTA Strike Continues, Many Commuters Take to Their Bikes

LOS ANGELES -- Dressed in jeans and a denim shirt, black cowboy boots hooked into the pedals of an old 10-speed, Jose Sandoval is not your typical Spandex-wearing cyclist. But these are not typical times, the Los Angeles Times reported.

As the second week of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority strike drags on, many Los Angeles-area mass transit riders, such as Sandoval, are tooling around town on two wheels. While recognizing that the strike is having serious consequences for working people, bike advocates are hoping it will introduce some to the joys and benefits of cycling.

But on a torrid afternoon in the San Fernando Valley, Sandoval was not so enthusiastic. The 36-year-old Van Nuys resident pedals an hour to his job in Canoga Park.

"This is bad," Sandoval said Tuesday as he rode down Van Nuys Boulevard. "There are no buses. And it's really hot."

Although police in various neighborhoods report no Beijing-style bike jams, employers from Children's Hospital in east Hollywood to the Warner Center Hilton & Towers in Woodland Hills say more workers are filling up company bike racks. Regular bike commuters have seen an unusual number of riders on major streets. And bicycle stores, especially those trading in used bikes, report increased sales in the last two weeks.

Marco Calzadilla, co-owner of the Bike Wrench in Canoga Park, said he has seen an increased number of customers wheeling in old beaters to have them fixed up for commuting. Although the strike has been good for business, Calzadilla said he is worried about the safety of inexperienced cyclists on the hurried streets of Los Angeles.

Riding to work, he said, "can be kind of unnerving for someone who doesn't ride regularly, especially in the morning. It can be pretty hairy out there. But after a couple of days, people started getting desperate."

As more MTA customers are exposed to the realities of biking in L.A., the Los Angeles County Bicycle Coalition has seized the opportunity to call for a more bike-friendly region. Last week, the advocacy group staged a "demonstration ride" through demanding urban cycling terrain--South Figueroa Street and West Adams Boulevard--as well as streets that benefit from dedicated bike lanes.

"A lot of transit-dependent people who can't take the bus or rail anymore are turning to the bike as their means of transportation, but they're finding the conditions less than ideal," said Ron Milam, executive director of the Bicycle Coalition. "I've seen a lot more people on the roads. There aren't many bike lanes, and there are hardly any bike paths. There's not much room on the road for cyclists. A lot of them are riding on the sidewalks, which creates a pedestrian-cyclist conflict."

Rigoberto Maldonado, 35, rode on the sidewalk of Reseda Boulevard on Tuesday after buying his shiny blue bike for $100 the previous day. He said his 40-minute bike trip to work in Van Nuys from his home in Northridge was not easy.

"It's a dangerous ride because the cars don't respect you," he said.

While the focus has been on buses for the last two weeks, the MTA is also responsible for bicycle projects in the county. The Bicycle Coalition wants to persuade the agency to spend at least 1% of its annual budget--or about $25 million a year--on bike paths, lanes and other improvements, Milam said.

The MTA currently funds about $6.9 million worth of bike projects a year, said Lynne Goldsmith, an MTA transportation planning manager. But many cities do not have room on their roads for dedicated bike lanes, she said.

"We don't get many applications for the lanes that are on the street," she said. "We'd like to see more of that, because the serious commuters want to be in the street in a bike lane. But the streets are so congested that it's hard to find a place where a lane will fit."

Michelle Mowery, the city of Los Angeles' bicycle program coordinator, said the city has more than 300 miles of bike routes, lanes and paths, with 300 more miles planned. That amounts to more lanes than are found in bike-crazy Portland, Ore., which has 213 miles of lanes. But, Mowery noted, the city of Los Angeles encompasses 469 square miles and Portland is only 144.

"I think people think it's a lot worse than it is [for cyclists]," Mowery said. "With that said, we're not Portland--but that's because we're physically very different than Portland." For MTA riders relying on bikes, distance is often the biggest challenge. Chris Ziegler, a 35-year-old systems analyst from Monrovia, rode his bike to El Monte then hopped on a bus to his job downtown before the strike. Now he bikes the entire distance. It takes him one hour each way--about the same amount of time as his old commute.

"I'm not a huge fan of the MTA," Ziegler said. "But I do miss them somewhat, because for me to cycle every single day is tiring."

Joe Linton, president of the Bicycle Coalition, took the train from his home in Koreatown to his consulting job in Long Beach before the strike. Now he occasionally makes the 2½-hour trip by bike, but he also telecommutes.

For house painters, such as 34-year-old Javier Jaco of Van Nuys, telecommuting is not an option. Jaco said his old bike is his only alternative.

"It makes life more difficult," he said. "But at least I already had this bike, for emergencies."

Although the Bicycle Coalition would like more commuters to think of their two-wheelers for more than just emergencies, it may take more than a strike and a few bike lanes to change Angeleno culture.

Stephen Foster, 18, has been riding a bike his mother bought him since the strike began. Will he continue cycling post-strike?

"No," he said. "I want a car."

UTU Main Page