VTA bus service to resume; light rail remains suspended
VTA checking light rail system amid copper theft
VTA inspectors on Thursday checked methodically roughly 42 miles of light rail line for evidence of copper theft. This, as the authority announced bus service will resume Friday and light rail service Monday following a Santa Clara County Superior Court judge granting an injunction against 1,500 striking ATU local 265 workers.
SAN JOSE, Calif. - As the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority prepares to restart limited bus service on Friday following a 17-day transit strike, light rail service remains suspended.
Copper theft surges
What they're saying:
The transit agency said copper theft "skyrocketed" during the strike, and crews are inspecting power lines to ensure they are functional before light rail service can resume.
VTA officials said they anticipate bus service to resume on Friday, but that light rail service will take longer due to inspections of the tracks and overhead lines of the 42-mile train system. They said light rail service could resume as soon as Monday, March 31.
VTA strike ends
What we know:
On Wednesday, Santa Clara County Superior Court Judge Daniel Nishigaya ordered an end to the strike, after VTA filed a lawsuit against Amalgamated Transit Union (ATU) Local 265.
The lawsuit alleged that the union violated its contract by walking off the job on March 10, leaving 1,500 frontline workers on strike.
"What the judge’s ruling means is that VTA workers need to come back to work immediately. The injunction is effective immediately," said VTA spokesperson Stacey Hendler Ross.
VTA argued that the union had agreed to a "no-strike" clause in its contract, citing the essential nature of public transit services. According to VTA, the provision remains in effect even during ongoing contract negotiations.
An attorney for ATU said this argument had no merit. The union claimed the old contract had expired and pointed to VTA’s announcements on its website as evidence. ATU argued that without a valid contract, the no-strike clause no longer applied.
VTA countered that the act of negotiating meant the no-strike clause was still enforceable, and Judge Nishigaya ultimately sided with VTA.
The other side:
"We disagree with the judge," said ATU Local 265 President Raj Singh. "You know this is the second time that we've been in this position where we believe that the justice system and the court has failed us. We'll determine what happens tomorrow. We believe that the judge got this wrong. At the end of the day, the workers lost today."
Labor relations expert Dr. Robert Ovetz of San Jose State University said the ruling was a setback for the union.
"This returns us to a very bleak history in labor relations when employers would seek injunctions and courts would break a strike," he said. "It imposes a contract on the workers that they have not approved. It forces the workers to work and denies them their ability to use their right to take concerted action, including strikes."
ATU may appeal the judge’s order and seek an emergency stay, but in the meantime, workers must comply and return to work.
The Source: Information for this story comes from interviews with VTA, ATU Local 265, Dr. Robert Ovitz of San Jose State University and pervious KTVU reporting.