One of the main issues that led to the BART strike was the ability to negotiate outdated work rules. Following the fatal accident last weekend near the Walnut Creek station in which two veteran workers – BART engineer Chris Sheppard and contractor Lawrence "Larry" Daniels – were struck and killed by a train, both the unions and management should be able to agree on improving safety. According to BART, the four-car non-revenue train was in the process of moving cars to a facility to clean them of graffiti. We were surprised that BART trains were operating at all during the shutdown, whether moving cars for maintenance or carrying passengers, which we knew was not the case.
The National Transportation Safety Board, which is investigating the accident, said this week that the train that hit the men was under the control of an operator in training who has held other positions at the transit agency. Prior to the strike, BART's unions were concerned that management would train managers to serve as train operators in the event of a prolonged shutdown. Indeed, at least one local television station showed a warehouse in the East Bay that contained some BART cars purportedly for training purposes. Since BART management never confirmed this, circumstantial evidence sure seems to suggest this was the intended use. The NTSB also said that the train was traveling at 60-70 miles per hour. Sheppard and Daniels, who may not have expected a train in operation due to the strike, probably never had a chance.
Hours before the shutdown, gay BART board President Tom Radulovich held a 20-minute news conference where he practically begged the unions to come back to the bargaining table. Lesbian board member Rebecca Saltzman and board member Robert Raburn flanked him. All three are considered progressive Democrats. During his news conference, Radulovich spent quite a bit of time talking about changing "work rules," which apparently was the stumbling block that led the unions to walk out of negotiations last week. He spoke of outdated rules that required faxes over email or the byzantine process of workers "bidding" for their preferred shifts.
Then Saturday's accident happened and now it's been reported that there appear to be some outdated work rules that BART management has stubbornly kept in place even after a train struck another BART inspector from behind in October 2008. BART uses a procedure called "simple approval." Under this system, media outlets have reported, workers who go on the tracks must be in pairs and one must serve as a spotter. They must be able to view an oncoming train 15 seconds before it arrives, and figure out an exit strategy. Why can't BART employ a wireless sensor program already in use in other cities?
BART management can't have it both ways. They can't criticize the unions for wanting to adhere to old work rules when they do the same. The San Francisco Chronicle reported this week that BART is still fighting the state's findings from the 2008 death. Cal-OSHA issued four citations to BART and fined the agency nearly $29,000 for serious violations in connection with the 2008 incident, including one that determined that the simple approval system had contributed to that accident.
The unions, which made worker safety a key issue in the months-long negotiations, appears to be right: worker safety needs to be improved at BART. While BART says it has beefed up simple procedure approvals to include a spotter and other changes, much of the system is the same as it's been for more than 30 years.
Instead of spending resources fighting that 2008 accident case, BART management should invest in new technology to improve conditions when employees check the tracks for minor repairs or inspections (there is a more intensive approval process for major maintenance). And the board's progressive members should be among the first to seek these changes. Having a more efficient system benefits everyone, and, as we saw during the recent four-day strike, BART is a regional system that hundreds of thousands of people depend on.