top
San Francisco
San Francisco
Indybay
Indybay
Indybay
Regions
Indybay Regions North Coast Central Valley North Bay East Bay South Bay San Francisco Peninsula Santa Cruz IMC - Independent Media Center for the Monterey Bay Area North Coast Central Valley North Bay East Bay South Bay San Francisco Peninsula Santa Cruz IMC - Independent Media Center for the Monterey Bay Area California United States International Americas Haiti Iraq Palestine Afghanistan
Topics
Newswire
Features
From the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature

Hell Yes, BART's a Mess, but Don't Blame the BART Union Workers

by intexile (intexile [at] iww.org)
There is much wrong with BART, but the BART workers and BART unions are not responsible for the mess that BART is in, or better yet, the mess that bart is.


Doh, BAAAARRRT!!!!

I'm sure every San Francisco Bay Area commuter who depends on the Bay Area Rapid Transit District has wanted to scream that (or something like that) at least once during the heavy rail system's 30-plus year existence. Goodness knows that I am one of them. There is much wrong with BART, but the BART workers and BART unions are not responsible for the mess that BART is in, or better yet, the mess that bart is.

BART's two largest unions, SEIU Local 790 and ATU Local 1555, representing approximately 2300 employees are set to strike if BART management doesn't agree to the unions' demands which include a pay raise, continued health care, pension coverage, and retiree benefits. BART management claims that the system faces a $100 billion, four-year deficit, and they are calling the unions "greedy" for marginally doing their job of protecting what crumbs the BART workers already receive (relative to management who also wants a pay increase and benefits, but who earn more than three times as much as the highest paid BART union employees and as much as ten times as much as entry level union employees).

BART Management is using thier P.R. tactics to turn the public against the union and have been effectively laying the blame for BART's continued deficit at the feet of BART union employees. The anti-union P.R. is working all too well. Every one of the letters to the editor in the Saturday, July 2, 2005 edition of the San Francisco Chronicle was vile, reactionary, and rabidly anti-union. Of course, given the fact that the capitalist class and the capitalist press have systematically blamed the working class and their mostly weak pro- capitalist business unions for all of capitalism's failings over the past century or so, it doesn't take much nudging to whip BART commuters (even those that are union workers that don't work for BART, as evidenced by one letter writer) into a foaming at the mouth brain washed pro -capitalist dupe. It's absolutely pathetic.

Is any of this anger justified? Yes! Is it aimed at the right target? Not on your life!

Of course, BART riders have plenty to be angry about. BART fares have increased dramatically in the past decade, but BART service is as rotten as ever. But should any of you angry BART riders be reading this, you should know that blaming the BART union, especially if it results in them being busted, will only make the problem worse.

Who then are the real villians?

The answer is long and very far reaching. It's admittedly difficult to find a starting point, but to me, radical that I am, I choose to go to the root of the problem and blame the planners, designers, and capitalists who created the system in the first place.

The problems that BART is experiencing now are woven in the woof. BART was created in the 1960s well after General Motors, it's front organization National City Lines, the automotive industry, the oil cartel, and the US Government decided to destroy inner-city mass transit by deceitfully declaring it obsolete and declaring that the private automobile with its wasteful and polluting internal combustion engine wasthe pinnacle of freedom.

By the time BART was created, it was already apparent, in the San Francisco Bay Area at any rate, that the autocentric ideal didn't measure up to reality. San Franciscans (as well as angry residents elsewhere throughout the Bay Area) had organized (and continued to organize) anti-freeway revolts that managed to halt construction of dozens of freeways (some of which were never ultimately built) as well as a pair of south-central bay-crossing viaducts (known as the "Southern Crossing") from Alameda to Hunters' Point and San Leandro to South San Francisco.

BART was already on the drawing board when Souther Crossing was being debated. Ultimately BART's advocates succeeded where Souther Crossing's advocates failed, but was BART really intended to be a public transit alternative to private auto-centric sprawl- based transportation? If it was, was it well designed? The answer to the first question is a matter of considerable debate. I do not have time to discuss it here, but my opinion is clearly negative. The answer to the second question is definitely negative. BART is in fact, easily one of the worst designed, completely mismanaged, major inter-city mass transit systems in the whole world. Let me count the ways:

* (1) BART is heavy rail (as opposed to light rail). In theory that gives BART the advantage of speed, and in theory BART was designed to travel as quickly as 80 MPH, but in reality it never exceeds 50 MPH at its fastest and often averages less than 50 MPH. Heavy rail is much more expensive than light rail for numerous reasons, including wear and tear and heavier usage of materials.
* (2) BART's heavy rail is proprietary. It is wider than any rail system in the world and there is no other system with the same rail gauge anywhere. BART car chassis have to be custom built (some would hypothesize that this is by design, to provide the corporation that designs the cars with job security).
* (3) BART is powered by a high-voltage, high wattage, live third-rail system. This is not only highly dangerous, it is energy inefficient and probably very expensive. BART would have done well to simply use diesel powered cars that could have been converted to hybrid-electric diesel or even hybrid-electric hydrogen fuel-cell power in the present day.
* (4) BART's creators in their infinite stupidity designed all BART lines to share the same double track lines through common bottlenecks. There are currently five, color-coated BART lines. Four of these (the red, yellow, green, and blue), commuter lines, terminate at four distinct locations in the East Bay Area at one end and now terminate at or near the San Francisco Airport at the other end. The fifth (orange), transverse line, terminates at the end of the red line (in Richmond) at its north end, and it terminates at the end of the green line (in Fremont) at its south end. Most commuter traffic heads towards San Francisco from the east in the morning and away from San Francisco from west to east at the end of the commute. All four commuter lines share the same track. That means that BART must alternate each of the four lines, thus resulting in less frequent service (often ten-twenty minutes apart for each line). BART should have given each line their own track.
* (5) Two of the commuter lines (the red and the green) don't even operate during all system hours. These are reserved for commute times only. Two of the commuter lines (the green and the blue) don't even go all the way to the airport (both marginally serve an airport in Oakland, but to limit travelers to that option is short-sighted). Those wishing to get to the destinations not served have to transfer and wait for a train that does reach their intended destination.
* (6) BART has a convoluted ticket system, where commuters are charged by the distance they travel. The tickets use a magnetic strip pioneered by Bill Wattenberg, a Pentagon weapons designer and conservative AM radio talk show pundit which relies on expensive and often unreliable ticket machines that are often breaking down.
* (7) BART cannot be built "at grade". It must either be built above grade (which costs four times as much as similar construction at grade) or below grade (which costs eleven times as much as similar construction at grade).
* (8) BART stations are served by stariways and escalators, the latter of which are exposed to the elements which is something they are not designed for. This greatly increases maintenance costs.
* (9) BART is a political pork barrel project. It often sucks money away from other mass transit projects, usually those serving working class neighborhoods and neighborhoods inhabited by people of color. BART greedily demaqnds a lion's share of (non auto-centric) transit funding whenever omnibus transit bills are drafted, and they usually get it.
* (10) BART is built far into the suburbs (and most BART expansion stretches further into these same suburbs, instead of increasing capacity at the core where it is sorely needed), and it it carries a full capacity during commute period. This actually promotes further suburbanization of the surrounding communities and the Manhattenization of the core areas it serves.
* (11) BART directors have (until recently) let passengers park in its parking lots free of charge. Where they have started charging for parking is at the stations in the working class core as opposed to the rich, white suburban periphery. This is due to the fact that BART directors are elcted by voters and the white suburbanites are the ones that vote and have the political clout. This actually discourages use of other mass transit systems in the area.
* (12) BART has its own police force. Why is a mystery. BART police have their own patrol car fleet and are often seen driving around in neighborhoods as much as five miles from any BART line or BART station. BART police are used to police non-BART related crimes. Most BART related crimes involve fare evasion (which would be totally unnecessary were BART subsidized completely). BART police have a reputation of being the worst of the worst when it comes to police misconduct and are often composed of rejects from other police forces.
* (13) Above-ground BART stations could get a grant from the government to install PV solar panels and generate their own electricty locally, thus cutting back on grid-tied energy costs. They have made no attempt to do so.
* (14) BART is bicycle unfriendly (although it has improved somewhat in the past decade, but only due to the tireless efforts of bicycle activists). Only recently has it discovered the concept of bike cages. Even those that do exist (in a handful of stations) are subcontracted to low-wage non-profit organizations and volunteers as opposed to union workers. BART's reliance on escalators and stairs as opposed to elevators (limited to one per station) makes it very difficult for bicyclists to get into the station in a timely fashion. Bikes are not even allowed on BART trains during commute hours in commute directions. It's as though BART simply wishes that bicyclists would go away.
* (15) BART trains are controlled by a central super computer that has a reputation for unreliable service. In theory this computer was supposed to keep trains running on time and as close as 90 seconds apart. In reality, this system has never worked as advertized and in practice, trains run no less than 120 seconds apart. Of course, super computers can be used to justify wasteful expenses and computers don't join labor unions.
* (16) BART cannot think outside of its own box. If it doesn't utilize super-wide, heavy- rail, third-electric rail, custom built rolling stock above or below grade, they don't want to know about it. BART light rail, conventional rail, ferry service, or bus lines are out of the question as far as BART is concerned, even if a conventional service paves the way for later expansion of their proprietary system (although at long last, they are starting to realize just how cost-ineffective this stubborness is).
* (17) BART's credo is expand, expand, expand! Expansion is targetted to the periphery as opposed to the core.
* (18) BART claims that they cannot run trains 24-7 due to maintenance needs (this eliminates a huge potential increase in passengers who would use the system at night on weekends to commute to and from San Francisco to enjoy its nightlife). BART has (until recently) refused to even run a feeder busalong its rail lines to service the stations during the scheduled late night-early morning maintenance period!
* (19) BART could in theory, have build parking garages near their stations and charged users for parking, even if they didn't use the system and used that money for funding. They didn't.
* (20) BART management is top heavy. Much of it could be eliminated and replaced with workers' councils (but that would be Communism! or worse yet, it could be Anarchy!).
* (21) BART, like so many mass transit agencies in the USA relies on fare box revenue, sales tax, and bonds for its funding. When capitalism enters one of its characteristic contraction (bust) cycles, funding for BART is lost at every end of the equation. Were BARt subsidized completely through a general assessment of corporate property that was fixed, this would not be a problem.

This is but a fraction of what is wrong with mass transit in the USA in general. To blame all of this on BART unions is the height of capitalist chutzpah. It would be fair, however, to criticized BART union leadership for not challenging any of these problems, because BART union leadership sees itself as junior partners in the capitalist system. This is, as you are aware, why once again, this unfortunate situation is proof once again that the IWW's preamble is correct to point out that:

[business] unions [are] unable to cope with the ever growing power of the employing class. The trade unions foster a state of affairs which allows one set of workers to be pitted against another set of workers in the same industry, thereby helping defeat one another in wage wars. Moreover, the [business] unions aid the employing class to mislead the workers into the belief that the working class have interests in common with their employers.

Many of BART's ridership are also members of the working class or middle-management. By blaming BART unions for the inherent flaws in the BART system, they are playing right into the hands of the capitalist class. By not doing more to challenge BART's inherent flaws, and limiting themselves to "pork-chop" issues (wages, health care, etc) the BART unions also play right into the capitalist class' hands. It's a viscious cycle and it must be broken now. Even if the BART unions strike, and win a short term battle, without any effort to address the class war nature of mass transit that pits riders against workers and robs both blind, the BART riders are likely to enable a ballot-box based or legislative backlash against the unions which will ultimately weaken them further and do nothing to address the root problems.

Meanwhile, the capitalists keep BART running because they are utterly dependent upon it to move their wage slaves from place-to-place. Over 320,000 riders use BART daily. By riding BART, that 320,000 allows close to a million others to use the local freeways and major bridges (that cross the bay) more freely due to reduced congestion. If BART riders refused to pay their fares, the capitalists would be forced to fund it anyway.

BART workers need to realize that the riders ought to be their allies, not their enemy. Instead of engaging in a work-stoppage strike, BART workers ought to consider a strike that allows all riders to ride for free. Not only would BART workers win the support of (most) BART riders, they would have as much of an effect on the bosses' pocketbooks without losing the support of the riders!

Meanwhile, BART ridership needs to realize that the BART workers are not their enemy either. BART workers don't decide to raise BART fares, BART management does. BART workers didn't create the mess that is BART, BART's creators and designers did that.

BART workers and BART riders have the power to start fixing BART. The sooner they start, the better. Otherwise the problems will only get worse.
Add Your Comments
Listed below are the latest comments about this post.
These comments are submitted anonymously by website visitors.
TITLE
AUTHOR
DATE
Steve Ongerth
Fri, Jul 22, 2005 2:08AM
BRI
Tue, Jul 19, 2005 12:23PM
intexile
Thu, Jul 7, 2005 12:14AM
Mario
Wed, Jul 6, 2005 6:30PM
person
Wed, Jul 6, 2005 2:20PM
BART rider
Wed, Jul 6, 2005 1:55PM
Ariesboy571
Wed, Jul 6, 2005 9:21AM
intexile
Wed, Jul 6, 2005 1:45AM
.
Tue, Jul 5, 2005 11:20PM
aaron
Tue, Jul 5, 2005 11:09PM
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!

Donate

$110.00 donated
in the past month

Get Involved

If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.

Publish

Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.

IMC Network