Bus strike looms in Corvallis
City transit and school
bus operators reject
Laidlaw’s final offer,
authorize strike
AFSCME rallies for new
contract at Clackamas Co.
About 100 people turned out in
Oregon City for a noontime rally Jan.
23 in support of members of the
American Federation of State, County
and Municipal Employees Local 350
locked in difficult contract talks with
their employer — Clackamas County.
The union has filed an unfair labor
practice complaint for unilaterally im-
plementing a new payroll schedule in
the midst of the current contract nego-
tiations. Local 350 represents about
350 county employees in the 911 cen-
ter, transportation, development, water
and environmental services depart-
ments. The 911 employees are not al-
lowed to strike and work under a sepa-
rate contract.
The county employees have been
working without a contract since June
30, 2006. Bargaining on a new agree-
ment began May 11, but disagree-
ments over health insurance premiums
have bogged down talks.
According to union spokesman
Don Loving, Clackamas County wants
a 95-5 split on the cost of employee
health insurance. “The county is insist-
ing on a cap on its contribution, mean-
ing Local 350 members would likely
see their percentage rise considerably
above 5 percent next year,” he said.
In mid-December a mediator was
called in, but after three sessions there
has been little movement. The Jan. 23
rally coincided with the third round of
mediated talks. The next mediated ses-
sion is scheduled for Feb. 15.
Local 350 President Rob Hunger-
ford says his colleagues deserve re-
spect. “We are the employees who
make this county run,” he said. “Man-
agers are in line to get big bonuses, but
they can’t find money for our wages
and health insurance costs.”
AFSCME Oregon Council 75 Ex-
ecutive Director Ken Allen told rally-
goers, “Clackamas County needs to
understand who they’re picking a fight
with. They’re not just going up against
Local 350. They’re about to get on the
wrong side of a large, statewide union
that has over $600,000 in its strike
fund. They need to come to the table
and settle, because we won’t be scared
away.”
CORVALLIS — Corvallis’s transit
and school bus drivers turned thumbs
down to a proposal by Laidlaw Transit,
Inc. that, in effect, would rip up wage
gains attained over the past six years.
More than 65 bus operators — 10 at
the city and 55 at the school district —
are represented by Amalgamated Tran-
sit Union Local 757. Their contact ex-
pired on June 30, 2006.
On Jan. 23, bus operators voted
overwhelmingly to reject Laidlaw’s
contract proposal and at the same time
authorized a strike.
Canadian-based Laidlaw Transit has
contracts to provide public transit and
school bus service in Corvallis. It is the
largest transportation company in North
America and is notorious for opposing
unions.
Drivers from both the City of Cor-
vallis and the school district joined Lo-
cal 757 in 1997, but ran into one road-
block after another trying to get a first
contract. They walked off the job sev-
eral times and filled City Council meet-
ings numerous times to protest shoddy
treatment.
In fact, it was Laidlaw’s resistance to
the union that led to a 1999 ballot meas-
ure in which Corvallis voters — by a
wide margin — approved an ordinance
stipulating that wages and benefits for
city transit workers be based on the
wages and benefits of other transit
workers within a 100-mile radius. The
prevailing wage law went into effect
July 1, 2000.
The issue for city bus operators cen-
ters around a service contract between
the City of Corvallis and Laidlaw. Ac-
cording to Ron Heintzman, an interna-
tional vice president for the ATU and a
former president of Local 757, wages in
the bus operators’ first contract were
patterned after the prevailing wage or-
dinance, and benefits mirrored those re-
ceived by Corvallis city employees.
“We agreed to that because the city
was anticipating taking bus service in-
house,” Heintzman said.
That transition never happened.
To further complicate matters, the
city didn’t update the minimum wage
and benefit requirements when it re-
newed its service contract with Laidlaw.
As a result, when the union came
looking for wage and benefit increases
comparable to those received by city
employees, Laidlaw refused, taking the
position that unless the city changed its
contract in regard to minimum wages
and benefits, they wouldn’t agree to any
changes.
That position has caused the parties
to reach impasse, with the union con-
tending that it will not be locked into a
contract with no changes for life.
Heintzman said the union came to
the bargaining table with 14 items, but
narrowed its requests to just three: a 3.5
percent annual raise, an increase in life
insurance from $20,000 to the annual
Swanson, Thomas &Coon
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
Since 1981
James Coon
Jacqueline Jacobson
T HE M ARCO C ONSULTING G ROUP
T HE M ARCO
C ONSULTING
G ROUP
wage of a driver, and sick leave pay-out
comparable to city employees.
“Laidlaw’s position is totally unac-
ceptable and to this point in time the
city has done nothing to correct it,” he
said, adding that any increases on Laid-
law could be directly passed though to
the city.
In the school bus driver dispute, af-
ter six years the union was finally able
to bargain a five-year step increase on
wages. That step increase was ratified
in the 2003 contract, but didn’t take ef-
fect until the last day of the contract
(June 30, 2006).
As a concession to get the step in-
creases, bus drivers agreed to take a
wage increase on the last day of the
contract, instead of at the beginning,
which is typical in other contracts
In the proposal drivers rejected on
Jan. 23, Heintzman said Laidlaw had
eliminated step increases and gone back
to the original wage structure, totally
discounting the past six-year bargaining
history.
Additionally, Laidlaw applied the
June 30, 2006 raise to its new contract
proposal — meaning they didn’t offer
any raises for the first year of the pro-
posed contract.
“These are strike issues,” Heintzman
warned, “and our guys have given au-
thorization to do so.
“The question now is whether the
parents of Corvallis K-12 students are
willing to jeopardize their children’s
safety to a Canadian corporation that is
only interested in profit.”
Ray Thomas
Kimberly Tucker
Margaret Weddell
Cynthia F. Newton
Tip of the week: You have two years to file a lawsuit
after you have discovered the existence and cause of an
asbestos-related disease.
We represent people on all types of injury and disease related claims.
n Workers’ Compensation
INVESTMENT CONSULTANTS TO
MULTI - EMPLOYER BENEFIT FUNDS
n Personal Injury/Product Liability
P LEASE CALL J ASON Z ENK IN T ACOMA , WA AT (253) 759-6768
W EST C OAST O FFICE
M IDWEST O FFICE
E AST C OAST O FFICE
2912 N ORTH 26 TH S TREET
T ACOMA , WA 98407
P: 253-759-6768
F: 312-575-9840
550 W EST W ASHINGTON B LVD .
N INTH F LOOR
C HICAGO , IL 60661
P: 312 575-9000
F: 312 575-9840
1220 A DAMS S TREET
F IRST F LOOR
B OSTON , MA 02124
P: 617 298-0967
F: 617 298-0966
PAGE 12
n Construction Injuries
n Death Claims
n Asbestos/Mesothelioma
n Social Security Disability
We provide straight answers at no cost on any of the above areas of law.
CALL US or VISIT OUR WEB SITE
( 503) 228-5222
NORTHWEST LABOR PRESS
http://www.stc-law.com
FEBRUARY 2, 2007