And
Amalgamated
Transit
Interest
Arbitration
Arbitrator: Gary L. Axon
Date
Issued:
Arbitrator:
Axon; Gary L.
Case #: 11148-I-94-00239
Employer:
Date Issued:
IN THE MATTER OF )
) P.E.R.C. NO. 11148-1-94-239
INTEREST ARBITRATION )
) NEUTRAL ARBITRATOR'S
BETWEEN )
) OPINION AND AWARD
AMALGAMATED TRANSIT
LOCAL
587, AFL-CIO, ) 1993-95
)
)
and ) AGREEMENT
)
)
Employer. )
HEARING SITE: Community
Center
Port
HEARING DATES: June 13, 14, 15,
1994
POST-HEARING BRIEF DUE:
RECORD CLOSED ON RECEIPT OF BRIEF:
REPRESENTING THE
Martin
Garfinkel
Frank
and Rosen
1200
705
REPRESENTING THE EMPLOYER: Bruce L. Schroeder
Heller, Ehrman,
White & McAuliffe
6100
701
ARBITRATION PANEL: Curtis Stacey
Richard
E. Wojt
Employer
Appointed Member
Gary
L. Axon
Neutral
Arbitrator
1465
Pinecrest Terrace
(503)
488-1573
Table
of Contents
Page
I. Introduction 2
II. Background 8
III. Position
of ATU 11
IV. Position
of
V. Arbitrator's
Award - Wages 42
VI. Arbitrator's
Award - Health Insurance 59
I. INTRODUCTION
This
case is an interest arbitration conducted pursuant
to RCW 41.56.492 and the regulations
promulgated thereunder. The
parties to this dispute are the
"Employer" or "
Union Local 587 (hereinafter "
this dispute have defined their working
conditions pursuant to a
Collective
Bargaining Agreement since
1983. The previous
Collective Bargaining Agreement covered the
period 1990 through
Agreement in the fall of 1992. To the credit of the parties, they
were able to resolve all differences, except
for wages and health
insurance for the 1993-95 Collective
Bargaining Agreement.
formed in 1980 to provide transit services
in
within the Olympic National Park and along
the
composed of three
Townsend Council members.
services including fixed route operations,
route deviations, van
pools, ride-matching service, regional
intercity bus interline
connection, local freight, and connections
with the
State ferries.
diverse and isolated counties in western
County is physically cut off from the
metropolitan
counties by both
western halves are separated by the rugged
county has a total land mass of 1,805 square
miles situated on the
northern portion of the Olympic
is one of the lowest in the state. The most recent population
figures indicate there are only 23,500
people residing in the
incorporated town in the county with a
population of 7,740.
The
rural nature of the service area creates some unique
driving situations when compared with urban
transit agencies.
each day,
from over 100 miles to as many as 400 miles. The
operators
are required to
drive over narrow
and sometimes
treacherous roads during adverse weather
conditions. For example,
the Brinnon-to-Port
Townsend run requires the operators drive over
The
drivers have to contend with problem passengers who
are under the influence of alcohol or
drugs. Drivers often have to
deal with passengers who harass and threaten
them while they are
operating the bus. In addition, drivers have to deal with
medical
emergencies while operating the buses in
remote locations.
passengers.
Drivers are expected to stop the bus when a person
flags the bus down seeking a ride.
In
sum, because of its large service area and small
population, Jefferson Transit's routes are
characterized by long
stretches between pick-ups with few
passengers on the bus at any
one time.
The
major economic and employment sectors in
County
include marine trades,
pulp and paper,
forest
products/logging, diversified
manufacturing, government and
tourism.
The major private sector employer is Port Townsend Paper
Corporation.
Government employment makes up a sizeable portion of
the
manufacturing segment of the economy is
declining while employment
in the service and retail trade industry is
occupying a greater
percentage of the employment in
a source of income for the residents of
population is growing at a moderate
rate.
experienced
recent immigration of
people as the
result of
"lifestyle moves from more urban areas
throughout the country."
The downturn in the forest products industry
and the closure of the
1.11.
The
Amalgamated Transit Union Local 587 represents 19
bargaining unit members at
is composed of 15 drivers, 2 mechanics and 2
dispatchers. Eight of
the 15 drivers are part-time operators. The part-time drivers
average between 25 and 30 hours of work per
week. They are
guaranteed 15 hours per week. There is one full-time and one part-
time dispatcher. Jeffrey Hamm, the Employer's general manager,
testified
that
dedicated employees who are "the heart
of this organization."
The
hearing in this case took three days for the parties
to present a substantial amount of testimony
and a voluminous
number of exhibits. The majority of the hearing time was consumed
on the issue of the appropriate
jurisdictions with which to compare
insurance benefits to be included in the
1993-95 contract. The
hearing
was recorded by
a court reporter
and a transcript
consisting of 619 pages was made available
to the parties and the
arbitration panel for the purpose of
preparing the post-hearing
briefs and the Award. Testimony of witnesses was taken under oath.
At the hearing the parties were given the
full opportunity to
present written evidence, oral testimony and
argument. The parties
provided the Arbitrator with substantial
written documentation in
support of their respective positions. Comprehensive and lengthy
post-hearing
briefs were submitted
to the Arbitrator
with
accompanying interest arbitration awards
previously issued in the
state of
The
approach of this Arbitrator in writing the Award will
be to summarize the major and most
persuasive evidence and argument
presented by the parties. After introduction of the issue and
positions of the parties, I will state the
basic findings and
rationale which caused the Arbitrator to
make the Award on the wage
and insurance issues.
The
parties filed their post-hearing written briefs in a
timely manner and the record was closed on
of the extensive record in this case the
parties agreed to an
extension of the statutory requirement that
a decision be issued
within thirty days of the close of the
record. On September 22,
1994, the neutral Arbitrator conducted a
telephone conference call
with the party appointed members of the
arbitration panel to
discuss the evidence and argument contained
in the record of this
case.
The comments and observations of the party appointed panel
members were of great assistance to the
neutral Arbitrator in
preparing his findings of fact and Award on
the issues presented
for interest arbitration. The written decision is solely the work
of the neutral Arbitrator.
This
Arbitrator carefully reviewed and evaluated all of
the evidence and argument submitted pursuant
to the criteria
established by RCW 41.56.492. Since the record in this case is so
comprehensive, it would be impractical for
the Arbitrator in the
discussion and Award to restate and refer to
each and every piece
of evidence and testimony presented. However, when formulating the
Award
for the 1993-95
Collective Bargaining Agreement,
the
Arbitrator did give careful consideration to
all of the evidence
and argument contained in the record of this
case.
The statutory
standards and guidelines
to aid the
Arbitrator in reaching a decision on the
issues in this case are as
follows:
(a) The
constitutional and statutory
authority
of the employer;
(b) Stipulations of the parties;
(c) Compensation package
comparisons,
economic indices,
fiscal constraints, and
similar
factors determined by the arbitration
panel
to be pertinent to the case; and
(d) Such other factors, not confined to the
foregoing,
which are normally or traditionally
taken
into consideration in the determination
of
wages, hours, and conditions of employment.
II. BACKGROUND
This
case comes to interest arbitration pursuant to the
action of the
interest arbitration to employees of transit
agencies throughout
the state of
statute pertaining to transit employees and
the statutes covering
police and firefighter labor disputes were
the subject of some
conflict between the parties. The Arbitrator will discuss this
issue in his findings and Award.
Article
V, Section 2
established a base wage rate
effective
Classification Wage Rate
& Effective Date
Dispatcher $10.60
Driver $10.50
Mechanic $12.35
Transit
Operator Trainee $
5.00
In
a memorandum of agreement the parties agreed to modify
Article V, Section 2 to establish two
mechanic positions. The
January 1, 1992, rate for a lead mechanic
was set at $13.91 per
hour and for the maintenance service worker
the rate was set at
$10.30 per hour.
The
1990-92 Collective Bargaining Agreement also provides
for longevity pay for employees at two
different levels. Employees
with 61 through 120 months of service are
able to accrue a maximum
of $30 per month in longevity pay. Employees with 121 months of
service or more accrue a maximum monthly
amount of $60.
Article
VII addresses the issue of the insurance program.
The Employer is currently contributing less
than the $185 per month
maximum toward employee insurance. The $185 per month is adequate
to cover the cost of the employee only
insurance. The total
premium cost for 1992 was $34,647 and
$36,490 in 1993. Er.
Ex.
5.3. The
parties are at impasse on the amount of the Employer
contribution toward health insurance
premiums.
The negotiation
process resulted in a number
of
agreements on the issue of leaves, probationary
period, seniority,
grievance procedure etc. The Employer calculated the financial
impact of the tentatively agreed items over
the three-year duration
of the contract at $40,778. The parties also agreed to modify the
structure of the salary schedule to provide
a wage progression. In
essence, the new employee would have to work
five years to attain
the maximum level on the salary
schedule. The parties disagree
over the percentage to be applied at the
various steps until the
maximum salary is reached. The 1993 budget projected total revenue
of $1,323,627. Er. Ex. 3.13. It cost the District $382,019 to
fund the wages required under the 1992
contract. With FICA and
PERS an additional $58,181 was added to the
cost to fund the salary
schedule.
This
is the first interest arbitration the parties have
utilized to resolve an impasse over
negotiations for a Collective
Bargaining Agreement. The major focus of the parties on the wage
issue was comparability. The parties expressed at the arbitration
hearing widely divergent opinions over which
agencies should be
utilized
as comparators for
establishing the wage
level at
authorities from within the state of
comparables.
All of the agencies on the Employer's list operated
in non-metropolitan areas. On the other hand, the
a list of sixteen transit agencies in
wage comparison study. In addition,
alternative list of comparables which
included some local private
as well as public agencies it believed were
relevant to the
determination of wages for the members of
this bargaining unit.
Five transit agencies were common to the
lists offered by the
and the Employer.
In
its post-hearing brief, the
comparators to seven transit agencies in the
state of
The five agencies which are common to both
lists are as follows:
Pacific
Transit
Valley
Transit
Twin
Transit
Pullman
Transit
The Arbitrator holds that the five agencies
shared in common by the
two lists should be contained on the
ultimate list of comparables
to be
utilized in measuring wages for the members of this
bargaining unit.
III. POSITION
OF ATU
A. Background
The
a new hire at 85% of the maximum rate rising
to 100% at Step F
after
five years. Current
employees hired prior
to the
ratification of this Agreement would be
grandfathered at the
maximum rate.
The
as follows:
CLASSIFICATION WAGES
Dispatcher $12.94
Transit
Operator $11.55
+
Lead Mechanic $15.30
Mechanic $13.58
Maintenance Service Worker $11.33
Transit Operator Trainee $ 5.00
The above salary represents a 10%
across-the-board increase in
wages.
The
and third years of the contract as follows:
Effective
all
Employees will increase by a minimum five
percent
(5%). Should the aggregate percentage
increase
of sales and use tax received by
exceed
five percent (5%), Employees' wages
will
increase by an equal amount up to a
maximum
of ten percent (10%).
Effective
all
Employees will increase by a minimum five
percent
(5%). Should the aggregate percentage
increase
of sales and use tax received by
exceed five percent (5%), Em