At what cost do you jeopardize the health and safety of your employees and customers? In cutting personnel costs, TriMet is jeopardizing the health of its employees and the riding public. KGW ran a recent story of spreading airborne diseases, particularly the H1N1 virus onboard crowed MAX trains and busses. There was even talk about TriMet putting hand sanitizer dispensers on all vehicles. But TriMet’s response to this problem was to get rid of all bus cleaners some six months ago. TriMet recently installed cards aboard their 654 buses and 127 Max vehicles, alerting the public that it’s flu season and asking passengers to cover their coughs and sneezes. A KGW viewer commented that “bus seats and hand rails have got to be a one-way ticket to germville.” Another commented saying “and I’m not saying the cleaning folks aren’t doing their job; I’m sure they do an awesome job. But the sheer amount of people that ride, that wipe noses and hold on to the rail, that sneeze…..ok, you get my point.”

What cleaners? Until six months ago, every bus and MAX train got a thorough cleaning about once every four weeks. A cleaner would spend roughly three hours on each vehicle, cleaning the interior of the vehicles from top to bottom. That included washing down the ceiling, walls, seat frames floors, cleaning windows and removing gum and graffiti. The bus and rail car seats would be changed out after being thoroughly steam cleaned. That was then. But, cleaner positions were removed some six months ago. Now, bus cleaning consists of a maintenance employee opening the back window of the vehicle and using a blower to blow everything to the front and out of the bus while the bus is being fueled. Often, articles such as needles and used condoms get stuck behind seat frames. Cockroach infestations have even reported on TriMet vehicles and when a festation was discovered, cleaners would set off bug bombs in the vehicles.

In finding areas to cut costs, I think eliminating the thorough cleaning of bus and MAX vehicles every month was a bad decision, and one that greatly affects the health of those who operate and those who ride TriMet vehicles. Is the minimal savings by trashing vehicle cleaners really worth the health detriment to operators and passengers? Was this a good management decision?

Does the riding public know that the public transit vehicles they commute in are no longer subjected to a rigorous monthly cleaning schedule? A MAX train operator commented “If you ever see me operate the train, you will see me with brown gloves on my hands; many reasons why I and a few other operators use these gloves, but one is definitely germs of any kind anywhere on the trains, the cabs included……”

TriMet needs to resume regular and thorough cleaning of its vehicles. The health of the employees who operate the vehicles and the general public that ride the vehicles is more important than the savings derived from allowing vehicles to run dirty.

At your January 2011 Board Meeting, the Union asked that you indemnify operators from any disciplinary action arising out of situations which implicate Type 4 rail car problems. Because of what we see as a failure on TriMet’s part to recognize and address the Type 4 light rail train blind spot problem, and given TriMet's dismissal of these concerns, the Union again demands that TriMet indemnify all operators from any disciplinary actions arising out of situations which implicate the Type 4 problems until such time that the issues have been satisfactory addressed. I would like to ask if TriMet is prepared to issue an indemnification order at this time?

And finally, I would be remiss if I didn’t comment on the protracted labor contract dispute between TriMet and the union. I received a letter dated February 11, 2011 from Neil McFarlane, which quite frankly, alarmed me. In Neil’s letter he wrote like he wasn’t sure what “what if” proposals were during mediated negotiation sessions. The following are a few excerpts from my response to Neil.
“You know that the parties have been in negotiations for a very long period of time. And surely you know that "what if" proposals have been floated between the parties during mediated and non-mediated sessions. Maybe your claim "I do not know exactly what you mean by a what if proposal" possibly explains why the parties have not been able to reach agreement and settle this prolonged and protracted dispute.

In his letter Neil also wrote that he recognized that you (referring to me) are writing for other audiences in addition to TriMet. In response I said, “I write to and for my membership. You, on the other hand, regularly put out information to unionized employees through your "direct communication" media that is most often slanted, misleading and would not win any blue ribbons for being open and honest.”

Again, Neil reiterated as he has so many times in the past, that the parties should work together to memorialize a short term (“bridge agreement”) and then attempt to negotiate a longer term agreement. The only problem with TriMet’s definition of a "bridge agreement" seems to mean that TriMet builds the bridge, the Union walks over it and before the Union reaches the other side, TriMet causes the bridge to collapse.

All of us should be well aware that the Oregon Employment Relation's Board will not proceed forward with the interest arbitration because of pending unfair labor practice charges concerning TriMet's alleged violation of the law on several counts. First, TriMet altered its position when submitting their bargaining proposal to arbitration. Second, TriMet violated the law when it unilaterally changed the terms of the collective bargaining agreement in respect to wages and insurance. And finally, TriMet retaliated against the union, with Neil acknowledging in person that he would not have changed the contract terms if the Union had not filed the original unfair labor practice complaint.

The Union has repeatedly said it is willing to resolve this agreement anytime that TriMet is willing to reach a mutual agreement. Mutual means both sides, not just one side. As I have said time and time again, the Union is ready to strike arbitrators and move immediately to binding arbitration once TriMet rescinds its unlawful implementation and/or agrees to make its employees whole as a result of the unlawful implementation.

Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today and I will answer any questions you may have.