Safety issue complicates LTD labor feud.

Byline: Matt Cooper The Register-Guard

A judge may rule Thursday whether Lane Transit District can shave five minutes off the daily inspection time for buses, in the latest turn of caustic 10-month contract talks between LTD and union workers.

An attorney for two passengers and two bus drivers sued in Lane County Circuit Court on Tuesday, arguing that the shorter 10-minute inspections by drivers will jeopardize safety once implemented Sunday.

A hearing will be held Thursday on the request for a temporary restraining order against LTD, said Gene Mechanic, the plaintiffs' attorney.

The lawsuit illustrates how bitter the dispute between LTD and its workers remains, after months of contract talks and two cooling-off periods, the latest of which is due to expire early next month. A key point in the contract dispute involves an LTD demand that workers assume a bigger burden of health care insurance costs. The sides are set to meet Friday to see if they can avert a strike. LTD says it needs to control costs to keep them in line with revenues, but the union says the cuts are hurting workers - and now, passenger safety.

The district earlier this month began imposing terms of its latest offer, including the cut in inspection times.

The district had a 10-minute inspection policy for 30 years ending in 2000, and was repeatedly recognized for excellent safety, LTD spokesman Andy Vobora said Tuesday.

It moved to a 15-minute inspection time during contract talks that year, but the work rule was left in limbo with the rest of the contract that expired July 1 of last year, said Carol Allred, a board officer with Amalgamated Transit Union 757, which represents 236 of the transit district's 310 employees.

The lawsuit is necessary to get LTD's attention, Allred said. "I don't think the district understands how serious the drivers and the passengers are about this," she said.

But Vobora said the lawsuit is an attempt to divert the public's attention from the union's refusal to negotiate. "Filing an injunction is a way to bargain in the public and not deal with it at the bargaining table," he said.

Vobora suggested that the complaint was arbitrary, given that the same transit union negotiated contracts with the state's other largest districts - TriMet in Portland and Salem Area Mass Transit - that provide 10-minute inspections.

That's untrue, said Jonathan Hunt, vice president with the transit union. Inspection periods weren't part of those contracts, he said.

A Salem transit spokesman said drivers have 10 minutes to check buses in the morning, but Hunt said maintenance workers help with that. TriMet inspections take about 20 minutes, he added; TriMet spokeswoman Mary Fetsch couldn't confirm the number.

Hunt accused LTD of cutting costs at the expense of safety, but Vobora said safety won't be compromised with the 10-minute rule. Not all drivers used the 15-minute prep time, and routes will run more efficiently with the 10-minute inspection, for an annual savings of $45,000, he said.

Drivers must inspect the bus body, lights, wheels and lug nuts; check for tire leaks and damage; and check the inside, including lights, wipers, horn, gauges, safety equipment, seats and mirrors, biohazard kit and camera, the union said.

Post-Sept. 11 concerns have added to the list, the union said.

"With a 15-minute prep time, it's a tight fit," Mechanic said. "By reducing it to 10 minutes, we believe the inspection time will be reduced by half."

Plaintiff Merrill Haggard, a 57-year-old who uses a wheelchair and rides the bus daily, would rather that five additional minutes was spent ensuring safety. "It'd be like flying an airplane," said Haggard. "I will never get on a commercial airline that I know has not had a walk-around."