A state legislator wants to mandate that financially strapped MARTA privatize big portions of its operations and start shedding its pension system while giving the governor more influence over the transit agency.
State Rep. Mike Jacobs, R-Atlanta, has proposed legislation that would give the governor the power to pick any retired superior court judge to arbitrate any labor dispute between MARTA and the local Amalgamated Transit Union — which union members say risks appointing someone more biased for management. The legislation also would give the governor a board appointment.
The law, which used to give judges a role in MARTA-union arbitration, was amended several years ago to require arbitrators to be chosen from one of two professional associations.
“A judge does not know labor law, as we have seen when we have gone into contract negotiations before with judges,” said Curtis Howard, head of the local union. “The DeKalb County judge just rubber-stamped whatever the company said.”
The proposed law could signal that both the Legislature and MARTA officials plan to play hardball with the union to salvage the agency’s finances.
The debate over the arbitration change comes as the transit agency and the union begin to battle this year over a new labor contract and benefits package and the role privatization will play over next few years.
Jacobs, who chairs the legislative committee that oversees MARTA, said the agency’s management did ask that the governor be given the option of appointing a retired judge.
“The request was made and I granted the request,” he said. “Any arbitrator can be unfair.”
Jacobs said the union contends that the proposed changes in the law could run afoul of federal law that protects collective bargaining rights and union benefits, which would make MARTA ineligible for federal grants. State Rep. Billy Mitchell, D-Stone Mountain, who serves on the MARTA oversight committee, expressed concern about putting federal grants at risk.
Howard would only say the union was reviewing the law to decide whether a complaint would be warranted.
Phil LaPorte, a labor negotiator and Georgia State University professor, said it would be a long shot for the union to make a successful complaint out of privatization because MARTA officials can argue they need to shed the jobs in the best interest of the agency.
Over the past five years, MARTA has received more than $550 million in federal grants for such things as maintenance, capital improvements and security, which agency officials have said have been critical for its operations.
Still, the proposal is drawing criticism.
“I think the intent is to take it away from a labor arbitrator who is perceived to be more pro-labor,” said Norm Slawsky, a labor lawyer who represents the union. “Naturally the governor will pick someone he perceives as serving the interests he agrees with. A Roy Barnes and a Nathan Deal may pick people who are very different.”
MARTA’s General Manager Keith Parker and the board of directors have said they plan to follow many of the recommendations from last year’s management audit by consultant KPMG. The audit found the agency could save up to $50 million through privatizing services such as para-transit, payroll and cleaning; through negotiating a labor contract to attack absenteeism and workers’ compensation claims; and by moving from a pension system to a 401(k) retirement plan for new employees. Union officials contend the auditors cooked their findings to support privatization.
Parker and Board Chairman Fred Daniels have said it is essential that MARTA, which has been running an annual operating deficit of about $30 million, restructure its finances and business model if it is ever going to win any state funding. The agency is the only transit provider of comparable size that receives no state funding.
MARTA management had no comment on this story, except to say it was reviewing the legislation. As well as mandating the privatization recommendations in the KPMG audit by July 1, 2018, the proposed law would ban employees hired after Jan. 1, 2014, from joining the pension system.
Mitchell said he supported the move toward privatization but felt that it should not be mandated by law because of too many questions on how it would be accomplished. He said he did have concerns about the proposed arbitration change.
“I am not concerned about this governor politicizing the issue,” Mitchell said of Deal, “but certainly that is an inherent risk if we don’t instill safeguards in the system.”
Jacobs said he wanted to make privatization a done deal at MARTA because of fears that future administrations or boards would not be committed to the privatization that GOP legislators are demanding.
Other proposed changes include:
- A caucus of North Fulton County mayors would pick two board members. South Fulton mayors, the Fulton County Commission Chairman and affected county commissioners would appoint one board member, and DeKalb County mayors would pick a board member.
- The governor would pick a board member from Fulton or DeKalb county as a voting member on the board, and the current voting state representative, the commissioner of the Department of Transportation, would be changed to be a nonvoting member.
- The law requiring MARTA to use 50 percent of its sales tax revenues for capital improvements will be suspended for three more years to allow the agency more flexibility in marshaling its resources.
About the Author
