Bay Area BART Salaries

Actually, the high salaried employees you see are people like the General Manager who refuse to personally come to the bargaining table at all, and probably approve raises for themselves.

The average salary of striking workers is about $61k, and management has accepted that their current offer only results in a substantive increase of $1 over four years, after BART workers accepted a freeze four years ago to inject $100M into the system.

More info:

  http://www.keepbartrunning.com/an_open_letter_to_the_community_from_the_bart_workers

peter_l_downs• 13 years ago

Try looking at one of the later pages in the document -- average salary is around 30k! I believe your numbers for sure, just wanted to offer a clean example of "no, not everyone gets paid 80k base + 120k overtime."

http://imgur.com/2vfQ1qi, from http://www.mercurynews.com/salaries/bay-area?Entity=Bay%20Ar...

anigbrowl• 13 years ago

That leave sout some pertinent information. Unlike many other employees in the private and public sector, BART employees make no pension contributions. I think a salary increase identical to a (new) mandatory pension contribution is a substantive increase, just a deferred one. There are also performance-related bonuses on offer.

Average salary does not tell use a whole lot, and omits salient facts like additional earnings from overtime.

bobo135793• 13 years ago

The average pay for a Bay Area worker is $65K. That worker is a professional with a college degree. Why does unskilled transit work deserve so much pay?

joyeuse6701• 13 years ago

Shiz, I'll take their job.

rosser• 13 years ago

Did you look at anything beyond the first page?

cjensen• 13 years ago

The top of the list is the executive staff, not the workers.

ianb4• 13 years ago

The top of the list is mostly police, not executives. Go a little further down and it's police and maintenance.

scilro• 13 years ago

Looked up some of them, and a good number are people who've been working there since the 90s. I know that if I had the same job for 22 years, I'd expect to at LEAST be making 200k...

malandrew8• 13 years ago

$200k just by virtue of working 22 years? What's the rational for that?

If you do skilled labor, where you are constantly improving your skillset and becoming more productive or valuable (e.g. programming, law, custom carpentry, custom welding, nurse etc,), there is an argument for making a little to a lot more money after 22 years, but for all jobs where a novice and an experienced employee add approximately the same value there is no case for raising salary except to account for inflation.

emanuer• 13 years ago

I am on page 60 where train operators and station agents are making $122 000.

The difference between "workers" and manager salaries is about 4x, pretty low compared to the private sector.

I find the salaries to be outrageously high, even factoring in that we are talking about the Bay Area & San Francisco. Considering that the average age of BART's cars is 30 years [1], the money seems better spend on updating the equipment.

[1] http://www.ktvu.com/news/news/local/bart-moved-update-rapidl...

mc324• 13 years ago

At this rate, something's has to give.

If people (riders) realize what the salaries are and compare that to the service they get in return, they should ask for BaRT employees to become more efficient, given their salaries, else BaRT emps will price themselves out and automation will become more and more viable option, despite the political obstacle.

So, yeah, I agree, they should use this money toward upgrades and or service expansion, maybe invest in an additional track smoother[1]. And, as someone said below, they need to realize that they are a service organization and act like one.

[1]http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/BAY-AREA-Softening-the...

samstave2• 13 years ago

I've been in more than a few verbal altercations with station agents at almost every downtown SF BART station, where, when going from the platform to the street via the elevator due to having a stroller - am confronted with a disgusting and unbearable stench of urine and other fluids in the elevators.

I hit the emergency call button and demand they clean the elevators. I get a god damned attitude from the station agents as though its not their problem.

Then who the fark's problem is it. The cost of BART and the service on gets - particularly the hygienic risk - is unacceptable.

CLEAN THE DAMN ELEVATORS!

justizin3• 13 years ago

It's difficult to speak about BART staff without using broad strokes. I think station agents are too adversarial and should have a performance measure based on that. I don't know how to do that in any way that is sane. I'm a programmer, and I don't want to ride to work on an automatic train.

I don't much like BART police, and in fact I think the decision to have a private police force for BART should be revisited. These officers are often rejected based on psychological exams from departments like SFPD, OPD, and UCPD. They have higher entry salaries than workers who aren't armed, and while people on Facebook groups seem constantly to want them around with greater presence to admonish cyclists breaking silly rules or chasing naked acrobats, in fact the only thing they seem capable of doing is accidentally murdering people.

You want upgrades? The maintenance team at BART wants safer working conditions to install the equipment you propose to purchase. With no raise during a period with 18% average cost of living increase - a low average all of us on HN know - I'm sure many of these hard working folks are concerned about having to move their families to neighborhoods with worse schools and crime while being asked to work longer hours, and called greedy for clocking overtime.

Just to be clear I have no affiliation except that I have had some drinking buddies who are SEIU organizers. They're serious people who are very good at taking care of the lower wage employees around the world, and esp in places like the bay area with huge income disparity.

http://www.keepbartrunning.com/an_open_letter_to_the_communi...

justizin3• 13 years ago

Union mechanics update the equipment, and BART has been offering pay increases, which they also admit are not increases, preferentially to safety improvements.

For instance, the lighting situation in the tunnels is unacceptable and has likely been involved in at least one worker death.

BART workers have important jobs, evidenced by the pain we're experiencing as a region without them. That's what strikes are about.

Would you appreciate your salary negotiation going something like this:

  "Hey, four years ago when the company and our customers were struggling, I accepted a pay freeze to cover essential costs to keep us afloat."

  "Thanks for that.  We'd like you to start covering some of the costs of your benefits, though we're actually doing a good bit better.  We're going to give you a raise that amounts to half of inflation in the most optimistic of light, and that will cover the new costs we're asking you to cover.  We're going to do this so that we can go to the press and say that we offered you a raise, you're a bunch of ungrateful fucks, and look at how you've fucked all of the poor riders.  Also, on top of that, all of the things you've asked us to purchase for the system that would increase worker safety are rejected or deferred - we don't think that should be a part of your negotiation, even if you're saying that you might be willing to accept the pay we're offering if we budged a bit more on these costs.  Do you accept?"

http://www.keepbartrunning.com/an_open_letter_to_the_communi...

bobo135793• 13 years ago

How would increasing the salaries of $100,000+ union workers improve safety conditions?

aspensmonster• 13 years ago

I'm an outsider to west coast city politics, but I suspect it's the same all over: the details of why the public workers are striking won't matter. Previous sacrifices and safety concerns be damned. All the public at large will hear thanks to this salary data is that the public worker is doing substantially better than they are in terms of pay and benefits, and likely for less time and effort. Of course, the majority of people --who labour under private entities that regard salaries as costs to be minimized-- could never expect such treatment. And if they can't get it then they sure as hell won't stand for someone else getting it on their taxpayer dime.

It's classic divide and conquer class stratification, and you don't even have to do the agitating yourself.

rossjudson2• 13 years ago

Do you understand why people get pissed off when they read the salary tables? The people riding the trains don't have massive employer contributions to their pensions -- or even have pensions. They don't get paid overtime -- they just work unpaid. Stagnant wages? How have wages changed in the area generally, relative to the cost of living?

If you want the upside of big jumps in salary, you should have to take on some of the risks (like losing your job and medical insurance, or your business).

Do you ever wonder if there's someone else who would be willing to do the job you are doing for less?

Would you appreciate your salary negotiation going like this:

"I want 20% increase over four years."

"No. We're laying off 20% of the staff because revenue is down. We might hire you back as a part-timer later, without health insurance or benefits."

nemo1618• 13 years ago

Day-old discussion here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5974829

ianb4• 13 years ago

Things start looking weird when you get to the later pages (I'm looking at page 130, sorted by TCOE). For instance: Bodin, Gwendolyn (Train Operator, R-Line Rail Operations): Base pay: $2,901, Medical/Dental/Vision: $20,183

There's a bunch of people who I assume retired, with low base pay but a high "Other" (which includes vacation day payouts).

Of course near the top there's a ton of overtime, lots of police, which is "normal" (no idea if it's actually legitimate), but lots of other jobs too, including some that I'd expect to be salary, like "Moore, Timothy (Principal Marketing Rep, Communications): Base $100,595, Overtime $40,165"

ww520• 13 years ago

Police make a lot of money. Their overtime is very substantial even if their base salary is already up there.

scrapcode• 13 years ago

What about the police officer on page 3 with a base of 73ish, yet a total of over 500k... Bonuses of over 100k. My figures could be off, though, because every time I load the page some data disappears. Anyone else getting missing info?

ianb4• 13 years ago

No one has a total over 500k – the default sort is by total pay and the first on the list is Dorothy Dugger (General Mgr, Deputy General Manager), $419,661. What's the person's name? (Note that "Other" includes bonuses, but also includes payout for unused vacation time, which could be accrued over time – so in some cases it might represent something accumulated over many years.)

evanwolf• 13 years ago

fyi, publicizing how much union workers are paid is a common negotiation tactic by employers, attempting to erode public support for strikers.

However you interpret the numbers and whatever you post about them, you're shifting the conversation from union concerns and talking points to management's.

cmelbye• 13 years ago

Is that wrong? I don't understand. Are the unions always right? Should we focus only on their concerns?

jcrites• 13 years ago

Furthermore, it seems difficult to examine the situation at all without considering how much the workers are paid, and how much the company or government service earns or loses, and in the case of the government, how effectively it provides its service to the community.

How can we really intelligently discuss the issue without knowing it?

eightyone3• 13 years ago

Read some of the other comments here that dissect how these numbers are purposely misleading. That's his point.

bobo135793• 13 years ago

So we should just ignore how much they're being paid, and let them fleece taxpayers?

quackerhacker2• 13 years ago

I got an awesome tweet this morning in regard to the BART strike that just wanted to share:

@cjc: Average BART employee salary is $83K/yr. A teacher with 10 years of experience in San Francisco makes $50K/yr. Who's striking again?

kaptain• 13 years ago

I'm assuming that average that you're posting is just the average of all the salaries listed in the data provide. This includes all the administrators (as far as I can tell). To be a useful comparison, you'd have to include all the salaries of the administrators OR only average the union workers with 10 years of experience (or whatever is the equivalent of a teacher with 10 years of experience).

Interestingly, where did this person get this data? Is it publicly available?

quackerhacker2• 13 years ago

http://www.sfusd.edu/en/assets/sfusd-staff/contract%20and%20...

http://www.ktvu.com/news/news/local/talks-between-bart-union...

Since she's an ex-googler, I would hope it wasn't broad speculation, those are her sources.

My stand on BART though is that they provide a very critical service to the Bay Area. So they have a lot leverage in their hands since the strike is being felt throughout the entire bay and all professional classes. I disagree that it should be happening if their pay is that high.

btipling3• 13 years ago

Comments here are disappointing. Pay is what employers are willing or need to pay to maintain skilled expertise. There's absolutely nothing wrong with collective bargaining driving up the price of the cost of employees. These salaries are middle class salaries in the Bay Area and barely enough to buy a house in some of the poorer areas. If you are unhappy with your own pay, work hard to improve your station in life. It is tax payer money, but it's paying what is needed in order to keep BART moving. BART provides an immense service to the bay area, and it can't happen without the drivers and staff. They provide a valuable service, and I support their strike.

apsec1122• 13 years ago

"These salaries are middle class salaries in the Bay Area and barely enough to buy a house in some of the poorer areas."

Whether someone can afford a house or not has nothing to do with what market rate for work should be.

"One of the biggest divergences between the Daddy Model and reality is the valuation of hard work. In the Daddy Model, hard work is in itself deserving. In reality, wealth is measured by what one delivers, not how much effort it costs. If I paint someone's house, the owner shouldn't pay me extra for doing it with a toothbrush.

It will seem to someone still implicitly operating on the Daddy Model that it is unfair when someone works hard and doesn't get paid much. To help clarify the matter, get rid of everyone else and put our worker on a desert island, hunting and gathering fruit. If he's bad at it he'll work very hard and not end up with much food. Is this unfair? Who is being unfair to him?" - http://paulgraham.com/gap.html

btipling3• 13 years ago

The mental gymnastics between perceived value of what these individuals do and the actual value (and damage the strike is doing to the local economy) do not match. It doesn't matter if you think these people are just pushing buttons. BART isn't running, and that immense value is not being provided. It also doesn't matter what people think these people should earn. It's what BART is willing to pay, and what employees are willing to accept to work there.

malandrew8• 13 years ago

Personally, I would rather us automate away all the jobs, including all the BART ones. The sooner society eliminates as many jobs as possible, the sooner we'll get to a impasse where a minimum guaranteed salary is the only way for society to move forward. The longer the transition takes, the more painful it will be.

btipling3• 13 years ago

Automation will not decrease the value that BART brings to the bay area and it will not eliminate all positions, it will simply concentrate that value in fewer individuals who could also demand high pay.

lcc• 13 years ago

/s? Maybe you've never taken public transportation in a major city. Riding the BART can be sketchy enough as it is - I've witnessed muggings in broad daylight. I don't think many people would feel safe enough to take the BART if there weren't drivers and attendants around to dissuade the worst of it.

mc324• 13 years ago

While there's not much wrong with collective bargaining, there's nothing wrong with people wanting a more efficient system which delivers better service more effectively with less waste.

"Pay is what employers are willing or need to pay to maintain skilled expertise."

People with said expertise would work for less than current rates but cannot work for BaRT due to the protectionism offered by the unions.

Also, the reason BaRT can "afford" ('willing to pay') this added cost, is that BaRT service is somewhat economically inelastic so they can pass on the cost to the end user --who has to swallow that pill, like it or not.

BaRT fares account only account for a percentage of operating revenue, albeit comparatively high compared to other systems.

As an aside, I think If IT workers had become unionized, I think I'm not far off in thinking that we'd still be using DOS and system7 or System V. Good/bad, debatable, I suppose, but certainly some progress would have been stifled.

incision3• 13 years ago

As an aside, I think If IT workers had become unionized, I think I'm not far off in thinking that we'd still be using DOS and system7 or System V.

I've worked in a large, unionized IT department and find your comment to be hilariously accurate.

dragonwriter• 13 years ago

As an aside, I think If IT workers had become unionized, I think I'm not far off in thinking that we'd still be using DOS and system7 or System V.

If IT workers were unionized, as in other industries, this would only matter in large shops where non-unionized IT managers were making the substantive decisions about what got done, and the unionization would affect working conditions, not strategic direction. To the extent that this influence on working conditions somehow made things less attractive for innovative workers (IME -- having worked in large organizations both in union and non-union IT shops -- its more likely that most large organizations would do that than that unions particulary would, but lets not worry about that for the moment), that would just mean an even stronger trend for innovative workers to move to small shops like startups.

raldi• 13 years ago

If the life of a BART employee were as hard as you describe, there would be all sorts of stories about a BART worker shortage, stories about the state bending over backwards to find new hires, like you always hear about tech employers.

Is there any evidence of that?

If there's no evidence of chronic BART worker shortages, of employees quitting and going to work for some other municipal transit agency, that would suggest that BART employees actually have it pretty good.

cmsmith• 13 years ago

Except that collective bargaining distorts our perception of their value by allowing them to hold the entire system hostage. If my job was to press a button once a day that kept the electricity on in San Francisco, I could go on strike and negotiate a salary of millions of dollars. That doesn't mean that I would be providing millions of dollars worth of value (since I could be replaced by a trained monkey or robot).

kungfooguru• 13 years ago

http://www.alternet.org/labor/7-things-you-need-know-about-b...

http://www.thenation.com/blog/175063/bart-strike-another-ins...

andymoe• 13 years ago

I don't buy all the outraged posts here or the facebook comments on the article. I expect everyone to negotiate hard on their behalf to put themselves and their families in the very best position they are able.

Don't come crying to me because in your mind you value a BART employees contribution more or less than a teachers or your own contribution to society and you don't think it's fair. It's not about your subjective value of x or y or anyone's idea of fairness. It's about each parties leverage and negating position and nothing else.

prostoalex• 13 years ago

Except public employees' counter-parties at the negotiating tables are politicians financed by public employees' unions.

lemmsjid• 13 years ago

This narrative gets played over and over. People get ahold of public workers' salaries, see that they're getting a decent wage, and get all huffy that those public workers are personally stealing their hard earned taxpayer money. It's another version of people getting all upset when they see people buying nice things with food stamps.

When I see those salaries, I think the following:

* I'm glad to see that there's people at BART making a decent wage.

* There are certainly other groups not making as much money.

* What are the forces keeping other groups from making as much money, and how can we get them more?

* San Francisco is in one of the richest regions on the planet. Why shouldn't its public employees make a good livable wage?

* As a public transit user, I like knowing that the person I'm trusting my life with has enough money to keep their blood sugar up and their cortisol levels down.

Bay Area BART Salaries

Related Stories