Amtrak Strike Would Overload PATH

[JCMAN320]

Amtrak strike would overload PATH

Friday, January 18, 2008
By TOM FEENEY
NEWHOUSE NEWS SERVICE

NJ Transit rail customers would face severe service disruptions if nine unions representing Amtrak workers go on strike as threatened on Jan. 30, NJ Transit Executive Director Richard Sarles warned yesterday.

NJ Transit would not be able to run trains into Manhattan if Amtrak workers strike. The agency would be forced to shut down its busiest rail line, which runs entirely on Amtrak's Northeast Corridor tracks.

NJ Transit would respond to an Amtrak strike by running shuttle buses between its rail stations and the PATH stations in Newark, Harrison and Hoboken, Sarles said after the NJ Transit board's monthly meeting in Atlantic City yesterday. Sarles estimated that it would be able to accommodate only between 40 and 50 percent of the passengers it carries during the typical daily peak period.

The passengers lucky enough to find a ride to a PATH station could still face a grueling trip into Manhattan. The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, which operates PATH, will not be able to add peak period trains because the system already runs at capacity, said Mark La Vornga, a spokesman for the agency.

There is available capacity on the ferries that run between Hoboken and midtown Manhattan, and additional boats could be added if an Amtrak strike causes a spike in demand, said Pat Smith, a spokesman for ferry operator New York Waterway.

[JCMAN320]

Amtrak confirms deal; strike is averted

by The Associated Press Friday January 18, 2008, 12:32 PM

http://blog.nj.com/ledgerupdates_impact/2008/01/large_amtrak01.jpg
John O'Boyle/The Star-Ledger
A Washington D.C. bound Acela train leaves Penn Station in New York City in this file photo.

Amtrak reached a deal with nine labor unions averting a possible strike at the end of this month, the passenger railroad announced today.

"Investing in the railroad comes in many forms, and one of the best ways is to invest in its people, which we've done with this tentative agreement," Amtrak president and CEO Alex Kummant said in a statement. "We have averted a possible strike that could have had a crippling effect on the lives of millions of Americans."

The strike would have crippled NJ Transit, which relies on Amtrak tracks for more than half of its 740 daily trains. The agency's executive director, Richard Sarles, applauded news that the strike had been averted.

"On behalf of our customers, we are thrilled, and we congratulate Amtrak and the unions for reaching an agreement, " Sarles said in a statement.

Details of the tentative agreement will not be released until it is ratified by affected union members in the next several weeks, according to a statement from Amtrak.

But people familiar with the labor agreement, speaking on condition of anonymity because the details had not been formally announced, said it adopts the recommendations of a presidential emergency board report issued Dec. 30. The board recommended Amtrak grant back wages to its workers, and the report triggered a 30-day countdown until a strike became legal.

There has never been a strike in Amtrak's 36-year history.

The dispute, which had continued despite years of unsuccessful mediation, involved about 10,000 employees whose last contract ended Dec. 31, 1999.

Amtrak, which depends heavily on federal subsidies, was concerned about how it would afford the back wages, which would average nearly $13,000 per employee. The railroad had offered to give each worker a lump signing bonus of $4,500 instead of back pay.

An Amtrak spokesman had said the back pay would cost Amtrak about $150 million more than what the company had offered.

If a strike had occurred, "It would have been almost impossible to get through the traffic if we all had to drive," said Loy Carlos of Huntington, N.Y., at Manhattan's Penn Station. "And whatever shuttles they had would never have been sufficient because the trains ... are already crowded, especially at rush hour."

"And," added Carlos, "employers would not have taken this into consideration" as an excuse for employees to skip work.