Santa Clara County is facing a painful transit crisis. VTA operators are on strike, demanding compensation increases that would push the system beyond its limits. Meanwhile, the people who rely on transit the most—low-income workers, seniors, students—are being left behind.
I come from a union family. My father was a unionized letter carrier with the National Association of Letter Carriers. I saw firsthand how important unions are in protecting workers’ rights and lifting families into the middle class. I will never fault a union for fighting hard for its members. That’s what they’re supposed to do.
But elected leaders have a responsibility, too — and ours is to fight just as hard for the public. For the nurse’s aide who can’t get to work. For the student missing class. For the thousands of people stranded while negotiations drag on. We cannot allow public services to become unaffordable or unavailable because labor demands go so far beyond available revenue.
Here are the facts: VTA operators are already among the highest paid in the country. The average operator earns more than $100,000 annually in salary and benefits, while the majority of riders make under $60,000 per year and nearly 21% earn less than $15,000. VTA management has offered an 11% raise over three years, along with an increase in benefits and the union’s requested arbitration policy updates. This is a serious, fair offer that reflects both the value of the work and the financial limits of the agency.
This strike is no longer about fair wages or working conditions. It’s about pay demands that, if met, would force VTA to cut routes, raise fares, or lay people off. And given that the agency already faces a structural deficit, maybe all three. Meeting all of the union’s demands could only be done by slashing service or making transit even less affordable for the people who rely on it most.
That’s not right. It’s not fair. And it is not sustainable in the long run.
VTA just announced that it is providing $5 off of two Uber rides per day, to help residents get to school, work, the doctor and otherwise meet their transportation needs. I am proposing we do even more and offer up to $20 per day in rideshare credits, enable pool rides to drive down per passenger costs, and refund monthly transit passes to show respect to our most loyal customers who are not getting the service they paid for. VTA should also explore chartering additional shuttles and buses that can run along existing service lines and help get large groups of riders to school campuses and places of employment.
If $20 a day seems like a lot it is important to remember it is actually less than what we pay now per ride for VTA’s traditional transit services. In other words, we can provide most riders right now with faster and more personalized service using rideshare than with VTA. (And that is not even considering capital costs.)
For the sake of the system, we need to be fair to drivers, mechanics, riders and frankly – math. How can we justify in the long term paying dramatically more for a VTA system that is so expensive it can’t compete with existing rideshare and the imminent competition from driverless vehicles? If we keep approving unsustainable wage increases, we are going to tie our own hands. At some point, we will be unable to justify using so many taxpayer dollars to fund a system that can’t compete with new technology. If we don’t work within our means today, we are doing a disservice to our drivers, our riders, and our taxpayers. The decisions we make today don’t just affect our transit-reliant residents who haven’t been able to make it to work this week — they affect the future of transit in the South Bay.
We shouldn’t have to make a calculation that will hurt both drivers and our environment. We should do the hard work of making VTA “pencil out,” and unsustainable raises are going in the wrong direction.
We need to remember who public transit is for: the riders. It’s for the janitor commuting from Gilroy to San José before dawn. It’s for the San José State University student who can’t afford a car. It’s for the senior who depends on the 22 or the light rail to reach a doctor’s appointment. These are the people being hurt the most while two sides argue over a couple percentage points on top of already generous compensation.
VTA isn’t sitting on endless funding. The vast majority of the money comes from sales taxes, which already hit low-income families hardest. And when service is cut to fund payroll increases, those families pay the price again—with longer waits, fewer buses, and fewer opportunities.
I respect labor. I always will. But holding up the entire system to demand raises that would force service cuts, or worse, is short-sighted.
I urge the union to accept the generous offer on the table and help us restore service now. And I urge my fellow elected leaders to speak plainly: we must support VTA’s workforce, yes—but we must also protect the public interest. Because when public service becomes unaffordable, it’s the people with the least who suffer the most.
Let’s get back to the table. Let’s keep fighting for workers. But let’s fight just as hard for the people we all serve—our riders.
San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan was first elected in 2022, and was re-elected in 2024.
Oh dear mayor from the poor neighborhood, you don’t say you support union labor, then 4 paragraphs later outline a plan to eliminate the workforce.
Nothing can compete with these “rideshare” companies because they pay their drivers slave wages to use their own cars.
$20 x 90,000 riders is $1.8 million dollars. PER DAY. Thats a bit more than the $72,000 daily fare box revenue. Try that math matt.
Funny how it’s the middle class hardworking fault. What about the VTA white collars, board members funds and raises that don’t get questioned. What about the 160M plus skyscraper VTA just purchased. VTA mismanaged money on top and these workers need a fair contract. VTA not coming to the table fairly with lawsuits in its back pocket that been denied previously.
VTA strike is clearly unjust.
VTA is among the most toxic workplaces in Santa Clara County. The toxicity is widely reported but the reporting barely scratches the surface.
Five of every six workers rejected the most recent offer from the VTA board. That suggests deep-seated resentment at their mistreatment and at the disrespect from the elected officials on the VTA board. The judicial decree today (3/26) that the strike must end does not obviate the ugly reality.
Mahan is a tyrant who demonstrably disrespects San Jose workers, too. He voted to fire any City of San Jose employee who didn’t receive Covid jabs. This sort of coercion in derogation of voluntary and informed consent, which VTA also used on its workforce, was a crime against humanity under the Nuremberg Code. Mahan refuses to apologize, though he admits he’s not fully boosted but won’t disclose his Covid vax status. Showing your medical papers is for the peons, who lack bodily autonomy in his view.
Don’t believe Mahan when he tells you he respects workers.
VTA ridership is about 100,000 a day. Since each person takes two trips a day, that means at most 50,000 customers. But 25% of customers make transfers, so 4 trips per person. That means actual daily customers are around 40,000.
VTAs Operations budget is $400 million dollars annually. That’s an average of $10,000 per customer per year.
Do the math. $20 Uber subsidies saves an enormous amount of taxpayer money, and provides better (as in door-to-door) service.
TTOM6 – excellent point. Would be interesting to see how well estimation matches empirical. The light rail is a bust, no doubt, but the buses may be worth it. Too bad no one will really take a look.
VTA knows. Clipper records every use, and all non-Clipper boardings are recorded by the Operator on the fare box keypad, to document whether it was a single ride fare, or a day pass, monthly pass, etc.
Maybe San Jose Inside can ask VTA for the actual number of daily customers. It’s in the interest of both VTA and ATU to use the “ridership” number, but it distorts the real picture.