Bicycle, Skateboard Grievance to Chancellor’s Office?

University fails to respond within time lines?

Apparently the university has failed to respond to the level two hearing of the skateboard, bicycle grievance. This clears the way for the union to file this grievance at the Chancellor’s Office. According to California State University Employees Union Labor Relations Representative Michael H. Hejazi, “The response is late. I will appeal to Level 3.” The next step after level 3 would be arbitration.

UPDATE: Both parties, by mutually agreement, have extended the Level 2 response time-line on the Campus Bike Safety Grievance to Monday May 19, 2008.
[Click here to see more related photographs]

[Copy of Grievance Here]

Gus Lease on skateboards, bicycles and safety

Gus Lease sent an Email on the safety issue

Just in case you don’t know who Gus is, let me tell you. Gus Lease is one of the nicest people you might ever meet and on top of that; he is a university treasure. Gus has been on the faculty at SJSU for 56 years. He sings the national anthem at graduation. Gus was once the chairman of the Music department and he currently teaches Music History in the History department.

He has dedicated his life to SJSU. He has lived much of the history of this university. He remembers and tells stories about our university that are a pleasure to listen to. When he first told me about the skateboarder who almost hit him he said, “if he had hit me going as fast as he was, I think he would have killed me.”

Gus parks in the campus disabled parking spaces on the north part of seventh street.

About two weeks ago when I was parked on 7th street, I got out of my car and was going to the back of the car to get my teaching equipment out of the trunk when a skateboard rider coming down the street almost hit me. Since I have a disability and use a cane to walk, had I been hit, I could have suffered a serious injury. Also, today one of the student bicycle riders along the sidewalk between Clark and the administration building was going extremely fast and had to swerve to avoid hitting me.

I do hope you will relate my concerns to the committee that Skateboarding, and bicycling on Campus is a serious Safety issue for all who are walking on campus.

Gus C Lease
Department of History
May 7, 2008

In a recent Email on the same topic, University Police Chief Andre Barnes said, “I am not in agreement with you that it is a significant safety hazard or a position that I can argue comfortable in favor of changing the current policy.”

Email to University Police Chief Barnes

My Email to Chief Barnes

I know during our recent phone call you said you and your officers had not seen or reported much dangerous activity or unsafe practices on the part of operators of non-motorized vehicles including skateboards, bicycles and razors. At 4:35 pm on May 5 I saw these youths doing acrobatics on the railings of the east side of Clark Hall. I called the UPD dispatcher and the call was logged on my cell phone at 4:35pm. Since it was time for me to go off work, I went back into the building, got ready to go home, took my camera and went out of the building. I had expected to see an officer there since it is maybe 750 feet from there to UPD. Since I saw no officer I started taking pictures. I kept taking pictures. I shot about 25 photos until I finished my roll of film. (Yes, I still shoot film.)

I then walked over to the bike corral and got my bicycle and rode home (circumnavigating SJSU of course.) I never saw any officers and I guess it is no wonder they never saw any dangerous activity or unsafe practices on the part of operators of non-motorized vehicles that day.

[Click here to see more related photographs]

[Copy of Grievance Here]

Discrimination and the bike policy?

Discrimination and the bike policy The photo shown above is of a university employee riding his bicycle as he is exiting a university building. There has been something bothering me, something I couldn’t quite put my finger on, that has nothing to do with the safety argument related to president Kassing’s new bike policy, the part that extends this benefit, “Bicycles are not permitted in buildings unless in a private office, closet, or enclosure…”

The other day it hit me, like a ton of bricks, I should have been more sensitive to it. Like the rider in the photo above, very few of the folks I have seen keeping bicycles in their offices are minorities. Our highest areas of minority employment are among job classifications that do not have a private office, closet, or enclosure where they can store a bike. Most of the minorities in our bargaining units work in classifications that would not be able to use this benefit. I am concerned that by extending this benefit to classifications that are much more likely to be non-minority, my university may have committed de-facto discrimination.

Article 25.1 of our union contract should be also added to this grievance, the part that says, “The CSU prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, religion, ancestry, color, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, age, physical disability, mental disability, veteran status, marital status, pregnancy, medical condition and/or national origin…”

To be able to keep their bike at their work place, in my opinion, that benefit like all benefits have to be given to all employees without prejudice, even unintentional prejudice.

More on the safety issue

More on the safety issue
People chaining their bikes to stairs and fire exits is a relatively common occurance at SJSU. I have several photos of this in my growing photo archive.

I saw the article in today’s Spartan Daily. While not accurate in every detail on some things, I think it caught the spirit of the issue.

In the article University Police Department Chief Barnes reportedly said he had not seen or heard about many safety issues linked with non-motorized vehicles that convince him to revisit the policy. According to the Daily; “There hasn’t been any factual evidence that we can see that would cause us to change our mind,” he said. “I understand that some people would not like to have them riding, but from an enforcement standpoint, based on the numbers and issues we’ve seen, we don’t see any reason why we would change the policy.”

I know this may be a misquote, so I will give him the benefit of a doubt. Perhaps you may wish to send him this photo and the link to the others as well. His email is: Andre.Barnes@sjsu.edu

Today was a great day for a bike ride. I rode my bike again today. After riding about eleven miles to SJSU I did not see any reason to ride the extra few hundred feet to my desk. I rode around SJSU on the public streets and parked my bike in one of the many bike corrals around campus and walked to my desk.

[Click here to see more related photographs]

[Copy of Grievance Here]

It is about safety!

It is about safety and health and not alternative transportation
In my opinion the recent change, by university president Don Kassing, to adopt a policy that allows the use of skateboards, razors and bicycles in the campus interior has the goal to encourage alternative transportation. This is good, in principle. But, I think this administration has been a bit too quick to decide and has let health and safety take a back seat to lofty goals and “good” principles. The end does not justify the means.

On the morning of Feb. 20, 2008 I was outside of Clark Hall taking pictures in the rain. A skateboarder scooted by and then he slipped and fell in front of me. His skateboard shot across the concrete and hit a pedestrian in the ankle. It was a glancing blow. The pedestrian was not injured. The fact nobody was hurt, this time, is not the point. It could have been more serious. What if the skateboard had hit a pedestrian more squarely? What if the pedestrian had been elderly or disabled.What if the pedestrian had tripped and been injured? That, in my opinion is what this is about. This is about the assumption of unneeded risk by the university and exposing the campus population to danger for the sake of lofty goals and “good” principles.

For employees, the university is a work place. Employees are entitled by law (and contract) to a safe work environment. Students are entitled to a safe campus. Folks with disabilities are entitled to have a university that is not made inaccessible by dangers, obstacles and trip hazards. Tax payers are entitled to have state agencies not take unnecessary risks and exposure to lawsuit for the sake of pursuing lofty goals and “good” principles. We cannot accept management using unsound means that threaten the safety and health of the people of the state of California.

[Click here to see more related photographs]

[Copy of Grievance Here]

On Encouraging Alternative Transportation

Editorial:

We do need to find alternatives to fossil fueled based transportation, but we cannot sacrifice safety in the process. A friend of mine just had a close call today with a bicyclist riding his bike inside of Clark Hall. My friend said, “that was scary.”

If the university wants to encourage alternative transportation there are things that can be done, inexpensively like providing shower facilities to faculty and staff who ride their bikes to work.

In the short run, turning the campus into a free-for-all for bicyclists, skateboard riders and people using razors may seem like a cheap way to encourage alternative transportation, but that is not the case. Just wait until the first crash, until the first person gets hurt real bad and or killed and then sues the university. The university cannot plead ignorance. They have been warned. The staff employees union has filed a health and safety grievance and has provided the university with plenty of evidence about the hazardous conditions here. The entire campus is a job site for the people who work here and the university, under labor law, has a legal and a contractual obligation to provide a safe work place.

It is time for the university to stop taking the cheap way out and to get serious about encouraging alternative transportation. No solution that endangers the employees of the university and other campus community members is acceptable.

[Click here to see more related photographs]

[Copy of Grievance Here]

Did fatalities cause previous bike and skateboard bans?

Were previous bike and skateboard bans result of fatalities?
I have just been told the original motivation for the previous bicycle policies (PD 89-03 and PD 90-01) and the Chancellor’s Office’s Coded Memorandum BA 88-06 (which was cited in those policies, but not the new one) was two fatalities on CSU campuses that occurred as the result of bicycle vs. pedestrian collisions in the late 80’s. This needs to be investigated to be confirmed or refuted. I have copies of the previous presidential directives regarding the use of bicycles, skateboards and other human powered vehicles. The Chancellor’s Office’s Coded Memorandum BA 88-06 is mentioned in both of them, but not in president Don Kassing’s new policy, Presidential Directive, PD 2007-06.

Related Questions

1. Why was mention of Chancellor’s Office’s Coded Memorandum BA 88-06 omitted in the new presidential directive?
2. What is Chancellor’s Office’s Coded Memorandum BA 88-06?
3. Are the reports of fatalities true?
4. Was Chancellor’s Office’s Coded Memorandum BA 88-06 fulfilled, expired, superseded or annulled?

Safety First!
The overriding concern of the union is that the university is a workplace and the university has the responsibility inherent of all employers to provide safe working conditions. The legal and contractual responsibility of the university to provide safe working conditions overrides all other concerns in this matter.

References:

• Presidential Directive PD 2007-06
• Presidential Directive PD 90-01
• Presidential Directive PD 89-03

[Click here to see more related photographs]

Grievance seeks bike ban at SJSU

Grievance proposes bicycle & skateboard ban on campus A health and safety grievance is now awaiting a decision that asserts that the current policy (as well as its lack of enforcement) regarding the use of non-motorized vehicles (including bicycles & skateboards) in the internal areas of campus poses a threat to the safety of union represented university employees. The union is seeking the ban of the use of non-motorized vehicles in the internal areas of campus and proper enforcement of such a ban.

What is a grievance? A grievance is an allegation by the union, or a union represented employee, that the university has failed to abide by it’s contractual obligations. The California State University Employees Union (CSUEU) is the union representing most staff employees at SJSU. The grievance process has a series of escalations including binding arbitration.

[Click here to see more related photographs]

Motoring on SJSU Campus

[Click here to see more related photographs]