-
Job Description
Marketing Statement
Ride BART to a satisfying career that lets you both: 1) make a difference to Bay Area residents, and 2) enjoy excellent pay, benefits, and employment stability. BART is looking for people who like to be challenged, work in a fast-paced environment, and have a passion for connecting riders to work, school and other places they need to go. BART offers a competitive salary, comprehensive health benefits, paid time off, and the CalPERS retirement program.
Job Summary
Pay Rate
$151,524.00 /annually - $229,559.00/annually (Non-Represented Pay Band 09)
Initial salary is negotiable between $178,442.00 - $200,641.00, commensurate with experience and education.
Reports To
Director of Human Resources, R. Bolds
Current Assignment
Under general direction, this position plans, directs, manages, and oversees the employee relations activities of non-represented employees including workplace investigations, Violence in the Workplace cases and investigations, management of consultation regarding employee relations issues, and hearing coordination. In addition, the employee will be responsible for updating and/or implementing employee relations policies and procedures.
Selection Process
Applications will be screened to assure that minimum qualifications are met. Those applicants who meet minimum qualifications will then be referred to the hiring department for the completion of further selection processes.
The selection process for this position may include a skills/performance demonstration, a written examination, and a panel and/or individual interview.
The successful candidate must have an employment history demonstrating reliability and dependability; provide copies of certificates, diplomas or other documents as required by law, including those establishing his/her right to work in the U. S; pass a pre-employment medical examination which may include a drug and alcohol screen, and which is specific to the essential job functions and requirements. Pre-employment processing will also include a background check. (Does not apply to current full-time District employees unless specific job requires additional evaluations).
Examples of Duties
Manages, plans, oversees, and evaluates the work of the Employee Relations Division of the Human Resources Department; develops, implements, and manages strategies to manage employee relations issues, including disciplinary actions and performance management.
Serves as a neutral party in resolving disputes between employees and managers, mediating conflict, and ensuring fair outcomes.
Provides guidance to managers on handling complex employee relations matters.
Oversees, develops, and maintains systems and databases in support of the District’s Employee Relations program; collaborate with Human Resources Information Systems (HRIS) staff and Office of Chief Information Officer (OCIO) staff in the development and enhancement of systems.
Conducts and/or directs investigations related to employee complaints, harassment, discriminations, and workplace misconduct, including violence in the workplace; ensures thorough and accurate documentation and resolution in compliance with legal and organizational standards; recommends discipline when appropriate to management.
Supports managers in addressing performance issues, creating performance improvement plans (PIPs), and executing disciplinary actions when necessary.
Collaborates with Human Resources leadership to ensure policies are up-to-date, compliant with labor laws, and effectively communicated across the organization.
Interprets and explains provisions of applicable laws, rules, policies, and agreements to BART management, employees, unions, and the public; recommends and develops new policies as needed.
Consults with the Office of the General Counsel on employee relations and policy development activities to ensure compliance with applicable laws and regulations.
Collaborates with Labor Relations Department, Office of Civil Rights and other departments regarding investigations where they may overlap with investigations within the purview of the Manager of Employee Relations.
Conducts and/or directs the conduct of research in preparation for disciplinary hearings; partners with management in conducting hearings.
Prepares detailed and professional reports, written communications, executive summaries, and statistical data as necessary.
Participates in the selection and oversight of vendors, consultants, and service providers; oversees consultants and vendors compliance with contract provisions.
Analyzes data and employee relations cases and other relevant metrics; prepares regular reports for senior leadership with recommendations for improvement.
Stays updated on labor laws and employment regulations; and ensures the District’s employee relations practices are in compliance with federal, state, and local employment laws.
Performs other duties as assigned.
Minimum Qualifications
Education :
Possession of a bachelor’s degree in human resources, business administration, public administration, industrial-organizational psychology, or a closely related field from an accredited college or university.
Experience :
The equivalent of five (5) years of full-time, progressively responsible professional level human resources experience in the area of employee and/or labor relations including conducting workplace investigations, which must have included at least two (2) years of supervisory or administrator-level experience.
Substitution :
Additional experience as outlined above may be substituted for the education on a year for year basis.
Knowledge and Skills
Knowledge of :- Principles, practices, and techniques involved in the administration of a comprehensive employee relations program
- Principles, practices, and techniques of workplace investigations and interviews
- Principles and practices of performance management and progressive discipline
- Laws, regulations, and statutes related to public sector employer-employee relations, including but not limited to the Meyer Milias Brown Act
- Principles, practices, and techniques of dispute resolution
- Principles, practices, and techniques of effective negotiation
- Principles and practices of supervision, human resources administration, and management
- Industry trends related to employer-employee relations
- Techniques for conducting effective public presentations
Skill in :- Overseeing and participating in the management of a comprehensive human resources program
- Participating in the development and administration of division goals, objectives, and procedures
- Conducting investigations and interviews
- Conducting independent research and analysis
- Selecting, supervising, training, and evaluating staff
- Overseeing the work of contracted consultants and vendors
- Handling sensitive situations with discretion and confidentiality
- Organizing and prioritizing workload to meet multiple demands
- Developing and maintaining effective working relationships with personnel at all organizational levels
- Communicating clearly and concisely, both orally and in writing
- Influencing and building relationships with stakeholders at all levels
- Overseeing the maintenance of District personnel files and records
- Analyzing problems, identifying alternative solutions, projecting consequences of proposed actions and implementing recommendations in support of goals
Equal Employment Opportunity GroupBox1
The San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District is an equal opportunity employer. Applicants shall not be discriminated against because of race, color, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, age (40 and above), religion, national origin (including language use restrictions), disability (mental and physical, including HIV and AIDS), ancestry, marital status, military status, veteran status, medical condition (cancer/genetic characteristics and information), or any protected category prohibited by local, state or federal laws.
The BART Human Resources Department will make reasonable efforts in the examination process to accommodate persons with disabilities or for religious reasons. Please advise the Human Resources Department of any special needs in advance of the examination by emailing at least 5 days before your examination date at employment@bart.gov .
Qualified veterans may be eligible to obtain additional veteran's credit in the selection process for this recruitment (effective Jan. 1, 2013). To obtain the credit, veterans must attach to the application a DD214 discharge document or proof of disability and complete/submit the Veteran's Preference Application no later than the closing date of the posting. For more information about this credit please go to the Veteran's Preference Policy and Application link at www.bart.gov/jobs .
The San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BART) prides itself in offering best in class benefits packages to employees of the District. Currently, the following benefits may be available to employees in this job classification.
Highlights- Medical Coverage (or $350/month if opted out)
- Dental Coverage
- Vision Insurance (Basic and Enhanced Plans Available)
- Retirement Plan through the CA Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS)
- 2% @ 55 (Classic Members)
- 2% @ 62 (PEPRA Members)
- 3% at 50 (Safety Members - Classic)
- 2.7% @ 57 (Safety Members - PEPRA)
- Reciprocity available for existing members of many other public retirement systems (see BART website and/or CalPERS website for details)
- 6.65% employer contribution up to annual maximum of $1,868.65
Closing Date/Time: Continuous -
ABOUT THE COMPANY
-
-
BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit)
Show moreThe BART story began in 1946. It began not by governmental fiat, but as a concept gradually evolving at informal gatherings of business and civic leaders on both sides of the San Francisco Bay. Facing a heavy post-war migration to the area and its consequent automobile boom, these people discussed ways of easing the mounting congestion that was clogging the bridges spanning the Bay. In 1947, a joint Army-Navy review Board concluded that another connecting link between San Francisco and Oakland would be needed in the years ahead to prevent intolerable congestion on the Bay Bridge. The link? An underwater tube devoted exclusively to high-speed electric trains.
Since 1911, visionaries had periodically brought up this Jules Verne concept. But now, pressure for a traffic solution increased with the population. In 1951, the State Legislature created the 26-member San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit Commission, comprised of representatives from each of the nine counties which touch the Bay. The Commission's charge was to study the Bay Area's long range transportation needs in the context of environmental problems and then recommend the best solution.
The Commission advised, in its final report in 1957, that any transportation plan must be coordinated with the area's total plan for future development. Since no development plan existed, the Commission prepared one itself. The result of their thoroughness is a master plan which did much to bring about coordinated planning in the Bay Area, and which was adopted a decade later by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG).
The BART Concept is Born
The Commission's least-cost solution to traffic tie-ups was to recommend forming a five-county rapid transit district, whose mandate would be to build and operate a high-speed rapid rail network linking major commercial centers with suburban sub-centers.The Commission stated that, "If the Bay Area is to be preserved as a fine place to live and work, a regional rapid transit system is essential to prevent total dependence on automobiles and freeways."
Thus was born the environmental concept underlying BART. Acting on the Commission's recommendations, in 1957, the Legislature formed the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District, comprising the five counties of Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, San Francisco and San Mateo. At this time, the District was granted a taxing power of five cents per $100 of assessed valuation. It also had authority to levy property taxes to support a general obligation bond issue, if approved by District voters. The State Legislature lowered the requirement for voter approval from 66 percent to 60 percent.
Between 1957 and 1962, engineering plans were developed for a system that would usher in a new era in rapid transit. Electric trains would run on grade-separated right-of-ways, reaching maximum speeds of 75-80 mph, averaging perhaps 45 mph, including station stops. Advanced transit cars, with sophisticated suspensions, braking and propulsion systems, and luxurious interiors, would be strong competition to "King Car " in the Bay Area. Stations would be pleasant, conveniently located, and striking architectural enhancements to their respective on-line communities.
BART employees in the 1970s.
Hundreds of meetings were held in the District communities to encourage local citizen participation in the development of routes and station locations. By midsummer, 1961, the final plan was submitted to the supervisors of the five District counties for approval. San Mateo County Supervisors were cool to the plan. Citing the high costs of a new system-plus adequate existing service from Southern Pacific commuter trains - they voted to withdraw their county from the District in December 1961.
With the District-wide tax base thus weakened by the withdrawal of San Mateo County, Marin County was forced to withdraw in early 1962 because its marginal tax base could not adequately absorb its share of BART's projected cost. Another important factor in Marin's withdrawal was an engineering controversy over the feasibility of carrying trains across the Golden Gate Bridge.
BART had started with a 16-member governing Board of Directors apportioned on county population size: four from Alameda and San Francisco Counties, three from Contra Costa and San Mateo, and two from Marin. When the District was reduced to three counties, the Board was reduced to 11 members: four from San Francisco and Alameda, and three from Contra Costa. Subsequently, in 1965, the District's enabling legislation was changed to apportion the BART Board with four Directors from each county, thus giving Contra Costa its fourth member on a 12-person Board. Two directors from each county, hence forth, were appointed by the County Board of Supervisors. The other two directors were appointed by committees of mayors of each county (with the exception of the City and County of San Francisco, whose sole mayor made these appointments).
The five-county plan was quickly revised to a three-county plan emphasizing rapid transit between San Francisco and the East Bay cities and suburbs of Contra Costa and Alameda counties. The new plan, elaborately detailed and presented as the "BART Composite Report, " was approved by supervisors of the three counties in July 1962, and placed on the ballot for the following November general election.
The plan required approval of 60 percent of the District's voters. It narrowly passed with a 61.2 percent vote District-wide, much to the surprise of many political experts who were confident it would fail. Indeed, one influential executive was reported to have said: "If I'd known the damn thing would have passed, I'd never have supported it. "
The voters approved a $792 million bond issue to finance a 71.5 mile high-speed transit system, consisting of 33 stations serving 17 communities in the three counties. The proposal also included another needed transit project: rebuilding 3.5 miles of the San Francisco Municipal Railway. The new line would link muni streetcar lines directly with BART and Market Street stations, and four new Muni stations would be built.
The additional cost of the transbay tube -- estimated at $133 million -- was to come from bonds issued by the California Toll Bridge Authority and secured by future Bay Area Bridge revenues. The additional cost of rolling stock, estimated at $71 million, was to be funded primarily from bonds issued against future operating revenues. Thus, the total cost of the system, as of 1962, was projected at $996 million. It would be the largest single public works project ever undertaken in the U.S. by the local citizenry.
After the election, engineers immediately started work on the final system designs, only to be halted by a taxpayer's suit filed against the District a month later. The validity of the bond election, and the legality of the District itself, were challenged. While the court ruled in favor of the District on both counts, six months of litigation cost $12 million in construction delays. This would be the first of many delays from litigation and time-consuming negotiations involving 166 separate agreements reached with on-line cities, counties, and other special districts. The democratic processes of building a new transit system would prove to be major cost factors that, however necessary, were not foreseen.
-