-
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
Cash Handling Foreworker (Grade 813)
Step 76 ($45.16/hourly) - Step 99 ($59.04/hourly)
Reports To
J. Yu
Current Assignment
This posting is to fill one (1) Cash Handling Foreworker vacancy. The selection process for this posting will be used to determine the most qualified candidate. The qualified candidate from the selection process will be offered the position determined by the Foreworker Evaluation Committee.
Under general supervision, the Cash Handling Foreworker will maintain the following, but not limited to, the following roles/responsibilities: supervision, plans, assigns, directs and reviews the work of Cash Handling staff engaged in the maintenance and repair of Cash Handling equipment; provides for the instruction of staff in work procedures; and performs related duties as assigned. Related duties assigned, such as carrying out special projects assigned by Manager with minor to no supervision and providing advice on special techniques to employees or change as necessary the means in which to improve and maintain a high level of departmental accuracy.
Successful candidate will demonstrate expertise as defined by the current assignment and have a demonstrated history of the following experience and knowledge:
- Technical Knowledge of the work performed in this skill area (Cash Handling).
- Ability to Read and Write Effectively.
- Ability to Analyze Problems, Make Decisions and Direct a Work Force.
- Ability to Effectively Communicate Verbally.
- Flexibility rotating daily job assignments.
Selection Process
This is a SEIU Local 1021 Bargaining unit position. The selection process will follow procedures pursuant to the Foreperson Evaluation Committee process specified in the SEIU Local 790 contract.
The Employment Office will screen bids/applications/resumes against the minimum qualifications. Those candidates who meet the minimum qualifications will be referred to the hiring department for further consideration. The selection process may involve a skills/performance test, written exam, and/or a panel interview. Outside applicants will not be considered until all employees who have applied have been considered first.
All applicants are asked to complete the application in full, indicating dates of employment, all positions held, hours worked, and a full description of duties. Online applicants are invited to electronically attach a resume to the application form to provide supplemental information but should not consider the resume a substitute for the application form itself.
Application Process
All SEIU Local 1021 members MUST submit their bid forms in the bid box. Failure to comply may invalidate the employee's bid.
Current Non-SEIU employees are strongly encouraged to apply online, either at www.bart.gov/jobs, or on WebBART. Current Non-SEIU employees may also apply using a BART paper application by delivering the completed form to the Human Resources Department, or by mailing it to P. O. Box 12688, Oakland, CA 94604-2688.
Online or paper applications are considered to provide supplemental information and should not be considered a substitution for the bid form itself.
Applications must be complete by the closing date and time listed on the job announcement.
Examples of Duties
Plans daily work schedules and projects including the assignment of personnel to particular internal workstations or to work crews for external cash collections.
Ensures that the work is done to accepted work standards and within an established time frame.
Determines needed materials, supplies and labor requirements to complete assigned work.
Receives trouble reports and dispatches trouble-shooting crews to stations in need of servicing.
Conducts visual station checks for collection crew performance and service requirements.
Schedules and follows up on personnel training; assures work coverage during periods of employee absence.
Prepares timecards and attendance records; conducts disciplinary action through first step and recommends further disciplinary action, as required.
Monitors progress of probationary employees; maintains strict security measures at workstations and other locations.
Activates manual equipment controls in the event of failure.
Confers with District police on AFC equipment problems and variances.
Prepares, reviews, verifies and balances a variety of cash reports.
Runs audit tapes on coin and currency collected and counted; reconciles discrepancies in cash counts and cash collections.
Packages, weighs and verifies coin and currency for deposit; prepares and verifies deposit slips, armored truck carrier vouchers and currency and coin letters for shipment; dispatches deposit onto armored trucks.
Monitors inventory of supplies and equipment.
Prepares proposals/contracts for competitive bidding for the purchase of supplies and equipment; expedites orders as necessary.
Minimum Qualifications
Education
Possession of a high school diploma, GED or recognized equivalent.
Experience
The equivalent of three (3) years of experience in a high volume cash handling environment which included the posting of collections and the sorting and counting of large amounts of money; experience in directing the work of others is desirable.
Note: A minimum of three (3) years of BART experience is required. Experience must have included at least six (6) months in a supervisory or lead capacity; or must have completed a supervisory course at an accredited institution or its equivalent.
Substitution
None
Other Requirements
Must possess a valid California driver’s license and have a satisfactory driving record.
Must be physically capable of lifting bags and magazines of coins weighing up to 50 pounds, pushing carts weighing up to 1000 pounds and standing and bending during work shift.
Knowledge and Skills
Knowledge of:- Principles, practices, methods, materials, equipment and techniques of collecting and counting large volumes of cash
- Basic supervisory principles and methods including work assignment, instruction and motivation
- Applicable safety principles and practices
Skill/ Ability in:- Planning, assigning, directing and reviewing the work of cash handling personnel
- Instructing and motivating assigned personnel
- Implementing and interpreting goals, work rules, policies, procedures and work standards
- Analyzing problems, evaluating alternatives and making creative recommendations
- Preparing, maintaining and reviewing accurate cash handling records and reports
- Exercising sound independent judgment within general policy guidelines
- Establishing and maintaining effective working relationships with those contacted in the course of the work
- Detecting discrepancies and problem-solving to achieve solutions
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)
- 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: 1/12/2025 11:59 PM Pacific -
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.
-