SAN JOSE — A Santa Clara County judge temporarily denied the Valley Transportation Authority’s request for an injunction to stop the ongoing strike of workers that has brought busses and light rails across the county to a standstill.
Santa Clara County Superior Court Judge Daniel T. Nishigaya denied VTA’s motion without prejudice because the forms filed were not compliant with the rules of court, according to court filings — meaning that the agency can refile the request at a future date.
The ruling came as the strike of Amalgamated Transit Union Local 265 entered its second week; workers and the VTA have been unable to come to an agreement on a contract. ATU members walked off the job last Monday and have been picketing ever since as commuters have gotten creative with their routes to make up for the lack of buses and trains.
VTA filed a lawsuit last week aiming to swiftly stop the strike, alleging that the striking workers were violating a “no strike” clause in their collective bargaining agreement. The union has said that the VTA acknowledged the expiration of the contract in early March and that their claim that the clause still applies is a “blatant about-face.”
Nishigaya said in his ruling that the VTA may re-submit its order to show cause and in compliance with California’s Rules of Court.
The cited rule states that the order to show cause and the temporary restraining order must be stated separately, with the order stated first, according to the court rules. The order must describe the injunction and the restraining order must describe the activities the injunction would prohibit. The order must also comply with several other formatting requirements.
Nishigaya’s ruling stated that he will consider the application for an injunction upon receiving the compliant temporary restraining order and order to show cause, according to court documents.
Representatives of the union and of the transit agency could not be immediately reached for comment Monday.
This is a developing report. Check back for updates.