Bus drivers union files emergency motion to quash restraining order
Sun-News Reports
lcsun-news.com
LAS CRUCES - The Las Cruces Transportation Federation Local #6341 — the union that represents bus drivers for LCPS — plans to file an emergency motion to quash the temporary restraining order issued Thursday by Third Judicial District Court Judge James T. Martin preventing the drivers from striking.
Negotiations between the bus driver's union and STS of New Mexico, the private company contracted by Las Cruces Public Schools to provide bus service for the district, reached an impasse Wednesday.
The collective bargaining agreement between the union and STS expired Thursday night and no further negotiation sessions have been scheduled.
"Yesterday, the Las Cruces Public Schools Board on behalf of the Las Cruces Public School District received an ex parte restraining order against AFT Nm, LCTF #6341, and STS-NM, enjoining a strike, picketing and protests," said AFT New Mexico President Stephanie Ly and #6341 President Marcos Torres in a joint statement issued Friday afternoon. "We received this restraining order despite no allegations that AFT NM or LCTF #6341 had engaged in, or threatened, violence. The District's motion, and the court's jurisdiction to grant it, was based only on New Mexico state law.
"The school district's motion failed to acknowledge the state law upon which the Court's jurisdiction to issue such a restraining order was based, has been preempted and displaced by the federal National Labor Relations Act, which, in no uncertain terms, grants employees the right to strike upon the expiration of a collective bargaining agreement.
"The school district's motion also failed to acknowledge that, even if the state law upon which it relied was not preempted, the Court's jurisdiction is curtailed by the New Mexico Anti-Injuction Act, which generally prevents a state court from issuing an injuction in a labor dispute such as exists between AFT NM, LCTF #6341, and STS-NM."
Martin granted the temporary relief until at least April 12, when a preliminary injunction hearing is scheduled in district court. District officials said they would not comment until a ruling is issued.