This photo was featured on the BART operators' Union Web site, along with text describing BART spokesman Linton Johnson as the 'Forbidden Fruit of Diligent Union Workers'
Earlier today, we noted that the nastiness level in the ongoing battle between BART and its unions had reached Spiro Agnew levels. Yet it appears the rhetoric may have gotten even a bit more hurtful than the combatants intended.
Posted on the Web site of the Amalgamated Transit Union No. 1555 -- the union representing around 900 BART drivers and station agents -- was a photo of BART spokesman Linton Johnson, dressed as a giant banana for a Jamba Juice event some years ago.
If the goal was to make management's mouthpiece look ridiculous -- well, mission accomplished. But the text accompanying the picture did more than that. "Linton Johnson: Forbidden Fruit of diligent union workers," read the caption. It warrants mentioning that Johnson is openly gay -- making the notion of calling him a "fruit" more than a little offensive. ATU President Jesse Hunt said he was not aware of Johnson's sexuality or that the picture was posted on his union's Web site.
"Well, you know, everything can be taken the wrong way. But I'm certain that [homophobia] is not the intention. I will have to see what is behind this, though," he said, acknowledging he "couldn't say" whose bright idea it was to pair this picture and caption on the union site.
When asked if he thought the statement was malicious, Johnson replied: "I don't know what it is, but my family along with my gay and straight friends are all calling me and are completely horrified, disgusted and offended. At the very least it's in poor taste and doesn't accurately reflect the wonderful, hard working, kind and thoughtful BART Station Agents and Train Operators in ATU who I meet day in and day out."
Ok he is dressed up as a fruit so that is were the reference came from and he blatantly lies to the public and the union owes him an apology? What next... are they racist about him being a banana and black??
I don't think there was any underlying message in the picture or the caption. If anything what comes out of his mouth is filled with malicious content and mis-representation. On the other hand he is only doing his job. His is the face that represents the BART management and is the most accessible to the workers, as workers are to the riding public. If you think he deserves an apology then he should give one to every blue collar, Non-"Professional" worker in the country!
Linton Johnson has become nothing but a management lap dog and has done nothing but lie to the general public!
As a gay man myself, I believe the Union doesn't owe the gay community an apology, but Linton Johnson does for becoming the stereotype of a conniving lying backstabber!!
("At the very least it's in poor taste and doesn't accurately reflect the wonderful, hard working, kind and thoughtful BART Station Agents and Train Operators in ATU who I meet day in and day out.") Really Linton?? Are these the same "wonderful" workers you've been maligning daily in the media?
Enough is enough...stop the media lying and get back to the tables and work out a deal the Unions, Management, and riding public can live with!
As someone who has only been in the Bay Area for the past 3 years, I have to say that I am very ashamed of the tactics of these clearly desperate Union Workers. I think their actions and defense of Linton Johnson's picture speak volumes to their mob mentality and immaturity.
Having lived in many other states with mass transit systems, never have I seen contract negotiations take on this personal of an attack. The President of the ATU needs to do the right thing and condemn the comments/actions of those he represents...clearly they are not deserving of anything, except unemployment.
To the members of the ATU responsible for the picture and comments I say this...."Grow up, take your ignorant attitudes and immaturity and move someplace else. The Bay Area and the United States can no longer afford folks who think and act like you."
The ATU website made a serious mistake to target Linton Johnson with an anti-gay slur. Linton is a well-respected openly gay BART spokesman and a fine and honorable human being.
An anti-gay insult to Linton is an insult the LGBT community. I feel strongly that a public apology should be given by the members of ATU who posted this photo and caption with malicious intention.
Linton is doing what he gets paid to do. He doesn't make anything personal. He has never embarrassed anyone personally. Why must it come down to this? What is the point of this? I don't necessarily agree with the things he has been saying in the media, but I expect no less. I choose not to listen to him and sometimes laugh when I do listen. I would never attack him personally nor mention his life style preference. For Jesse Hunt to say he didn't know Linton is gay, that's a bunch of hooey. I don't believe that for one second. The unions have mentioned Linton and the pride parade in recent rumblings. At minimum Jesse should apologize to Linton and keep it to business attacks only. No personal more personal attacks.
What is truly disappointing is the rotten reporting job of the SF Weekly's "The Snitch" regarding this non-issue. Are you supposed to be a news source or a gossip rag? You decidedly and deliberately put an “anti-gay” spin to an archived BART photo of Linton Johnson in a banana suit. Please!! You, SF Weekly, ought to be ashamed AND blamed - you took the photo out of its original context by only printing HALF of the photo’s caption! Your readers might not be so up in arms about this silly story if they had been supplied with ALL the facts; namely, the entire caption! But…too late now, the damage is done. The apology ought to come from YOU, SF Weekly to your readers, and the ATU 1555 union workers. Shame on you.
Boo fucking hoo. The likelyhood of this being anti-gay coming from a union with many openly gay and lesbian employees is ludicrous. It was not posted anywhere else but the union's website and despite the man's many bald-faced lies there was no "personal" attack. No one has publicly said "shut up faggot" or anything of the sort. Nor would any of us.
This is not only making a mountain out of a molehill it is a patently ridiculous redirection away from the issues at hand and Linton's malicious and inexcusable behavior. Mike Healey certainly bent the truth a time or two - but on nowhere near the level that Linton has.
When your actions directly and negatively affect the working environment and livelihood of people they are going to be upset about it. I'm sure he'll cry his way to the bank after the massive bonus he gets for misrepresenting the situation to the media is done. If he wanted to play fair this wouldn't be happening.
Now if someone in ATU was offended that might be a different story. But this was not intended for the general public regardless.
Cute how he only refers to his fellow workers in dulcet tones only when blithely attempting to put himself above them.
Also - let me clarify things: I am against DOMA, voted against prop. 8, was against "don't ask, don't tell" (in part because I knew so many lgb folks in the military both closeted and out) and I don't really care who does what with whom under any circumstances as long as it is safe, sane and consensual and I would rather hope that anyone else be the same with me.
That said I find this kind of red herring revolting and is a cheap way to drive hits to your site and/or newspaper. It is entirely a non-issue and continues the ongoing smear campaign against BART's workers. The day your site does an in depth piece on BART's expenditures or demands the audit that is so desperately needed then I will take it seriously.
As it is you've done a disservice to already embattled union workers by sticking up for someone that has not only provably and repeatedly lied to the public but is a reprehensible and repugnant human being as well. Good job.
I am sick and tired of these unions accusing Linton of "lying." I have read the information myself. BART is in serious financial trouble and needs to reduce the generous pay and benefits afforded to these union workers.
The union people call anyone who doesn't agree with them a "liar." So be it. The general public knows the truth.
Cmon people he is dressed as a fruit this is another way of bart management making frontline workers the scapegoat and look bad in the media and as for the bart union worker saying that Linton is not maligning operators and agents you are probably going to vote yes on this horribly disrespectful proposal that for the reading public includes no retirement less holidays no more job security a .22 cent raise in 4 years but what is management giving up some personnel make $6,000 A WEEK people but i make too much?You should not be mad at us but mad at your own jobs for paying you a decent wage which is what we want for all workers not just bart workers and we will stand with you will you stand with us?? why do we have to pay for the Oscar Grant tragedy or for the assisant general manager blowing up 25 million dollars worth of equipment all of which are included in their budget shortfall these problems were brought on by management and we are supposed to pay for them while management gives up nothing.
Your comment is without merit John Healy - Linton has lied and provably so. Never once has any employee at BART gotten paid 2 hours for missing their lunch, he has given a different number each time about how much workers make and Sue Angeli caught him in making several lies on KTVU.
If the "general public" actually knew the financial conditions it would only be as a result of an audit as no one other than BART management knows why they never have money during negotiations even in banner years and consistently takes money out of the general fund and into the capital fund. Or why no money from the transit villages is coming back from the general fund. Or where all the money they get for running Amtrak Capitol Corridor goes. If San Francisco can have Harvey Rose independently audit their budget (and the GAO Congress's) there is no reason why BART's can't.
BART's management and board have a history of corruption, incompetence and anti-worker behavior. Yet you would reward that.
If you think that management actually cares about you you're even more foolish than I thought because there was *never* any need to raise fares in July. Their intent has never been to get us to take less because our own proposed budget would have saved hundreds of millions of dollars more than theirs. What they want is to break the unions pure and simple.
Nobody has a problem taking a pay cut if that's what needs to happen but eliminating the redress of grievances - which is what they are asking for - is *entirely different*.
But I'll leave you with these questions:
If you're in dire financial straights do you hire 3 ACTOs at approx. a quarter of a million dollars a piece? If you're in dire financial straits do you vote yourself a bonus? If you're in dire financial straits wouldn't you look at fare enforcement as an option? Wouldn't you try to maximise income first before decreasing everyone's quality of life? If you were a leader and demanding your underlings make less wouldn't you show yourself to be a leader by taking less upfront?
BART union workers suck. They do little work, get paid a huge salary, and constantly complain . And riders have to pay for their incompetence. No sympathy for these overpaid jerks.
Does ANYONE commenting here know what the job of a spokesman is? He is told what to say from management, then he says it. His job isn't to have an opinion, but to parrot his bosses want him to say.
All you folks up there giving him shit about being a management lap dog and blah blah blah need to realize what the guy's job is, versus just attacking this guy.
It's f'd up that the gay topic came into play about this, but it was probably one stupid webdesigner that either knew about his sexuality and was an asshole, or it was unintentional and someone looked too deeply into a goofy picture.
First of all, the picture or the comment was not an anti-gay. He dressed up in a BANANA SUIT!!!!! He decided to put that on! Does that mean he is gay? NO!!! Whether he is or is not, that is his personal business and had NOTHING to do with ATU being homophobic or promoting the UNION as being anti-gay!!! Far as the comment, " Forbidden Fruit of diligent union workers," he is forbidden far as I am concerned. Forbidden from the UNION, because he is against the UNION!!! That comment does not initiate the UNION as being anti-gay. No where, shape, fashion or form!!!
