SAN JOSE — A Santa Clara County Superior Court judge denied the Valley Transportation Authority’s bid for a temporary restraining order to stop the ongoing strike Monday but granted an order requiring the union to appear in court and explain why their strike is legal, according to court documents.

Amalgamated Transit Union Local 265 has entered its second week of striking after negotiations fell apart over issues of higher pay and guaranteed arbitration in early March, with a few sessions of mediation and negotiation resulting in little progress toward a resolution late last week and over the weekend. VTA filed the lawsuit on the first day of the strike claiming that the union violated a “no strike” clause in the previous collective bargaining agreement, while the union maintains that that previous agreement expired and the clause no longer applies.

Related Articles

Santa Clara County judge temporarily denies VTA’s request for injunction to stop strike

VTA union strike to continue, officials tap Gov. Newsom for help

Letters: South Bay VTA strike leaving vulnerable people stuck

As VTA strike ends its first week, commuters grapple with new routes, higher costs

VTA, union spar over legal request to end workers’ strike

Santa Clara County Superior Court Judge Daniel T. Nishigaya granted the VTA’s application for an order to show cause — summoning union representatives to appear at a hearing to explain why the injunction should not be issued, according to court documents.

The temporary restraining order was denied, according to court documents. Representatives from the union and from the transit agency will appear in court March 26 at 1:30 p.m.

The VTA also submitted a proposed order to show cause and temporary restraining order that, if signed by the judge, would bar the union from continuing its strike activities, according to court documents.

“Unfortunately for our passengers, that does not allow for the workers to come back and therefore service to be reinstated,” said VTA Deputy General Manager Greg Richardson at a press conference Monday. “From the standpoint of the overall action from VTA to ATU, it does recognize the merits of the case and it is basically allowing for that to go forward on the breach of contract piece.”

In a statement Monday night, the VTA said that they believe the judge’s ruling means they met the initial burden to “show a likelihood of success on the merits of its breach of contract claim.”

Richardson added that the VTA will continue to pursue negotiations with the union to come to a resolution as soon as possible.

The union could not be immediately reached for comment Tuesday.

Earlier Monday, Nishigaya temporarily denied the bid for an injunction due to noncompliance with court rules.