-
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
$123,687.00 / annually (Minimum) to $187,387.00 / annually (Maximum) - (Non-Represented Pay Band 6)
Initial salary is negotiable between $123,687.00 - $143,507.90, to commensurate with experience and education.
Reports To
Manager of Vehicle Systems Engineer or designee.
Current Assignment
This announcement will be used to establish a pool of eligible candidates for vacancies that may occur within the next twelve (12) months.
The Vehicle Systems Engineer (VSE) will perform professional engineering duties in support of the repair, overhaul, evaluation, reliability, and maintenance of BART transit vehicles. They will provide support for the engineering of electrical and electromechanical systems, software-driven control systems, auxiliary power supply systems, and various electrical components.
The incumbent will be directed to complete assigned tasks and work on testing, analysis, design changes, and procedures. This assigned work will support the development of improved processes and designs related to revenue rail vehicles.
The ideal candidate will have a degree in Electrical Engineering or a closely related field and two (2) years of experience in electrical engineering. They will demonstrate competency in the diagnostics, testing, and troubleshooting of electrical equipment and systems. In addition, they will be skilled in investigating and determining the cause of major equipment failures by applying principles of root cause failure analysis and demonstrate competency in writing reports and technical procedures. They must be comfortable working in a maintenance shop environment, reviewing schematics and design documents, and addressing component/electrical repair issues.
Selection Process
Applications will be screened to assure that minimum qualifications are met. Those applicants who meet minimum qualifications will then be referred to the hiring department for the completion of further selection processes.
The selection process for this position may include a skills/performance demonstration, a written examination, and a panel and/or individual interview.
The successful candidate must have an employment history demonstrating reliability and dependability; provide copies of certificates, diplomas or other documents as required by law, including those establishing his/her right to work in the U. S; pass a pre-employment medical examination which may include a drug and alcohol screen, and which is specific to the essential job functions and requirements. Pre-employment processing will also include a background check. (Does not apply to current full-time District employees unless specific job requires additional evaluations).
Examples of Duties
Performs a variety of vehicle systems engineering duties in support of the design repair, overhaul, evalua tion, reliability and maintenance of District transit vehicles.
Designs and specifies special testing and servicing equipment to troubleshoot and maintain transit vehicle subsystems.
Investigates and determines cause of major transit vehicle equipment failures and provides required corrections or equipment design changes.
Provides a variety of technical information in support of transit vehicle repair, engineering and design.
Provides technical assistance in the location and disposition of transit vehicle parts and equipment.
Participates in the analysis of vehicle equipment failures; develops, implements and documents resulting maintenance procedures and equipment design changes.
Creates a variety of technical engineering drawings, specifications and documents; ensures contract compliance, the use of proper engineering methods and compatibility with other systems.
Provides technical assistance in developing new advanced transit vehicle systems for use on District transit vehicles.
Defines quality assurance criteria and inspection procedures for the maintenance and repair of transit vehicles; audits maintenance staff to ensure compliance with standards.
Operates a variety of mechanical equipment in a safe and effective manner including electrical, mechanical and electro-mechanical test equipment.
Attends and participates in professional group meetings; stays abreast of new trends and innovations in the field of transit vehicle systems engineering.
Provides expert testimony in personal injury lawsuits against the District, as assigned.
Minimum Qualifications
Education :
Possession of a bachelor’s degree in electrical engineering, mechanical engineering or a closely related field from an accredited college or university.
Experience :
The equivalent of two (2) years of (full-time) professional verifiable electrical or mechanical systems engineering experience, or related experience.
Other Requirements :
Must possess sufficient mobility to perform field inspections and investigations. Certification as an Engineer-In-Training (EIT) is preferred.
Working Conditions
Environmental Conditions :
Shop environment; exposure to electrical energy; travel from site to site.
Physical Conditions :
Requires maintaining physical condition necessary for walking, standing or sitting for prolonged periods of time; operating motorized equipment and vehicles; working or inspecting in confined spaces; working around heavy construction equipment; must be physically able to conduct field inspections and testing as assigned.
Knowledge and Skills
Knowledge of :- Operations, services and activities of a comprehensive transit vehicle engineering program
- Principles and practices of mechanical or electrical engineering as they relate to transit vehicles
- Transit vehicle electrical and mechanical equipment and subsystems
- Computers and applications utilized in vehicle diagnostics
- Principles and practices of engineering specification preparation and re view
- Materials and equipment utilized in testing and repairing transit vehicles
- Operational characteristics of various mechanical testing equipment and tools
- Occupational hazards and standard safety practices
- Related Federal, State and local codes, laws and regulations
Skill/Ability in :- Performing a variety of transit vehicle inspections, maintenance and repair engineering duties
- Operating a variety of vehicle testing equipment in a safe and effective manner
- Providing a variety of technical information in support of transit vehicle operations
- Analyzing vehicle equipment failures and developing equipment design changes
- Preparing a variety of complex engineering drawings and specifications
- Writing technical safety reports
- Defining quality assurance criteria and inspection procedures for maintenance and repair of transit vehicles
- Understanding and following oral and written instructions
- Communicating clearly and concisely, both orally and in writing
- Establishing and maintaining effective working relationships with those contacted in the course of work
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)
- 3% at 50 (Safety Members - Classic)
- 2.7% @ 57 (Safety Members - PEPRA)
- 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: 7/12/2025 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.
-