SACRAMENTO — Making good on a campaign promise, state Sen. Steve Glazer said he intends to submit two bills to the Legislature Friday: one that would ban BART strikes outright, and another that would limit their effectiveness.

The Democrat from Orinda called BART an essential service for the Bay Area, echoing the language that prohibits police and firefighters from striking. The BART strikes in 2013 were a “complete and total disaster” for Bay Area residents that put the area’s economy on lockdown, Glazer said.

“The freeways went into immediate shutdown, and if you needed to get to your job in order to get paid, you would get nothing for that day,” Glazer said. “It created immediate economic harm to your family by not being able to get to work, not to mention all the people who count on BART to get to health appointments or school.”

Assemblywoman Catharine Baker, R-Dublin, introduced a bill in 2015 to ban strikes at BART, but it was ultimately squashed by assembly Democrats. Glazer acknowledged it would be an uphill battle to convince legislators to support similar legislation this time around. He’s hoping there might be more support for his second bill, which would essentially allow nonunion employees to operate trains during a strike.

BART’s contract language prohibits anyone except a “qualified train operator” from driving the trains, all of whom are members of the Amalgamated Transit Union Local 1555. The language in Glazer’s bill says, “The district shall not enter into an agreement that would limit its ability to prepare for a work stoppage or operate during a work stoppage.”

“No public agency should limit, by voluntary agreement, its ability to protect the public’s interest,” Glazer said. “If the BART board won’t exercise this fundamental responsibility, then the Legislature should step in to protect the riders and the commuters in the Bay Area.”

The transit agency came under intense scrutiny during the 2013 strikes when two workers surveying the tracks were struck by a train and killed. It was later revealed that a trainee was operating the train at the time. BART is facing $210,000 in fines from Cal-OSHA over the fatalities and is currently challenging fines from the California Public Utilities Commission, which released its final investigative report on the incident last year. The CPUC could fine BART $500 to $50,000 per day for each offense deemed to be an ongoing violation.

BART also agreed to pay $300,000 in October to the family of one of the workers to a settle a wrongful death lawsuit.

Before the strikes, union officials delivered repeated warnings that managers operating the system could create a dangerous situation. Sal Cruz, president of the AFSCME Local 3993, one of the unions that represents BART workers, blasted Glazer’s proposal to allow managers to operate trains during a strike, calling it “irresponsible” and a threat to public safety. He pointed to the worker deaths in 2013 as the primary example.

Train operators and train controllers need to be recertified regularly, Cruz said, but that doesn’t replace regular practice.

“You eventually start to lose that hands-on experience pretty soon after you leave the position,” he said. “Although you still may understand the basics, there is nothing that is going to ever bring someone up to speed in the short amount of time, as Sen. Glazer is proposing.”

BART board President Rebecca Saltzman said the agency didn’t need a ban on strikes to keep trains moving, but rather, it should work toward improving labor relationships. The agency ratified an extension of its contracts with its labor unions in May. The new contract expires in 2021, and Saltzman said the extension is allowing both sides some time to begin conversations before formal negotiations begin.

“Instead of going down this road of banning strikes, we’re going down the road of improving labor relationships to avoid strikes in the first place,” Saltzman said.