HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Atlantic Provinces > Halifax > Transportation & Infrastructure


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #81  
Old Posted Mar 12, 2012, 1:26 PM
DigitalNinja DigitalNinja is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 964
Story on CBC says that they will have to raise fares. If this is true then they probably caved to the ATU demands...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #82  
Old Posted Mar 13, 2012, 2:53 AM
spaustin's Avatar
spaustin spaustin is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Downtown Dartmouth
Posts: 705
Quote:
Originally Posted by DigitalNinja View Post
Story on CBC says that they will have to raise fares. If this is true then they probably caved to the ATU demands...
Metro Transit ran a big deficit last year. They were probably going to raise fares regardless of how the new contract turned out. The strike makes a handy excuse. Now we have to wait and see what damage the strike did to the public transit system. If the experience from elsewhere is any indication, ridership will be down by about 5%.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #83  
Old Posted Mar 14, 2012, 12:59 AM
Nouvellecosse's Avatar
Nouvellecosse Nouvellecosse is offline
Volatile Pacivist
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 8,968
When will they actually be moving again? When I went by the transit center early this morning the buses were sitting there idling with their lights on. Were they running today?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #84  
Old Posted Mar 14, 2012, 1:22 AM
Keith P.'s Avatar
Keith P. Keith P. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 7,964
Buses will be running on a limited basis by Friday. One hopes citizens make their displeasure known to the operators.

HRM Council caved and approved a bad contract that rewarded these greedy ATU members. They should have kept them out and punished the union for several more months. Even better, they should have shut the whole thing down permanently and announced the selloff of routes, equipment and facilities to private contractors to rid us of the ATU.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #85  
Old Posted Mar 14, 2012, 2:36 AM
DigitalNinja DigitalNinja is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 964
Didn't the city get the rostering that they wanted?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #86  
Old Posted Mar 14, 2012, 3:04 AM
-Harlington-'s Avatar
-Harlington- -Harlington- is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Halifax-Nova Scotia
Posts: 1,097
Here is some info from the HRM site:

http://www.halifax.ca/metrotransit/s...ml#whenservice
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #87  
Old Posted Mar 14, 2012, 12:36 PM
Keith P.'s Avatar
Keith P. Keith P. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 7,964
Quote:
Originally Posted by DigitalNinja View Post
Didn't the city get the rostering that they wanted?
Doesn't matter - it is a watered-down version that the union still has too much say in, so it will rapidly prove to be useless.

The strike has shown that the union members are hostile and unmanageable - no surprise to those that have experience with transit in this city. The only way it can be fixed is to shut it down and start in a new direction.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #88  
Old Posted Mar 14, 2012, 3:13 PM
sk8tr sk8tr is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 28
The annual budget of Metro Transit is $80 million, with $50 million subsidized by property taxes and $30 million coming from fares. I wonder what would happen if we (the taxpayers) subsidized the remaining $30 million, and eliminated the farebox. I know, I know, it's a lot of money, but it could have a big impact on people's habits. How big an increase might we see in ridership? How many cars would be taken off the road every day? If ridership was way up, would that encourage more investment from advertisers/sponsors?

One major downside of this plan would be that there would be even less money in the system for infrastructure investments and enhancing capacity, but we don't really do very well in this regard at the moment anyway.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #89  
Old Posted Mar 14, 2012, 6:45 PM
scooby074 scooby074 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 497
$4000 bribe signing bonus. Nice.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #90  
Old Posted Mar 14, 2012, 8:01 PM
Keith P.'s Avatar
Keith P. Keith P. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 7,964
Quote:
Originally Posted by sk8tr View Post
The annual budget of Metro Transit is $80 million, with $50 million subsidized by property taxes and $30 million coming from fares. I wonder what would happen if we (the taxpayers) subsidized the remaining $30 million, and eliminated the farebox. I know, I know, it's a lot of money, but it could have a big impact on people's habits. How big an increase might we see in ridership? How many cars would be taken off the road every day? If ridership was way up, would that encourage more investment from advertisers/sponsors?

One major downside of this plan would be that there would be even less money in the system for infrastructure investments and enhancing capacity, but we don't really do very well in this regard at the moment anyway.
No "free" public service can be run efficiently. Look at health care. Transit fare should be increased and the funding resulting used to enhance service in meaningful ways - not adding unnecessary/unused service to suburban areas but to revamp the routes and equipment to make it work in a way that would make people want to use it. The last thing we need are 11 empty buses bumper to bumper on Barrington St. There needs to be a total rethink.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #91  
Old Posted Mar 16, 2012, 6:37 AM
someone123's Avatar
someone123 someone123 is offline
hähnchenbrüstfiletstüc
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 33,673
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith P. View Post
Transit fare should be increased and the funding resulting used to enhance service in meaningful ways - not adding unnecessary/unused service to suburban areas but to revamp the routes and equipment to make it work in a way that would make people want to use it. The last thing we need are 11 empty buses bumper to bumper on Barrington St. There needs to be a total rethink.
I think Halifax needs some high-frequency LRT-like routes to serve the busiest corridors and get through traffic bottlenecks (Hali87's plan looks good). If such routes were implemented then bus service could be completely redesigned around transfers at key hubs and would work much more efficiently.

Halifax is getting to the point where the old lazy style of city planning isn't going to cut it. Once roads are saturated with traffic you cannot just add more buses and expect things to start moving. I hope that the political climate changes quickly so that projects like rail-based transit become viable. If that doesn't happen then quality of life in the city will suffer. It will just be very hard to get around, and as a result more people and businesses will move farther and farther out, worsening the problem. If Halifax turns into the little city with big city commute times and congestion it won't be an attractive place for people or businesses.

By the way, Tim Bousquet has shown just how out of touch he and the bus drivers are with his latest post:

http://www.thecoast.ca/RealityBites/...rs-lose-on-pay

A bus driver emailed him to complain about how the new base pay rate of $24/hr is lower than $24.09 paid in St. John's. Talk about living in a bubble and having a sense of entitlement. You think the people working minimum wage jobs with no benefits will care? What about the people who make approximately the same wage at jobs that require a university degree that requires four years of study and tens of thousands of dollars?

I don't necessarily think that rock-bottom wages like the $20,000 figure cited for Bangor are the way to go, but I fail to see how $24/hr for unskilled labour is a wage to complain about.

Last edited by someone123; Mar 16, 2012 at 6:52 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #92  
Old Posted Mar 16, 2012, 12:44 PM
hollistreet's Avatar
hollistreet hollistreet is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 86
If Halifax turns into the little city with big city commute times and congestion it w

"If Halifax turns into the little city with big city commute times and congestion it won't be an attractive place for people or businesses." (someone123)

Below are cummute times for some major cities that the Toronto Board of Trade came up with:

Commute times in minutes.

LA: 56.1
Boston: 55.8
Calgary: 67
Chicago: 61.4
Vancouver: 67
Toronto: 80
Montreal: 76
NYC:68.1
HALIFAX: 65

Halifax IS a small city with very big city commute times and congestion. I have the pleasure of driving out of the downtown core of Halifax a number of mornings a week as I head to Lunenburg county and at a 65 minute commute to get into Halifax, my commute to Bridgewater or any point east of Bridgewater is no longer than someone coming in from Tantallon. Halifax has a major problem!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #93  
Old Posted Mar 16, 2012, 8:59 PM
scooby074 scooby074 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 497
That article in the Coast was eye opening. Seems ALL transit in the Atlantic Provinces are overpaid. How much does a typical trucker or schoolbus driver make? They should get no more. Im thinking $15-20 not $20-25.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #94  
Old Posted Mar 16, 2012, 9:19 PM
someone123's Avatar
someone123 someone123 is offline
hähnchenbrüstfiletstüc
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 33,673
Quote:
Originally Posted by scooby074 View Post
That article in the Coast was eye opening. Seems ALL transit in the Atlantic Provinces are overpaid. How much does a typical trucker or schoolbus driver make? They should get no more. Im thinking $15-20 not $20-25.
A lot of school bus drivers make only $30k or so a year, although it is a slightly different job.

Truck driving is quite different since it involves travel, often long hours, and in many cases the drivers themselves own and maintain their vehicles. Their pay might be about the same, but they probably don't get a benefits package even remotely similar to what the transit drivers get. To compare apples to apples you'd have to look at the overall value of compensation provided to bus drivers, factoring in pensions -- wouldn't be surprised if it were north of $60k/year.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #95  
Old Posted Mar 16, 2012, 9:52 PM
W.Sobchak's Avatar
W.Sobchak W.Sobchak is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 116
How much do Paramedics get paid? Silly question, not enough.

I heard a fella on 95.7 the other day during the strike suggest dissolving Metro Transit, and have the province create a transportation authority, and label it an essential service like the EHS paramedics.

An extreme suggestion but parts of it do have merit. Thoughts?
__________________
"Am I the only one around here who gives shit about the rules?"
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #96  
Old Posted Mar 17, 2012, 5:11 AM
Hali87 Hali87 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Calgary
Posts: 4,465
Quote:
Originally Posted by W.Sobchak View Post
How much do Paramedics get paid? Silly question, not enough.

I heard a fella on 95.7 the other day during the strike suggest dissolving Metro Transit, and have the province create a transportation authority, and label it an essential service like the EHS paramedics.

An extreme suggestion but parts of it do have merit. Thoughts?
I don't think we'd be the first city to do that. It shouldn't be considered out of the question.

However, we just signed a 5 year contract with the union.. so it doesn't seem like that urgent a debate
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #97  
Old Posted Mar 17, 2012, 5:09 PM
fenwick16 fenwick16 is offline
Honored Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Toronto area (ex-Nova Scotian)
Posts: 5,558
I think this story in the Chronicle Herald gives a good explanation of the new Metro Transit contract. I think this contract is a good compromise for both sides.

(source: http://thechronicleherald.ca/opinion...e-transit-deal )
Quote:
HRM did not ‘give away store’ in transit deal
March 17, 2012 - 4:26am By PETER KELLY

$4,000 bonus saves cash in long run

I think it’s safe to say that we are all breathing a big sigh of relief with the end of the six-week transit strike. The disruption to so many lives was really unfortunate, but Metro Transit operations will soon be back to normal and, hopefully, we can put what happened behind us.

To help speed the healing process, I would like to explain one aspect of the financial portion of the settlement that was reached between HRM and the Amalgamated Transit Union, local 508. I want you to be assured that council and I did not "give away the store" by agreeing to a one-time, taxable lump-sum payment of $4,000 to the 750 employees.

Let me explain: Imagine going to the bank to negotiate a five-year mortgage. If you put nothing up front, you have to make higher payments over the life of the mortgage. If, however, you put down a deposit at the start, then you reduce your payments over the long haul — and that’s the route we chose in order to save taxpayers’ money. The "mortgage" HRM could afford for a new transit contract was $5.6 million and the lump sum was our $3-million down payment to realize a significant saving later. (That $5.6 million was the total amount that HRM had to offer, in whatever configuration it was eventually to be paid. It was what we put on the table on Feb. 23 and what we settled on this week.)

HRM and the union have agreed to a five-year contract with annual raises of two per cent in the second and subsequent years. The lump sum is instead of a two per cent raise in the first year and does not apply to any new drivers hired. Most importantly, the $4,000 does not factor into the math when it comes time to calculate each subsequent year’s raises.
.
.
.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #98  
Old Posted Mar 19, 2012, 12:37 AM
scooby074 scooby074 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 497
They should have starved them out. Damage to the regular users and image of Transit was already done.

Just because they are back to work doesnt mean that HRM didnt lose. The new contract doesnt address the issue of their salary, which when compared to most, including others in the transportation field is excessive.

Are kids traveling with drivers making $30K somehow less safe than metro commuters?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #99  
Old Posted Mar 19, 2012, 4:32 AM
spaustin's Avatar
spaustin spaustin is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Downtown Dartmouth
Posts: 705
Quote:
Originally Posted by scooby074 View Post
Are kids traveling with drivers making $30K somehow less safe than metro commuters?
Two very different jobs. The school bus drivers typically work fewer hours and those hours are less taxing since they are more regular and fall within 9-5. It makes sense that they would be paid less as a result. Still, I have to wonder why the automatic reaction is that because school bus drivers are paid X Metro Transit drivers are therefore overpaid. Isn't it reasonable to argue that school bus drivers are underpaid? It seems that people are always looking to take away from each other which just makes everyone poorer. How come the question is always "why do they get that" instead of "why don't I?" Maybe we should all get paid McDonald's wages. Then it would be nice and equal. I don't think $50,000 as a top wage is a rich salary. It's a fair working class wage of the kind that we use to have an abundance of that enabled people to carve out a decent living, buy a modest house and raise a family. I think the deal struck was fair, it's just silly that, given the compromise, the strike lasted a month. Both sides dropped the ball here.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #100  
Old Posted Mar 19, 2012, 4:48 AM
someone123's Avatar
someone123 someone123 is offline
hähnchenbrüstfiletstüc
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 33,673
Quote:
Originally Posted by spaustin View Post
Two very different jobs. The school bus drivers typically work fewer hours and those hours are less taxing since they are more regular and fall within 9-5. It makes sense that they would be paid less as a result. Still, I have to wonder why the automatic reaction is that because school bus drivers are paid X Metro Transit drivers are therefore overpaid. Isn't it reasonable to argue that school bus drivers are underpaid? It seems that people are always looking to take away from each other which just makes everyone poorer. How come the question is always "why do they get that" instead of "why don't I?" Maybe we should all get paid McDonald's wages. Then it would be nice and equal. I don't think $50,000 as a top wage is a rich salary. It's a fair working class wage of the kind that we use to have an abundance of that enabled people to carve out a decent living, buy a modest house and raise a family. I think the deal struck was fair, it's just silly that, given the compromise, the strike lasted a month. Both sides dropped the ball here.
What does it mean to be "underpaid"? Metro Transit bus drivers are basically by definition not paid below the market rate, because they choose to continue to work. The fact that it is easy to find bus drivers demonstrates that they are above average in terms of compensation.

It's nice to suggest that people should earn a good wage, but it's important to consider the tradeoffs. On balance it's horribly misguided to try to help out the economy by arbitrarily overpaying certain public sector workers. On average that does not get society ahead because that money comes from taxes (paid by some making even less than bus drivers) and because union employment tends to create horrible inefficiencies. In the worst case we would end up with a bunch of people working for basically no reason -- wait for this to happen over the next few years.

If the real goal is to give as many people as possible a good standard of living then the way to do that is to have low taxes, generous transfers (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/repor...rticle1764967/), and cheap public services. Simply cutting fares on transit buses would make a huge difference to some of the poorest people in the city. Instead, Metro Transit must raise fares so that they can pay above average wages to a select few.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Atlantic Provinces > Halifax > Transportation & Infrastructure
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 4:33 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.