News   Apr 26, 2024
Sustainability Month: ReHousing — A Multiplex How-To Guide Explores What’s Possible in the Yellowbelt
 2.3K     4 
News   Apr 26, 2024
Mattamy's Soleil and Mile & Creek Condos in Milton’s Flourishing Landscape
 531     0 
News   Apr 26, 2024
Galleria on the Park Soon to Welcome First Residents of Masterplanned Community
 1.1K     1 

Rob Ford's Toronto

Status
Not open for further replies.
This kind of talk just seems to distract from real issues. The collector position is largely outmoded and their numbers will be reduced once a workable alternative is in place. I'd advise that it'd be more productive to express frustration regarding the slow pace of implementation of a fare card/open payment system across the TTC.

As for the current situation: we need fare collectors. It makes sense to staff this positions with injured operators who would otherwise be on long-term disability, even if it means their compensation may be out-of-step with what you'd expect for this level of work.
 
GraphicMatt said:
This kind of talk just seems to distract from real issues. The collector position is largely outmoded and their numbers will be reduced once a workable alternative is in place. I'd advise that it'd be more productive to express frustration regarding the slow pace of implementation of a fare card/open payment system across the TTC.
Click to expand...
Reasonable point.

As for the current situation: we need fare collectors. It makes sense to staff this positions with injured operators who would otherwise be on long-term disability, even if it means their compensation may be out-of-step with what you'd expect for this level of work.
Click to expand...
That's a rather large assumption that all or most of the positions are injured operators. I would guess they are in the minority.
 
nfitz said:
So what then do you suggest we do with operators who earn $60,000 a year, and aren't fit to drive a vehicle anymore?
Click to expand...

Let me ask this question: if you think the TTC is right to pay them $60K for that kind of a job, then why the rest of Torontonians with equally low skills don't get a chance to do the same? The question is not about what to do about them. They are supposed to get what job market determines based on their skillsets. Nobody is supposed to received a wage/benefit package so grossly beyond what the market would otherwise determine just because you belong to some sort of union. It is just not fair to others. I know plenty of people who would be willing to and more capable of doing their job for $40,000 a year, with half the benefits, wouldn't it be more responsible for TTC to hire those folks? I also know several friends with master's degree in various fields with 2-10 years of experience who are paid less than $60K a year, is that fair to them?

I doubt many of the ticket collectors do their job because they incurred work related injuries. If a private company employees is injured and is no longer able to do his old job, he will get some sort of compensation and leave. Will the company pay him $60K a year just to sit in front of the gate watching people passing by? No way. Additionally those collectors are not even doing their jobs. Do you know how many times I walk pass their booth showing my daypass and they don't even bother look up? How many times the jumpers just go through the gate right under their eyes and they don't really care? Because they know their job is secure and when TTC run our of money to pay them, it can always cry poor and ask for another fare raise.

The right thing to do is to hire all TTC (both ticket collectors and drivers) publicly. Let the market decide who are the best candidates and what salary they are willing to accept. TTC could easily slash their wage/benefit expenses by 60%. You think with the job market and the competition, those folks can even dream to secure a job that pays that much? Speaking of efficiency, there are so many ways to cut costs, TTC just doesn't want to do it.
 
Eug said:
...
Exactly. Since when does a ticket taker need to be making $60000 a year? At 37.5 hours a week, that works out to 1950 hours a year. That's over $30 an hour.

For overtime, that means they may be making over $45 an hour. That's just crazy.
Click to expand...

I always look at overtime as a sign that there are not enough employees in a business. It would be cheaper to hire more people so the business does not have to pay the time-n-half or double-time.

The problem with the TTC is that there is no part-time. The TTC should have part-time workers, but the union agreement may not allow that, so we get overtime. If the Ford brothers want to make points, get part-time workers on the TTC, even if they are only semi-retirees, on medical leave, or on maternity leave, as a start.
 
kkgg7 said:
Let me ask this question: if you think the TTC is right to pay them $60K for that kind of a job, then why the rest of Torontonians with equally low skills don't get a chance to do the same? The question is not about what to do about them. They are supposed to get what job market determines based on their skillsets. Nobody is supposed to received a wage/benefit package so grossly beyond what the market would otherwise determine just because you belong to some sort of union. It is just not fair to others. I know plenty of people who would be willing to and more capable of doing their job for $40,000 a year, with half the benefits, wouldn't it be more responsible for TTC to hire those folks? I also know several friends with master's degree in various fields with 2-10 years of experience who are paid less than $60K a year, is that fair to them?
Click to expand...

The flippant thing would be to say it's their own fault that they did not enter a more lucrative field and probably true.
 
Paleo said:
The flippant thing would be to say it's their own fault that they did not enter a more lucrative field and probably true.
Click to expand...

That's not flippant at all -- one can't complain about people being paid "beyond what the market would determine" because of unions and at the very same time say that the non-union market, free of such encumbrances, isn't paying someone "fairly".

Maybe the folks with master's degrees should find a good unionized job...
 
Is anyone else getting tired of being referred to only as a "Taxpayer" by the current administration? I find it really demeaning to be reduced only to that. My contribution to this city as a citizen, as a TORONTONIAN is (I would like to think) much greater than the money I pay through taxes. Maybe this isn't such a huge issue, but its really starting to grate on me.
 
I agree, the nomenclature reduces citizenship to the financial contribution one makes, and implies that the only relationship that the city has with its residents is financial. (It also reminds me of some in the US Tea Party who argue that only landowners should be allowed to vote.)

The Fords aren't the only ones to use this rhetorical trope, of course -- it is a general favourite of the right in both the US and Canada.
 
This is pretty off-topic, but I don't want to create a new thread for it.

Is there a difference between outsourcing, contracting out, and privatizing a service, or are they different ways of saying the same thing? If we were to privatize the TTC, would government funding and financial assistance stop?
 
I think privitization tends to be broader in scope - like completely relinquishing government control. Outsourcing/contacting out suggests a contractual relationship between the government and the organization delivering/managing the service. It is a continuum of what is known as "alternate service delivery" (ASD), part of the "New Public Management" model of realigning government priorities since the 80s.

http://www.ipac.ca/documents/WBI-AlternativeServiceDelivery1.pdf

AoD
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top