TTC Boycott: Facebook activism

[kEiThZ]

It seems to me that such animosity is usually on the part of someone who hasn't achieved the same pay or job security level themselves. Sheer jealousy, in other words.

Tell that to a Zellers cashier who makes one third to a half of what a fare collector does for a tougher job. I wouldn't write off all of it as jealousy. There is a certain anger at the unfairness of the situation and the ATUs tactics. Every couple of years they get to hold the city hostage and then get wage increases that the poorest and most vulnerable in our society have to pay for.

I have better pay and more job security than a TTC employee and I still don't consider the situation fair. Like I've said before. It's one thing if they are providing service (tourist info, maps, etc.). And, of course, driving a transit bus is tough work. But the fact that they make the same wage even when they are sitting in a booth, not doing much, does grate on the public. Nothing says privileged public servant like getting 50k a year to make change. I am sorry, but that's simply not defensible. And you'd be hard pressed to find many members of the public that disagree with me on this.

 

[kEiThZ]

The Facebook activism should be taken for what it is...a bunch of teens letting off steam.

 

[andomano]

The Facebook activism should be taken for what it is...a bunch of teens letting off steam.

What a great way to put it!

Has anybody come across any example of facebook activism actually working?

 

[knlaruw]

What a great way to put it!

Has anybody come across any example of facebook activism actually working?

"Facebook activism" seemed to work when the University of Waterloo decided to change it's marketing logo to some ridiculous "W" with multicoloured lines running through it. Needless to say, they're redesigning it.

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=123891536822&ref=ts

 

[Hipster Duck]

Don't forget the TTC has one of the lowest subsidy rates in North America (I'm sure it's the lowest for any large system) and recoups the most revenue from it's fair boxes.

Right off the back, any argument about inefficiencies goes straight out the door just with that one fact.

Well, let's put this into context: the TTC has the largest farebox recovery because its fares are by far the most expensive. I'm sure that if any Canadian city charged $126 for a monthly pass they'd need to rely less on government subsidies. Remember, if you have a large enough captive ridership, you can mask glaring inefficiencies through exorbitant prices which is exactly what the TTC does. In the TTC's case, the inefficiencies stem from their extraordinary labour costs and also from the amount of labour they have: in another thread I argued that LA Metro, an agency with comparable ridership numbers and a much larger fleet operator, manages to get by with 2,000 fewer employees. This despite the fact that LA must provide public transit to a sprawly county of 10 million without a legacy of entrenched public transit use. This would normally dictate that LA would have to employ far more people to get the same results (ridership) as Toronto, but apparently this is not the case.

 

[taal]

One can argue that the reason their recovery rate needs to be so high (whether it is efficient or not) is the lack of subsidy the TTC gets from the government - again, this is probably the lowest for any large system in Noth America. I think the TTC needs to recoup 70% of it's cost.

I made it clear I was not saying if it was a good thing or not. But, we still, we get the least amount of funding.

 

[kettal]

Comparable ridership numbers??? The ridership is less than one third the TTCs.

I certainly hope they have 30% less staff than the TTC, otherwise your argument holds no water.

Edit: make that 2 thirds, not 1 third

 

[scarberiankhatru]

Comparable ridership numbers??? The ridership is less than one third the TTCs.

I certainly hope they have 30% or less staff than the TTC, otherwise your argument holds no water.

So the TTC sees 5 million rides a day?

 

[kettal]

d'oh

2 thirds, not one third

 

[taal]

These are a bit old but....
http://www.laalmanac.com/transport/tr15.htm

 

[DavidH]

d'oh

2 thirds, not one third

May 2009: TTC ridership was 470M in 12 months.

http://www3.ttc.ca/News/2009/May/TTC_sets_record_ridership_-_470.8_million_rides_in_last_12_m.jsp

September 2009: Systemwide LA Metro ridership was 39M in one month. Multiply by 12 and we have 468M in 12 months.

http://www.metro.net/news_info/ridership_avg.htm#railsystemwide

Virtually identical numbers. Granted, there is some wiggle room in the extrapolation for LA, but surely not to the tune of 1/3 of the total.

Wanna try a third time? ;-)

 

[taal]

This doesn't help the TTC out but ... you really can't compare -

This system serves 1,433-square-mile service area and around 10 million people.

You need to add ALL of our suronding regions transit systems into the play.

That won't help the matter though : - )

I think a big thing here is that the TTC does a lot of it's maintenance in house - the probably explains it all actually ... call that what you will (good / bad)

 

[scarberiankhatru]

What's actually important is the fleet/employee size...whether or not a bus is full or half full, it needs one driver. In theory, a few more guys might be needed to work in the maintenance division to clean and repair vehicles used by more riders, with seats getting dirtier and all, but theoretically higher maintenance requirements do not translate into 2000 additional jobs. If anything, LA's transit users would likely treat LA transit property more, err, destructively than meek and mild-mannered Torontonians would treat theirs.

 

[DavidH]

This doesn't help the TTC out but ... you really can't compare -

Problem is, the surrounding systems will have *more* employees per rider simply because average ridership per vehicle will be lower. Adding them in worsens the staff/ridership comparison.

Adding GO in might help, though.

 

[kettal]

Wanna try a third time? ;-)

three... thirds... ?