Re: Driven By.... Uhh... Hello? Anybody?
Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.
Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.
General MBTA Topics (Multi Modal, Budget, MassDOT)
- Thread starter Waldorf
- Start date
CantabAmager
Active Member
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2014
- Messages
- 216
- Reaction score
- 0
Re: Driven By.... Uhh... Hello? Anybody?
Does the 116/117 even run beyond 12:30? All the ridership numbers are from 12:30-3am (prior to being slashed back), so I bet a lot of the evening peak wouldn't be included with the data reference. Out of curiosity, I assume you're talking about outbounds, what does the late (but not "late-night") inbounds look like? The 116/117 retains a decent amount of its ridership (~55%; avg. sat/sun compared to normal weekday) which put its it line with routes like the 70, 57, 77, 28, 1, and 66 - but that's only a part of picture.
About 225 per wknd take the late-night 111 and Aquarium sees about 600 entries per wknd. Obviously not all of the entries are headed to Chelsea/Eastie, but 100 people heading home that late isn't a small number for sure.
Does the 116/117 even run beyond 12:30? All the ridership numbers are from 12:30-3am (prior to being slashed back), so I bet a lot of the evening peak wouldn't be included with the data reference. Out of curiosity, I assume you're talking about outbounds, what does the late (but not "late-night") inbounds look like? The 116/117 retains a decent amount of its ridership (~55%; avg. sat/sun compared to normal weekday) which put its it line with routes like the 70, 57, 77, 28, 1, and 66 - but that's only a part of picture.
About 225 per wknd take the late-night 111 and Aquarium sees about 600 entries per wknd. Obviously not all of the entries are headed to Chelsea/Eastie, but 100 people heading home that late isn't a small number for sure.
Re: Driven By.... Uhh... Hello? Anybody?
Mon - Thurs, last 117 from Wonderland is 12:30am. Last 117 from Maverick is 12:35am.
Mon - Thurs, last 117 from Wonderland is 12:30am. Last 117 from Maverick is 12:35am.
CantabAmager
Active Member
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2014
- Messages
- 216
- Reaction score
- 0
Re: Driven By.... Uhh... Hello? Anybody?
116 \ 117 did run 12:30 - 3 prior to the cuts on Fridays and Saturdays. They should have the data, it's ("they") a late night route.
116 \ 117 did run 12:30 - 3 prior to the cuts on Fridays and Saturdays. They should have the data, it's ("they") a late night route.
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2010
- Messages
- 8,894
- Reaction score
- 271
CantabAmager
Active Member
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2014
- Messages
- 216
- Reaction score
- 0
Re: Driven By.... Uhh... Hello? Anybody?
Hmm ok, I think I've found the culprit. The Interim Report only reported ridership for 11 of the 14 late-night bus routes. That would mean that the 116/117 would have average less than 175 riders per wknd; I don't know how transfers were recorded for the specific table I'm using - if they aren't then it'd be reasonable to expect higher than 175 given the relatively high amount of late-night boardings at Aquarium. The MBTA probably has more recent info, but I haven't found anything in the reports with the right data yet.
Hmm ok, I think I've found the culprit. The Interim Report only reported ridership for 11 of the 14 late-night bus routes. That would mean that the 116/117 would have average less than 175 riders per wknd; I don't know how transfers were recorded for the specific table I'm using - if they aren't then it'd be reasonable to expect higher than 175 given the relatively high amount of late-night boardings at Aquarium. The MBTA probably has more recent info, but I haven't found anything in the reports with the right data yet.
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2010
- Messages
- 8,894
- Reaction score
- 271
Re: Driven By.... Uhh... Hello? Anybody?
Typical MBTA treating their ridership as separate routes instead of combining them due to the fact that not only do they serve the same corridor, but ARE the same bus until the very end in Revere. I just looked at the chart and it is absurd how they just inexplicably cut off 3 buses.
Typical MBTA treating their ridership as separate routes instead of combining them due to the fact that not only do they serve the same corridor, but ARE the same bus until the very end in Revere. I just looked at the chart and it is absurd how they just inexplicably cut off 3 buses.
F-Line to Dudley
Senior Member
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2010
- Messages
- 9,261
- Reaction score
- 9,269
Re: Driven By.... Uhh... Hello? Anybody?
Operator's shitcanning was made official yesterday. Now we get to see if any charges get filed. If the texting/crashing Newton bus driver case is any guide, lying about any part of his account of the incident becomes the difference between this saga ending here with the firing or ending in front of a judge with an obstruction charge.
Operator's shitcanning was made official yesterday. Now we get to see if any charges get filed. If the texting/crashing Newton bus driver case is any guide, lying about any part of his account of the incident becomes the difference between this saga ending here with the firing or ending in front of a judge with an obstruction charge.
Re: Driven By.... Uhh... Hello? Anybody?
Another example of splitting up a route that has small variations are 441 \ 442 \ 448 \ 449. If you want a adventure, ride a bus as packed as any key bus route, speeding down route 1A. Sad that the MBTA explicitly makes service shitty for certain constituents.
Another example of splitting up a route that has small variations are 441 \ 442 \ 448 \ 449. If you want a adventure, ride a bus as packed as any key bus route, speeding down route 1A. Sad that the MBTA explicitly makes service shitty for certain constituents.
F-Line to Dudley
Senior Member
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2010
- Messages
- 9,261
- Reaction score
- 9,269
Re: Driven By.... Uhh... Hello? Anybody?
Appeal is a pretty much automatic formality, and any appeal filed immediately involves the union. Doesn't mean he has any greater than 0% of succeeding; he doesn't. Doesn't mean the union is thrilled to have to represent a guy who made a laughingstock out of the profession; they have to deal with the fallout of daily surveillance of the rest of the rule-obeying rank-and-file being increased in this dumbass' wake. Appeal is more a protection to make sure termination gets done by the book, and can serve to help limit his liability in a lawsuit (not that there's likely to be any suits, since there were no injuries and no danger to the passengers once dispatch immediately pounced and executed the abort procedure).
Just like the administrative leave prior to the firing, appeal within the union contract is S.O.P. It'll be dispensed with quickly; this is as open-shut as it gets.
Appeal is a pretty much automatic formality, and any appeal filed immediately involves the union. Doesn't mean he has any greater than 0% of succeeding; he doesn't. Doesn't mean the union is thrilled to have to represent a guy who made a laughingstock out of the profession; they have to deal with the fallout of daily surveillance of the rest of the rule-obeying rank-and-file being increased in this dumbass' wake. Appeal is more a protection to make sure termination gets done by the book, and can serve to help limit his liability in a lawsuit (not that there's likely to be any suits, since there were no injuries and no danger to the passengers once dispatch immediately pounced and executed the abort procedure).
Just like the administrative leave prior to the firing, appeal within the union contract is S.O.P. It'll be dispensed with quickly; this is as open-shut as it gets.
CantabAmager
Active Member
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2014
- Messages
- 216
- Reaction score
- 0
Re: Driven By.... Uhh... Hello? Anybody?
Chieppo's out with his later report, in which he cites Shirley Leung as one of his sources. Chieppo isn't an idiot - he's a sharp guy - which makes his reports al l the more frustrating. He's not straight-up lying, but he's presenting very selective data to make a point. He's too smart for that not to be purposeful. I'm not going to hash it all out, with exception of the two particularly annoying points (which you'll roll your eyes at).
Point One: The MBTA has one of the lowest Fare Recovery ratios in the US. Chieppo presents the aggregate recovery ratio of every mode in the MBTA's wheelhouse. He then compares that aggregate ratio to services like BART (pseudo-CR heavy-rail). Amongst other mostly full-retinue providers (SEPTA - lower than MBTA aggregate, CTA, NJTRansit), the MBTA is in middle of the pack. Absolutely nowhere does he mention this discrepancy, nor does take the extra 10 minutes it would have taken to break recovery ratios down by mode.
Point 2: The MBTA has expanded more than any other agency and that expansion is crushing the MBTA's finances, therefore GLX should go on hold. Does Chieppo tell you which modes have been expanded the most? No. Does he explain the lack of legislative support of the MBTA in allocating funds to meet SIP reqs? No. Does he analyze the cost-effectiveness of expanding various modes? No. My favorite part:
No mention of ongoing SGR investments, which are buttressed by $3 billion in cap. investments over a 10-year period, but that's fair - the backlog is not a small problem. I just find it a little ironic that if the MBTA actually prioritized projects by "construction, operating,and maintenance costs" and not, say, basely political reasons, then GLX would have been up-and-running by 2000 and we'd still be waiting for OC restoration.
Anyways, it's nothing unexpected from Chieppo's standpoint.
Chieppo's out with his later report, in which he cites Shirley Leung as one of his sources. Chieppo isn't an idiot - he's a sharp guy - which makes his reports al l the more frustrating. He's not straight-up lying, but he's presenting very selective data to make a point. He's too smart for that not to be purposeful. I'm not going to hash it all out, with exception of the two particularly annoying points (which you'll roll your eyes at).
Point One: The MBTA has one of the lowest Fare Recovery ratios in the US. Chieppo presents the aggregate recovery ratio of every mode in the MBTA's wheelhouse. He then compares that aggregate ratio to services like BART (pseudo-CR heavy-rail). Amongst other mostly full-retinue providers (SEPTA - lower than MBTA aggregate, CTA, NJTRansit), the MBTA is in middle of the pack. Absolutely nowhere does he mention this discrepancy, nor does take the extra 10 minutes it would have taken to break recovery ratios down by mode.
Point 2: The MBTA has expanded more than any other agency and that expansion is crushing the MBTA's finances, therefore GLX should go on hold. Does Chieppo tell you which modes have been expanded the most? No. Does he explain the lack of legislative support of the MBTA in allocating funds to meet SIP reqs? No. Does he analyze the cost-effectiveness of expanding various modes? No. My favorite part:
No mention of ongoing SGR investments, which are buttressed by $3 billion in cap. investments over a 10-year period, but that's fair - the backlog is not a small problem. I just find it a little ironic that if the MBTA actually prioritized projects by "construction, operating,and maintenance costs" and not, say, basely political reasons, then GLX would have been up-and-running by 2000 and we'd still be waiting for OC restoration.
Anyways, it's nothing unexpected from Chieppo's standpoint.
Proposition Joe
Active Member
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2012
- Messages
- 307
- Reaction score
- 3
Re: Driven By.... Uhh... Hello? Anybody?
When I read that report earlier today I briefly thought that I had been sent back in time and was reading the Governor's panel report from April.
It's more "Reform Before Revenue" in which the reforms are service and labor cuts and the revenue is fare hikes.
When I read that report earlier today I briefly thought that I had been sent back in time and was reading the Governor's panel report from April.
It's more "Reform Before Revenue" in which the reforms are service and labor cuts and the revenue is fare hikes.
underground
Senior Member
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2007
- Messages
- 2,390
- Reaction score
- 3
Re: Driven By.... Uhh... Hello? Anybody?
Doesn't exactly scream "innovative," does it?
Doesn't exactly scream "innovative," does it?
Re: Driven By.... Uhh... Hello? Anybody?
Chieppo’s report notes that the T’s budgetary baseline is a $170M shortfall this year.
He then projects the following annual budget impacts from his recommendations:
1. Customer service - annual revenue boost assumed, but not projected
2. Fare increase - $60M increase in revenues
3. Stop expansion - annual budget impact not projected
4. Reform the ride - ($82M) annual cost reduction
5. Bus maintenance contracting - ($50M) annual cost reduction
6. End binding arbitration - annual cost reduction assumed, not projected
7. Shift pension fund - annual cost reduction assumed, not projected
In his intro, he notes that the T is spending $552M on state of good repair work for Sept 14 – Aug 15, but would need to spend $765M to actually get on path to burn off the $7.3B backlog over 25 years (a really minimalist goal). So we’d need to boost SGR spending by $213M per year to start working down the backlog at a snail’s pace.
So he has enumerated $60M in increased revenue and $132M in reduced costs (reform the Ride and bus maintenance), for a net improvement to the annual bottom line of $192M. But if we increase SGR spending by the $213M per year necessary to achieve the pathetically lame goal of working down the backlog over 25 years, we’ve now reached a $21M per year reduction in the T’s bottom line.
OK, his proposed “laser-like focus on customer service” (that phrase makes me puke in ANY context) will boost revenues as the hordes come flocking in to pay more fares, but he didn’t have the guts to project how much increased revenue there’d be. It’s hard to say what stopping expansion means to annual budgets without him saying what exactly will be cancelled (he implies the GLX is an obligation). However, I certainly feel that stopping all expansion such as Red/Blue connection puts very hard caps on increased ridership – I am on the Park Street Green Line platforms at rush hour each day and that transfer situation is slammed up against its limits right now. Laser-like focus on customer service plus higher fares will not make the Park Station platforms bigger or the crush of jostling humanity smoother. The arbitration and pension proposals would save some money, but he also didn’t have the guts to project how much. But if we’re generous, maybe all those increases get him a bit more than the $21 shortfall we were at upon the end of the prior paragraph.
This whole report, at the most favorable reading using all his assumptions, and giving him some $ credit on the places he didn’t project savings, amounts to shuffling things around to end up in about the same place, with a very modestly improved annual bottom line (maybe), and an incredibly slow pace of reduction on SGR backlog. This is not “Innovation”, this is tinkering. Or you could call it treading water, but with a different pattern of arm and leg motions.
Except for the customer service thing, which is a combination of “duh” level common sense mixed with empty blather (and is also pretty harmless despite how it makes me want to puke on first read), I don’t have any strong criticisms of his specific recommendations. I could live with most of them, or with variants thereof. They’d move annual ops in a better financial direction. The part about shielding low income riders from the impact of fare increases would have to have the very highest priority for me to support the rest of it.
However, he completely punts on all the swirling issues within that SGR backlog, and the replacement of rolling stock, and the complexities of how long-life capital projects can (and should) be differently funded than operations, and the potentially grave impacts to MA economic growth potentials if T expansion fails to meet growing needs, etc. Those are all the big kahuna issues for the T.
If this report were submitted by a bright student from Outer Nowhere Liberal Arts College as a junior honors thesis, I’d give it an A with lots of feedback about how to expand on it for a senior honors thesis. From the Harvard Kennedy School I expect a lot more. By Kennedy School standards, this is a lame ass skimpy 1/8 pound burger, on a stale Wonder bread bun, slathered in weak sauce.
Chieppo’s report notes that the T’s budgetary baseline is a $170M shortfall this year.
He then projects the following annual budget impacts from his recommendations:
1. Customer service - annual revenue boost assumed, but not projected
2. Fare increase - $60M increase in revenues
3. Stop expansion - annual budget impact not projected
4. Reform the ride - ($82M) annual cost reduction
5. Bus maintenance contracting - ($50M) annual cost reduction
6. End binding arbitration - annual cost reduction assumed, not projected
7. Shift pension fund - annual cost reduction assumed, not projected
In his intro, he notes that the T is spending $552M on state of good repair work for Sept 14 – Aug 15, but would need to spend $765M to actually get on path to burn off the $7.3B backlog over 25 years (a really minimalist goal). So we’d need to boost SGR spending by $213M per year to start working down the backlog at a snail’s pace.
So he has enumerated $60M in increased revenue and $132M in reduced costs (reform the Ride and bus maintenance), for a net improvement to the annual bottom line of $192M. But if we increase SGR spending by the $213M per year necessary to achieve the pathetically lame goal of working down the backlog over 25 years, we’ve now reached a $21M per year reduction in the T’s bottom line.
OK, his proposed “laser-like focus on customer service” (that phrase makes me puke in ANY context) will boost revenues as the hordes come flocking in to pay more fares, but he didn’t have the guts to project how much increased revenue there’d be. It’s hard to say what stopping expansion means to annual budgets without him saying what exactly will be cancelled (he implies the GLX is an obligation). However, I certainly feel that stopping all expansion such as Red/Blue connection puts very hard caps on increased ridership – I am on the Park Street Green Line platforms at rush hour each day and that transfer situation is slammed up against its limits right now. Laser-like focus on customer service plus higher fares will not make the Park Station platforms bigger or the crush of jostling humanity smoother. The arbitration and pension proposals would save some money, but he also didn’t have the guts to project how much. But if we’re generous, maybe all those increases get him a bit more than the $21 shortfall we were at upon the end of the prior paragraph.
This whole report, at the most favorable reading using all his assumptions, and giving him some $ credit on the places he didn’t project savings, amounts to shuffling things around to end up in about the same place, with a very modestly improved annual bottom line (maybe), and an incredibly slow pace of reduction on SGR backlog. This is not “Innovation”, this is tinkering. Or you could call it treading water, but with a different pattern of arm and leg motions.
Except for the customer service thing, which is a combination of “duh” level common sense mixed with empty blather (and is also pretty harmless despite how it makes me want to puke on first read), I don’t have any strong criticisms of his specific recommendations. I could live with most of them, or with variants thereof. They’d move annual ops in a better financial direction. The part about shielding low income riders from the impact of fare increases would have to have the very highest priority for me to support the rest of it.
However, he completely punts on all the swirling issues within that SGR backlog, and the replacement of rolling stock, and the complexities of how long-life capital projects can (and should) be differently funded than operations, and the potentially grave impacts to MA economic growth potentials if T expansion fails to meet growing needs, etc. Those are all the big kahuna issues for the T.
If this report were submitted by a bright student from Outer Nowhere Liberal Arts College as a junior honors thesis, I’d give it an A with lots of feedback about how to expand on it for a senior honors thesis. From the Harvard Kennedy School I expect a lot more. By Kennedy School standards, this is a lame ass skimpy 1/8 pound burger, on a stale Wonder bread bun, slathered in weak sauce.
F-Line to Dudley
Senior Member
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2010
- Messages
- 9,261
- Reaction score
- 9,269
Re: Driven By.... Uhh... Hello? Anybody?
You're probably giving the Kennedy School way too much credit. It's been a hack factory for vanity Blue Ribbon Panel membership jockeying and for vomiting out whitepapers like this into the void for almost as long as it's been producing the occasionally serviceable public sector insight.
You're probably giving the Kennedy School way too much credit. It's been a hack factory for vanity Blue Ribbon Panel membership jockeying and for vomiting out whitepapers like this into the void for almost as long as it's been producing the occasionally serviceable public sector insight.
Re: Driven By.... Uhh... Hello? Anybody?
True. I have seen some serious hackwork from them. But they occasionally rise to their reputation. Plus it's Friday, I've got a kid flying back into the country for the holidays, so I'm in a generous mood. Hence I went so easy on them in my final sentence.
True. I have seen some serious hackwork from them. But they occasionally rise to their reputation. Plus it's Friday, I've got a kid flying back into the country for the holidays, so I'm in a generous mood. Hence I went so easy on them in my final sentence.
Re: Driven By.... Uhh... Hello? Anybody?
A Christmas T poem from Aloisi:
http://commonwealthmagazine.org/transportation/twas-the-night-before/
A Christmas T poem from Aloisi:
http://commonwealthmagazine.org/transportation/twas-the-night-before/
Jahvon09
Senior Member
- Joined
- Oct 2, 2011
- Messages
- 3,324
- Reaction score
- 806
Re: Driven By.... Uhh... Hello? Anybody?
His defense lawyer is also trying to help him get the firing reversed.
But he committed a reckless & dangerous act. What was his employer supposed to do, let it slide? So far, those drivers who have been involved in accidents that could've been avoided by them, have been Donald Trumped.
Like you said, his chances of winning the case are slim & none. And if it ever goes to court, the judge will more than likely throw it out & laugh at them. You mess up and it is your fault, it will cost you your job. Bottom line.
His defense lawyer is also trying to help him get the firing reversed.
But he committed a reckless & dangerous act. What was his employer supposed to do, let it slide? So far, those drivers who have been involved in accidents that could've been avoided by them, have been Donald Trumped.
Like you said, his chances of winning the case are slim & none. And if it ever goes to court, the judge will more than likely throw it out & laugh at them. You mess up and it is your fault, it will cost you your job. Bottom line.
Last edited: