MBTA Winter 2015: Failure and Recovery

And what % of Boston's entire workforce reported to work on these days? For all we know, the T could have been comparatively flush with employees. And I'm not surprised that fewer staff reported to work during a blizzard than on the same day last year, when the weather was likely milder. Lastly, there is no mention of what types of employees called out. Context, context, context. It seems to be lacking here.

"Mission Critical" employees were told to come in or to stay at work if they were already there. The edict goes out the day before every major storm, and I don't believe this was any different.

"In the future, T workers’ vacation plans could take a backseat during major storms, DePaola said, adding he does not blame the system’s problems this year on the absences."
 
^ Right? When the T is operating at severely reduced capacities why would all these drivers, inspectors, etc. report to work? Just to stand around? If that had happened people like Westie would use photos of of bored T workers as evidence that they're useless employees...
 
I saw Whigh's post this morning and couldn't form a coherent response to the article because it is such a load of f'ing bullshit. The past 2 posts sum up the thoughts that ran through my head. Without a breakdown of who didn't report to work and other various points of context, the article is useless.

Probably some of the worst "journalism" the Herald has ever done.
 
datadyne007 said:
I saw Whigh's post this morning and couldn't form a coherent response to the article because it is such a load of f'ing bullshit. The past 2 posts sum up the thoughts that ran through my head. Without a breakdown of who didn't report to work and other various points of context, the article is useless.

Probably some of the worst "journalism" the Herald has ever done.
Click to expand...

Data -- there is no argument -- Certainly by the time of the 3rd storm cited above when
980 staffers — or 17 percent of the all MBTA employees — didn’t report to work
Click to expand...

Find an organization in the private sector where close to 1/4 of the employees are absent on an:
"All hands on Deck" situation -- if not all the way to:
" Person your possible overseas contingency approximate quasi-locations"

and you are looking at Radio Shack -- i.e. not just Bankruptcy but Dissolution

If I'm Dr. Scott -- I show up that morning with a shovel and expect my executive staff to do the same

The Herald journalism might have been incomplete -- but it is still far more productive than pouring forth excuses when the full investigation and review is not anywhere d
 
I wonder how many T workers didn't report to work because... you know.. . the T wasn't running.
 
Few things:
- 17% is nowhere near 1/4. You went to MIT. You should know this. I'd allow "close to 1/5"
- The T was operating at severely reduced capacities. The staff was not needed and likely couldn't even get to work because they take the T.
- The trains were dead and tracks were lost. Nothing further could be done. Mission critical staff reported to work as was iterated during all the press conferences.
- 83% of staff overall WERE there.
 
It's also worth noting that when there's a blizzard, schools shut down and daycare centers close. I'd guess the majority of T workers' jobs can't be done remotely, and I'd also guess some T employees have children and are either single parents or both parents work. There's no magic wand for that problem. The T has major problems, but people taking unscheduled time off as a result of some of the worst snow we've ever had is not one of them.
 
cozzyd said:
I wonder how many T workers didn't report to work because... you know.. . the T wasn't running.
Click to expand...

Cozzy -- while Feb 9 was a

On Feb. 9, the Monday after a weekend storm began that would bring nearly 2 feet of snow, 980 staffers — or 17 percent of the all MBTA employees — didn’t report to work.

The T was forced to suspend all rail service on Feb. 10 — a day after the agency suffered systemwide delays and stalled trains, including one case where 48 passengers were trapped in a Red Line car disabled in a power outage. The move to cancel all trains left thousands who rely on public transportation without a way to get to work.
Click to expand...
the key is the number of people who didn't report to work the day the T died and there was no snow

Contrast the T with Massport and Logan -- Somehow despite not having the airlines schedule any flights -- Logan stayed open and available just in case

That's all about the definition of Critical Infrastructure and Essential Employees

Logan also regularly conducts drills of "Just in Case"
 
^You do realize that people generally don't fly to their jobs at Logan, right? Find me statistics on the percentage of Logan employees who did not come to work that day. Guaranteed that it's a similar rate.
 
datadyne007 said:
Few things:
- 17% is nowhere near 1/4. You went to MIT. You should know this. I'd allow "close to 1/5"
- The T was operating at severely reduced capacities. The staff was not needed and likely couldn't even get to work because they take the T.
- The trains were dead and tracks were lost. Nothing further could be done. Mission critical staff reported to work as was iterated during all the press conferences.
- 83% of staff overall WERE there.
Click to expand...

Data -- 17% is close enough to a number most would immediately grasp -- i.e. if I ask my neighbor who also went to MIT for a 1/5 of a gallon of deicer I'd probably get a quart

You certainly could not know in advance that the staff was unneeded as the collapse of the system was progressive "The day the T-died .. .were singing ......"

Trains were dead -- ok -- but a lot of it was tracks were buried and that can be remedied by "horrors" able-bodied folks with shovels

I wouldn't trust the outgoing administrators to know what a critical staff was - - the press conference was all about attempt to CYA

We'll know what really happened in the next few weeks -- this Wintah of Discontent for the T passenger and T organization was something between the "surprises" of Pearl Harbor and the Battle of the Bulge
 
bigeman312 said:
^You do realize that people generally don't fly to their jobs at Logan, right? Find me statistics on the percentage of Logan employees who did not come to work that day. Guaranteed that it's a similar rate.
Click to expand...

Bigeman -- the key to the T was the Snow Flu -- the fact that of all the absences on the "Snow Days" -- T employees preferentially used "Sick Days" over vacation or personal days -- that's indicative of two aspects of the absences:
  • 1. the absence was not planned well in advance -- so it was the snow storm
  • 2. use it or lose it sick-days were the currency of the realm

Both of these are the key characterists of an organization "going through the motions" -- hardly the passionate commitment according to Dr. Scott.

Today's Herald in a story about the new head of the Registry quotes DOT Secretary Pollock about the interim staff changes:
http://www.bostonherald.com/news_op...rlie_baker_names_erin_deveney_as_new_rmv_boss
Baker’s new Secretary of Transportation Stephanie Pollack recently told Herald Radio that she will demand results from leadership within MassDOT as delayed service continues to plague the commuter rail and the T.

“Whether or not this new leadership configuration is the ‘A Team,’ to me, will be determined by their performance,” she said. “It doesn’t matter how nice they are, it doesn’t matter what they say ... if the trains are running on time more consistently and they restore their full schedule, then that means it’s the right leadership team — if that doesn’t happen, then it’s not good enough.”
Click to expand...
 
Any thoughts on this article?

http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2015/03/09/mbta-spending-paradox/rpTmflub694C1IT4cble2H/story.html

We have a spending problem apparently.

"“The thing I find so disappointing about this is everybody just says we should raise taxes,” he said, adding later, “They don’t talk about the fact that the operating budget for the T over the last seven or eight years has gone up by 50 percent.”

Baker’s math was close enough; the T’s budget has grown 44 percent in the last eight years. And the implication was clear: The agency has a spending problem."
 
kevtron2000 said:
Any thoughts on this article?

http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2015/03/09/mbta-spending-paradox/rpTmflub694C1IT4cble2H/story.html

We have a spending problem apparently.

"“The thing I find so disappointing about this is everybody just says we should raise taxes,” he said, adding later, “They don’t talk about the fact that the operating budget for the T over the last seven or eight years has gone up by 50 percent.”

Baker’s math was close enough; the T’s budget has grown 44 percent in the last eight years. And the implication was clear: The agency has a spending problem."
Click to expand...

Why did operating costs increase so significantly? Because fuel & utility costs exploded year after year and continue to.

From the D'Alessandro Report:
*Please note you cannot see the top of the "Total" debt service on this image. I had to cut it off for the screenshot. It goes waaaaay up to $515 mil.

Sr74UeY.png


This chart also shows that something that was supposed to be revenue, ended up being a deficit: the sales tax. The report makes it clear that the sales tax/forward funding shortfall doesn't account for all of the T's financial woes, but accounts for at least some - a piece in the puzzle.
 
Last edited:
Why doesn't this deal go on the open market? Why is Massport buying this land?


MBTA sells South Boston waterfront land to Massport for $7M

Mar 10, 2015, 2:07pm EDT

Catherine CarlockReal Estate Editor-
Boston Business Journal
Email | Twitter
The Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority has sold a 17.8-acre portfolio of properties between East First Street and the Reserved Channel in South Boston to the Massachusetts Port Authority for $7 million, according to a Suffolk County deed.

The lots include 789,158 square feet of land adjacent to the City Point bus terminal and stretch from the Reserved Channel to East First Street along an unused portion of O Street. The parcel is the site of a former MBTA power station, which was decommissioned and demolished back in 2009, according to MBTA spokesman Joe Pesaturo. The site serves as storage of traps and equipment affiliated with the Boston Harbor Lobsterman Association, but is otherwise vacant.

The MBTA had owned the parcel since 1911. The deed shows that the $7 million transaction was executed March 3 — a day before Frank DePaola was set to take over as interim general manager of the MBTA after Beverly Scott's abrupt resignation announcement.

"Like all non-fare revenue generated by the MBTA, the proceeds from this transaction will help fund the MBTA's operating budget," Pesaturo wrote in an email.

Massport did not immediately return messages seeking comment on its future plans for the property.
Click to expand...
 
BussesAin'tTrains said:
Why would the state adopt an anti-tax group's metric for fixing the T?
Click to expand...

Because the Voters repealed the gas tax indexing. Also, the Senate President Rosenberg, Governor Baker, and the House Speaker Deleo all agree that there will be no new tax increases to balance the budget. They will be doing reforms as stated in this video below. In this video, around 5 minute mark, Braude talks about transportation. "kicking the can" on MBTA has been a concern by someone. Later on, the Senate President says that "we can't have a world class transportation system" in the near future, "if we aren't willing to pay for it." So... Reforming is the only option at the moment, but if Baker's MBTA commission says there has to be tax increases, then Baker might raise taxes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VFnAYHF7zmE
 
The Massachusetts Taxpayers Association is an ideological group. Of course they'd advocate the neutering of the expensive MBTA. Thing is (and call me crazy for saying so) Charlie Baker is not Scott Walker in moderate clothing. The goal isn't going to be busting the MBTA into something different. I'd be very surprised if his MBTA working group comes back with any recommendations that would suggest such a thing. I'm always willing to be proven wrong, but all this squealing going on as if Massachusetts is going to go the way of Wisconsin is overblown nonsense.
 
BussesAin'tTrains said:
The Massachusetts Taxpayers Association is an ideological group. Of course they'd advocate the neutering of the expensive MBTA. Thing is (and call me crazy for saying so) Charlie Baker is not Scott Walker in moderate clothing. The goal isn't going to be busting the MBTA into something different. I'd be very surprised if his MBTA working group comes back with any recommendations that would suggest such a thing. I'm always willing to be proven wrong, but all this squealing going on as if Massachusetts is going to go the way of Wisconsin is overblown nonsense.
Click to expand...

Ya. Our politics isn't the same as Wisconsin's. Baker campaigned differently this time around, so he isn't going to try divisive ideas. But who knows.... He is only in office for a couple months, but judging by the looks of things....the MBTA isn't going to get increased revenues, but rather getting reallocated spending, reforms, and spending cuts.
 
BussesAin'tTrains said:
The Massachusetts Taxpayers Association is an ideological group. Of course they'd advocate the neutering of the expensive MBTA. Thing is (and call me crazy for saying so) Charlie Baker is not Scott Walker in moderate clothing. The goal isn't going to be busting the MBTA into something different. I'd be very surprised if his MBTA working group comes back with any recommendations that would suggest such a thing. I'm always willing to be proven wrong, but all this squealing going on as if Massachusetts is going to go the way of Wisconsin is overblown nonsense.
Click to expand...

Agreed. We have crazy and dysfunctional politics here, but not Wisconsin level crazy.

Baker needed suburban votes to win his election and he did better than most Republican candidates in traditional Democratic strongholds like Boston, too. Which of those factors will be most critical to his re-election hopes? Hard to say, but I am confident that Baker feels under pressure to get the T running better, especially the commuter rail (where I think his strongest base of support lies). I am far from his biggest fan, but I will be very surprised if he turns out to be ideological enough to advocate breaking up the T or privatizing it wholesale or whatever the MTA might like. I say that also based on the make-up of his special commission.

DeLeo is looking like far more of an impediment to proper T reform so far, but his instincts seem to be to starve it so long as he gets to keep being Speaker (his T-riding constituents be damned), rather than privatize it. We'll see how it plays out, but I doubt we see a big push to privatize in either the legislature or from baker. Also, name the investor who'd take it on without dumping the debt on the state and demanding huge taxpayer subsidies?

On the gas tax, while I was also disappointed in the message the voters sent, I don't believe the gas tax makes sense any more even for highway support, much less for broader transportation funding. We need to completely rethink the entire revenue stream for cars, rail, bus, bike, pedestrian improvements, you name it. I am not holding my breath we get there any time soon, but the gas tax defeat could end up looking like a useful step in retrospect, years hence.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top