I'm sorry but from an organizational perspective that is a complete failure.

Bus drivers should not be taking things like forcing payments into their own hands, especially if it compromises their safety and security. If it is the difference between getting into an altercation with someone, or letting them on for free, drivers should be instructed to let the person in for free. If translink isn't doing that shame on them.

I mean come on every bank, and convenience store tells their employees to just give up the money, it's never going to be worth it to be a hero, and you are going to sit here an try and tell me translink is too dumb to realize that 3 bucks isn't worth risking one of their drivers health and well being? Fuck off.

With the statement of it "spreading like wildfire" as soon as drivers document people who get on the bus often without payment, translink should dispatch some of their overpaid security guards to deal with the issue. If they nix a bus route because of fare evasion, without doing proper due diligence then I don't know what to say about their management.

i totally agree with you there. but there has to be a fine line.

they are told to never enforce payment simply because of what you pointed out, but at the same time, you can't always just say go ahead and let them ride free. it is a part of their job to collect payment.

it is unfortunate that some people just snap and assault drivers on a simple request to pay.

in regards to nixing a bus route because of fare evasion, its not just that, its overall revenue lost. its sad to say that when buses don't generate enough revenue to cover the cost of running it, they will reallocate the bus or change the route. the worst thing is that its always the smaller routes that go and it services outer reaches of the network.

Yup, I've already been spat on once and verbally been told to go "Fungula" on separate occasions. Gotta let that shit go, or it will eat you up and you will be a miserable fuck for the rest of your career.

to note, I didn't even ask them to pay. Just the mention of " Sir fare is $2.75 " some individuals will go ape shit on you.

Also why does translink pays more for people to work weekends? Say if your shift is form Wed to Sun you get pay 50% more on Sunday Vs regular days. You don't see police, fireman, nurse, doctor, call center service etc etc gets pay more for working on Sun.

People who works for translink fully knows they will need to work weekends. Why pay them more?

Well there goes the CEO

TransLink CEO Ian Jarvis steps down 'to restore public confidence'

It's a baby step in the right direction, but I can't help to think that the resignation is a little too late.

With the upcoming all important referendum, the move will simply be seen as little more than a token political gesture. Interpreted another way, this Ian Jarvis dude is at least smart enough to get the hell out now. The referendum has riled up the hornet's nest of hate towards TransLink because of its long accumulated past failures, and regardless of how things play out in the referendum, whoever heads TransLink is still going to be made into the general target of hate and get blamed for any of TransLink's past, current, and future work, regardless of whether they are actual failures or moderate success. (And we all know outright success is all but impossible given TransLink's current structure, operation and governance model.)

IMO, the only way "to restore public confidence" is to hit the big [RESET] button -- dissolve TransLink as it is, and revise it from the ground up.

The yes side is feeling the heat now. I'm still voting no

While I do agree with your point. My wife is a nurse and she does get paid a premium for working nights and sundays, however I'm talking 2 bucks an hour extra, not 15-20.

While I also agree, his use of plural makes my head hurt, so I ignored him.

:joy:

So they're paying ex-CEO to stay on till June, interim CEO while spending resources to look for a 3rd CEO

And this is supposed to help grow our confidence...:derp:

Don't worry, I'm sure the ex-CEO will continue to suck tax dollars to pay for that multi-million dollar pension and golden parachute he surely has.

This is part of the collective agreement that was agreed upon by translink and the union. The reasons for the extra pay on sunday has already been stated in the thread.

It's like saying we know our usual work week is 9-5 mon to Friday but why pay extra on a a Monday when there is a Stat day?

:suspicious:
Because its federal law.
The fact the union negotiated it is neither here nor there when it comes to the tax payer agreeing with the way a publicly funded company spends its money. Just because the government agreed on a massive overinflated pension for any specific politician doesn't mean its appropriate use of funds. This is no different. This was translink negotiating a stupid bonus that they shouldn't because of lack of accountability for the funds.
Its a perfect example of the "fuck it we will just get more money" attitude that makes people dislike this organization.

June 20-fucking-16????

God I hope that's a typo, because a 16 month severance package is fucking outrageous.

Edit: Fuck, 2016 is right.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/britis...down-1.2953785

because its federal law. who made up those laws? where did the bases for that law come from?

it is no different than the collective agreement. these "laws" were founded based on how they want their employees to be treated. just like how federal law is there so that you are fairly treated.

i work, i get paid by the company. you work, and you get paid by your company. how the company makes the money and how they spend the money is of no concern as long as you get paid.

and if this negotiating was to go south, a strike might have happened (as it has before). you think that looks better in the public eye? i betcha not. it is another cost of operating a "business". sure they may be paying their employees more for this bonus, but having a strike would mean a bigger revenue lost where as negotiating can happen again 3 years down the road and they can try to get rid of this clause.

would you really care if the company you work for falls under the same heat as translink? i highly doubt it. you just need to get paid at the end of the day.

^
The mentality on RS is this: if it's a public organization, employees have to work for wages lower than what they would get from private companies because they're using taxpayer dollars.

I think it's worth mentioning that inTransit BC, the SNC-Lavalin affiliated company that runs the Canada Line, had to negotiate with unionized employees of the Canada Line. Even if Translink played hardball with the unions in the next round of bargaining, I'm not sure if they would be able to achieve a huge rollback of benefits that have previously been negotiated. After all, it's not like Translink has the ability to pull a Ronald Reagan and just fire all of the workers and hire people at 20% less. When you're dealing with entrenched unions, it just doesn't work that way. Ask Christy Clark about her experience with the BCTF.

It's easy for people on here to rail against Translink for being shitty negotiators. Most people here have no idea how negotiation is done between large organizations, particularly public sector ones.

^ wrong.

The mentality of RS is that they should get the same as what the private sector gets, and not an inflated rate with extra benefits.

Then, what's the equivalent wage for a bus driver who works for a private company? How do people on RS know that what Translink negotiates isn't fair market value? I work in negotiations for a public organization and in my experience, we can be pretty stingy sometimes (we would be out of business pretty quickly if we weren't). People just look at the benefits and think - wow, I don't get any of that in my job. I'm talking about the total package - benefits vs perks that are not available to people working for public organizations (such as bonuses).

a 5 second google search shows in Vancouver, between 14 and 24, with the median being $20 / hour. Private companies generally don't get many benefits if any, and I'm going out on a limb, no bonuses either.


I don't really have any problem with wages for the workers though. Who wouldn't want to get the most amount of money for their work? We all know that unions demand much higher wages and benefits. The whole union discussion is a whole other can of worms that I can bitch about for years ...

The problem with translink is definitely at the executive and management level.

$35k per month... gosh what do you do with all that money...
I know there are ppl make more than that in BC, but I still can't even comprehend how much money that is... most ppl's year wage...

Well, that's what a contract is right? He's not getting fired and his salary is what? Less than 0.05% of the operating budget of TransLink. That's one new bus. TransLink could either keep paying him and having him as the CEO or get him to step down and find someone else.

I'm not worried about them paying his salary, I'm more interested in getting someone new that can do a better job.

Even if you cut the executive by 90%, have one CEO (no VPs, no board of directors, and have advisors work for free) and hire retail store managers on a 50K/year salary to manage technical staff and analysts (and pay them $14/hour because after all, they should be grateful for a job) you're not going to somehow build a new light rail system to Langley with the savings. It's preposterous.

The whole campaign has been mismanaged and it's doomed to fail. Even if you don't support public transit (whether it's beneath you, or because it doesn't factor into your lifestyle), it's hard to deny the fact is there are more cars in Metro Vancouver today than 20 years ago and that roads are becoming more congested despite major projects such as the Highway 1 overhaul and south perimeter road. So, what's the alternative? I have yet to hear of a good one.

^^ How about let's start by saying No. Give translink a reality check so they know they can't just keep asking for more money and mismanage it.