You are currently browsing the monthly archive for August 2008.
It’s way too soon to tell for sure. But if press accounts are accurate, fact-finder Jane Rigler’s proposal may be a workable solution for the Port Authority labor dispute:
- 3% annual wage increases (the Port Authority is offering 0%).
- Increasing healthcare premium payments for employees and future retirees (union wants to keep the status quo.)
- Starts to get a handle on retiree healthcare costs by requiring some workers who retire before age 65 to pay 100% of their health insurance premiums (union wants to keep the status quo).
- Does not address the growing absenteeism problem, OT procedures, and other work rule changes (Port Authority wants but the union opposes.)
Said fact-finder Rigler of her recommended settlement: “Local 85 employees will see their wages increase while, at the same time, continue to enjoy an enviable benefits package.”
Until the numbers are crunched, it’s impossible to say whether her proposal does enough to control the Port Authority’s $685 million health care liability for current workers and future/current retirees. And a contract without work rule changes will continue to make managing the Port Authority a task more difficult than it needs to be.
The two sides have until Sept 13 to either accept or reject the recommended settlement. If either rejects it, then negotiations continue but the union would then be legally permitted to go on strike if it chooses.
Posted by: Ken Zapinski
Lola S. of Greenfield’s letter to the Post-Gazette raises a couple points that beg to be addressed. She criticizes the “free” rides that senior citizens receive on Port Authority buses and trains and says charging them 25 cents or 50 cents “might generate the money needed to get the taxpayers off the hook.”
Sorry, Lola, but it wouldn’t. The state already pays the Port Authority for each senior citizen rider, using money raised from lottery ticket sales. So, while the senior citizens don’t pay for themselves, the Port Authority is already making collecting fares for those rides.
Also, the Port Authority had 67,271,689 riders (including senior citizens) in the budget year that ended June 30.* If each of those riders paid an additional 50 cents, it would have raised just under $34 million. During that same budget year, the Port Authority received about $240 million from federal, state, and local taxpayers to fund operations.
The Port Authority was set up in the 1960s because the private companies that operated the county’s bus, rail, and trolley lines were losing money and would have eliminated transit service. The government stepped in because the community believed transit was a public service that deserved taxpayer support. The Port Authority was never intended to be financed completely through the fares paid by riders.
Individuals can agree or disagree with that policy choice. I agree with it. And as taxpayers who finance the lion’s share of the Port Authority’s operations, we can – and should – work to ensure that we receive the best value for our money, and that the Port Authority operates in the most effective way possible in providing public transit service for the people of southwestern Pennsylvania.
Posted by: Ken Zapinski
* I would love to link to the Port Authority’s annual or monthly ridership report to show the source of the number, but it’s not on the website.
More data comparing us to other transit systems around the country from the Peer Review report commissioned by the Port Authority. Today’s factoid: Comparing how much it costs each agency to operate one hour of bus service (driver, fuel, mechanics, scheduling, etc.) (from Figure 5-1).
Port Authority of Allegheny County: $125 per hour.
- Baltimore: $127 per hour
- Seattle: $126 per hour
- Portland: $113 per hour
- St. Louis: $109 per hour
- Buffalo: $102 per hour
- Cleveland: $100 per hour
- Milwaukee: $94 per hour
- Minneapolis: $93 per hour
- Denver: $93 per hour
- Average of the 50 largest transit systems in the country: $117 per hour
Operating cost per hour is useful for comparing different systems because it tends to minimize differences between communities such as weather, topography, neighborhood density, etc. It doesn’t measure how effective and productive in attracting riders the service is, which are affected by those factors. It just tells you how much it costs a community to put one hour of bus service on the street.
And what is the biggest factor in determining the Port Authority’s hourly operating cost? Union wages and benefits, which make up 2/3 of the overall budget.
Posted by: Ken Zapinski
There’s an explosive report out there with reams of data that detail a lengthy list of the Port Authority’s problems — its history of poor productivity compared to other transit agencies, its high cost of operation, even the amount that taxpayers have to shell out for each and every bus and T ride. But the most interesting thing about the report is that it is the Port Authority taking a critical look at itself (large pdf document).
The report points out many of the same problems highlighted by the Allegheny Conference, the Allegheny Institute, and others in recent years. But this time around it is CEO Steve Bland and the board who are taking a realistic look at the agency, not glossing over problems or turning a deaf ear to concerns. Unless they know what’s wrong, they can’t fix it.
The Peer Review report was produced by the Port Authority’s consultant as part of the Connect 09 system redesign process now underway. Executing a successful redesign and changing the way the current rail and bus network operates is as important to the future of the Port Authority as securing a competitive labor contract.
I’ll have lots more to say about the report in the future but for now I’ll leave you with one of my favorite tidbits in the report: the number of Port Authority bus stops compared to other benchmark systems (Figure 5-1). The Port Authority has 20.3 bus stops for every square mile of its service area. Portland and Seattle, two locales that transit advocates love to gush over, have 13.2 and 9.2, respectively. The only benchmark system with a greater concentration of bus stops is Milwaukee, at 25.3 stops per square mile.
Maybe that’s why Milwaukee also ended up on this list…
Posted by: Ken Zapinski
