[Earlscourt_Lad]

In light of the strike, an idea that might be worth discussing is the outsourcing of transit, or some components thereof. Certainly in the UK there have been private bus operators for some time now, would such an idea work here I wonder.

There's also the concept of tendering operations, with the current TTC workers bidding as well as outside competitors.

Thoughts?

 

[299 bloor call control.]

Imagine if the TTC put the Eglinton Crosstown or any one of the subway lines up for tender and the MTR Corporation placed/won a bid? That would be amazing for the system.

MTR has already branched out beyond Hong Kong are building and operating railways in China and the UK. I believe they had placed a bid in for the Canada Line as well.

 

[tempperm]

yes...plz...

 

[Earlscourt_Lad]

That's an interesting idea: farm approved subways out to private operators to build and operate. Gives the potential to actually realize things like the DLR, Eglinton, Queen, Etc.

Who/what is MTR?

 

[urbanfan89]

Needless to say, you'll need Thatcher-style tactics to break the union, which would trigger a much longer and painful strike.

Great idea, though.

 

[down on the upside]

I think privatising the bus system simlar to London may be somethign the ttc should consider. Also outsourcing design to more competent firms would also be more benficial.

 

[Mustapha]

I think privatising the bus system simlar to London may be somethign the ttc should consider. Also outsourcing design to more competent firms would also be more benficial.

Agreed. I have clients in London. Go often. A wonderful sprawling system; reasonably priced; always constructing. Anyone connected with the TTC could learn from them.

What's needed are visionaries. Not just managers.

I'd take the job for $1 a year I could still work at my company.

We'd be clearing the dirt out of the infilled Eglington West tunnel starting Friday.

 

[freshcutgrass]

Last time I checked, private companies are interested in making profits. The only way they can make a profit on what is essentially a subsidized service, is to either lower service or raise fares. I doubt they could run a more efficient capital/operating show to make up that gap. Especially in the case of comparing it to the TTC.

If they happened to have themselves a real juicy route that did indeed run a profit, then it would be making the balance of the TTC less cost-efficient, as it relies on these kinds of routes to keep service up on less efficient routes.

In the end, I think it's the end user that loses when you try and either replace or combine public/private essential services.

I know it's hard to get your head around, especially in light of the recent situation, but the TTC runs a very comprehensive, tight ship, and the reason is because it's completely in-house, and has more experience at knowing and servicing their clients (Torontonians).

 

[Admiral Beez]

The only way they can make a profit on what is essentially a subsidized service, is to either lower service or raise fares.

Um, you missed one, how about increasing sales/revenue. Keep the fares as they are, but use the efficiencies (yes, let's start a debate about the existence or lack thereof of efficiencies in the private sector vs. public, that'd be fun) to improve service.

I imagine someone is about to post that poorly used routes would likely be dumped....as they should be. If you want transit, use it or lose it.

The current system is not working, as we're being held ransom by the employees. It's time to rejig the balance of power towards those that pay for the system as opposed to those that work in it.

 

[RedRocket191]

I imagine someone is about to post that poorly used routes would likely be dumped....as they should be.

Very bad idea!

Cutting routes don't just affect that route. Cutting a bus route to an industrial district, for example, means that workers have to use their cars for the entire trip and add to the congestion we're trying to curb.

Reduce service (but only to a minimum standard) or convert them to community shuttles.

 

[Earlscourt_Lad]

The current system is not working, as we're being held ransom by the employees. It's time to rejig the balance of power towards those that pay for the system as opposed to those that work in it.

I think that's what I find intriguing about the idea of outsourcing, it allows for competition. Competition is about the only thing that can "rejig" the balance in favour of users rather than operators.

 

[Glen]

I know it's hard to get your head around, especially in light of the recent situation, but the TTC runs a very comprehensive, tight ship, and the reason is because it's completely in-house, and has more experience at knowing and servicing their clients (Torontonians).

Explain then the rational for the Spadina LRT. Why would the TTC spend 200 million to replace a profitable bus route with an LRT that now loses $40,00 every Mon-Fri. ? Or does 'servicing' mean spending lavishly/foolishly ?

Lets bring competition to the TTC. Subsidise each passenger km to the same extent for private companies.

 

[drum118]

If one reads the services changes, they will see TTC stills kill the idea of running bus service from the Condo's at Humber Bay to the city core.

The issues of running express buses has been around for years and always shot down by staff regardless if it was double or triple fare.

Before Rick decided to move on, he wanted a test done like most test routes to see if it a good idea or no and was shot down by his own staff as well Howard.

There is already private bus service for this area today and it only reinforce there is a need to look at what the private sector can or cannot do to better service the city today.

Yes the Private company's are in business to make a profit, but depending how it is structure at all levels, it could cost less to operate and still charge rides the same TTC fare.

 

[down on the upside]

Last time I checked, private companies are interested in making profits. The only way they can make a profit on what is essentially a subsidized service, is to either lower service or raise fares. I doubt they could run a more efficient capital/operating show to make up that gap. Especially in the case of comparing it to the TTC.

For starters I think that would effectively kill the absurd $27/hour wage bus drivers are currently paid by separating a significant part of the union and dividing it further into companies. I believe regular school bus drivers make around $17/hour which would be huge savings.

Also having capital work designed in-house seems a bit unnecessary given that the TTC has only built the sheppard subway and Downsview extension in the last 2 decades. outsourcing that function so that we only pay when we actually do something could save money.

 

[299 bloor call control.]

Who/what is MTR?

MTR Corporation is the operator of the railway systems in Hong Kong. They recently merged (at the government's insistence) with the KCR Corporation to create a single entity charged with the construction and operation of the entire rail network.

It's a very good model to operate on, really. The government retains ownership of the rail lines and the corporation makes back its money in both fares and station development. Some lines are subsidized partially by the government, but only for capital costs.

This is how I see it - put Eglinton Crosstown out to tender, government retains ownership of the system, integrate it with Presto's eventual region-wide fare structure, bid company gets any profits from the line and ownership of air rights with more significant plots of land as well that are currently under government ownership, such as the York Centre lands, Renforth gateway lands, etc.