Archive for August, 2010
Aug
06
From Brazil to NYC, an R160 arrives
Posted by: | Comments
A few weeks ago, Transit announced that it had accepted the delivery of the final R160 units. With that order of cars, the next push to upgrade the rolling stock would involve the R179s, and the city’s fleet of subway cars is getting newer all the time.
Yesterday, in a great behind-the-scenes glimpse, the good folks at Transit’s NYCTSubwayScoop Twitter account published a series of photos concerning the new rolling stock. They traced the origins of the car from its production in Brazil to Hornell, New York, where the cars are assembled to the train yards in the city where the cars are put on the rails.
My favorite shot is the one atop this post. The new car is wrapped so nicely, and when the engineers at Transit open it up, they’ll find one of 1662 new subway train cars awaiting service.
Aug
06
DiNapoli audit targets overtime but says nothing new
Posted by: | Comments
For the past eight months, MTA officials have waged a war against overtime. In December, CEO and Chairman Jay Walder highlighted the overtime issue, and again in May, he spoke about how the authority will try to limit overtime shifts in order to save money. In between, New York State Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli urged the MTA to rein in the overtime.
It is no great surprise, then, that DiNapoli’s latest audit of the MTA reveals a “culture of acceptance” that has enabled what he terms overtime abuse. It’s hardly a groundbreaking finding, but it reinforces what Walder has said about the MTA’s work rules. “Uncontrolled overtime has been the rule rather than the exception at the MTA,” DiNapoli said. “The MTA is cutting services, raising fares and tolls and laying-off employees, but it should be doing more to control expenses. Overtime shouldn’t equate to twice someone’s annual salary. When scores of employees are earning more in overtime than they make in salary, it’s time for the MTA to change the culture of acceptance to a culture of accountability.”
The audit simply reinforced Walder’s numbers. DiNapoli claims that 140 employees were able to more than double their salaries last year by exploiting the MTA’s overtime rules. Most of the workers were Metro-North or Long Island Rail Road workers, but some came from Transit as well. His press release comes with a table, and the audit — available here as a PDF — delves further into the agency breakdown.
On a case-by-case basis, DiNapoli found widespread overtime, as he would at any large organization. More than 3200 workers received overtime pay equal to at least half of their annual salaries, he said. Overtime accrued as workers replaced those out on sick leave even if replacements weren’t needed; and he found “unjustified or undocumented work” in 77 percent of overtime billing.
Yet despite the fact that overtime billing has risen by 32 percent over the last four years and despite his findings, DiNapoli identified just $56 million in overtime savings. Mostly, he said, the MTA should adopt practices it already said it would implement. He urged them to “match work schedules to work opportunities to reduce the need for overtime; restrict overtime budgets to specific targets for overtime reduction; and follow up on 59 questionable overtime payments identified by auditors.” As Comptroller’s reports go, this one is a pretty tame one, and a ten percent cost savings hardly seems worth the price of the audit.
For its part, the MTA stressed how these findings came as no surprise, and it reiterated its pledge to control overtime costs. “The comptroller’s audit confirms what we reported earlier this year and reinforces the need for the aggressive actions we’re taking to reduce unnecessary overtime,” the agency said in a statement. “We will do our part, but active participation from our labor unions is the only way to make the type of impact we all want.”
Interestingly, the news coverage of the audit revealed more surprising results than DiNapoli’s report did. As WNYC’s Matthew Schuerman noted, the MTA has had to spend more on overtime due to station agent dismissals than it had anticipated, and some union leaders claim that the MTA now would have saved money by keeping the axed agents on board. The authority says this is a temporary problem that has “persisted” longer than expected, but it is no where to be found in DiNapoli’s report.
This is DiNapoli’s 13th audit of the MTA since 2007, and by now, he’s charting familiar territory. The MTA knows it needs to control overtime, and it knew this reality well before DiNapoli started working on this report. If the Comptroller wants to sink his teeth into something juicy, he should examine the organizational structure of the authority as a whole. Otherwise, telling us what we already know doesn’t advance the dialogue.
Aug
05
Highlighting some innovative subway advertisement
Posted by: | CommentsIn a certain sense, subway advertisement is a great untapped medium in New York City. A business looking to reach a captive audience could do far worse than renting out some space in a subway station or on board a train, and yet, the vast majority of the MTA’s advertising seems to come from pulp fiction novels, community colleges and ESL programs. Over at Flavorwire, Paul Hiebert a few weeks ago profiled ten innovative subway advertisement campaigns. Some of them involved turnstile branding; others involved in-station set ups; and one even focused on the straps and poles within a train car. Not surprisingly, none of them were in New York City. As the MTA is looking for ways to expand its revenue base, I hope the marketing department is paying attention to some of the more involved and creative underground campaigns out there.
Aug
05
Making the case for open transit data
Posted by: | Comments
A Case for Open Data in Transit from Streetfilms on Vimeo.
For the past year, the MTA has engaged in a widespread effort to overhaul its relationship toward data. Since my charge that the authority’s close-minded approach to sharing put it on the wrong path in an age of open information, MTA CEO and Chairman Jay Walder has led an effort to work with — instead of against — developers. The authority has released its full scheduling data for application and web-based programmers to use, and more on data sets on everything from ridership numbers to stairwell locations are being released each month.
Throughout the nation, many transit agencies are involved in similar data programs, and this week on Streetsfilms, Elizabeth Press discussed these efforts and how data availability can improve everyone’s commutes. She summarizes the video, embedded above:
Ever find yourself waiting for the next bus, not knowing when it will arrive? Think it would be great if you could check a subway countdown clock from the sidewalk? Or get arrival times on your phone? Giving transit riders better information can make ridng the bus or the train more convenient and appealing. And transit agencies are finding that the easiest and least expensive way to do it is by opening data about routes, schedules, and real-time locations to software developers, instead of guarding it like a proprietary secret.
I recently got the chance to dive into the topic of open data in transit with my colleagues at OpenPlans. We went up to Boston to see what transit riders got out of the transportation department’s decision to open up its data. We also talked to New York MTA Chair Jay Walder, City Council Member Gale Brewer, Zipcar co-founder Robin Chase, and Transportation Alternatives director Paul Steely White to paint a full picture of what it would mean if cities shared their transit and transportation data. The information is there, waiting to be put to use to help people plan transit trips, waste less gas driving, or make their streets safer.
Making schedules available in the right format can go a long way toward bringing in more customers and tearing down the veil of secrecy that often hides transit operations. I’m glad to see the MTA taking the right steps, and I’m glad to see the right people highlighting those efforts while urging transit agencies to become more and more transparent.
Aug
05
Being Jay Walder
Posted by: | Comments
Amidst a fiscal crisis, Jay Walder, center, hasn’t been able to implement many of his plans for the MTA. (Photo by Benjamin Kabak)
When Jay Walder took over as the MTA CEO and Chairman nine months ago, he thought he was inheriting an organization on the path to financial recovery. The state legislature had just passed a comprehensive funding package that was supposed to provide the authority with some fiscal stability over the next few years. But, as we know, once the economy bottomed out, the legislature stole earmarked funds and the payroll tax revenue came in well below the state’s tax accountants’ estimates, Walder had to set aside his ambitious plans to solve the MTA’s financial crisis.
So instead of presiding over growth, in the short term, Walder has presided over contraction. The authority dusted off its plans to trim service, started cracking down on waste and overstaffing at both the administrative and operation levels and readied a sweeping proposal to raise fares. It just might save the MTA, but at what cost?
Along the way, Walder made more than a few enemies. Union leaders, while working with him behind the scenes, have not publicly embraced the MTA head. After all, who could blame them? Walder has engaged in a public battle to cut down on jobs, and the union doesn’t want to and shouldn’t accept layoffs without a fight. Walder has also alienated a public already frustrated with the MTA by putting into place service cuts and fare hikes. And he still has five more years left on his not-quite-ironclad contract.
Late last week, Eliot Brown of The Observer profiled Walder’s first nine months. As Jay proclaimed his adherence to the agreed-upon 7.5 percent fare hike, Brown pondered a question that should concern transit advocates throughout the city: Will Walder “ever be able to unshackle himself from fiscal issues sufficiently to install more noticeable, meaningful changes-an undertaking that would take time and money-or will he continue to have to put out these fiscal fires, started long before his arrival, with viciously unpopular actions?”
Brown’s piece provides a nuanced look at the financial troubles plaguing the MTA. He tracks the travails of the five-year capital plan and highlights how the authority is dependent on the state for operations funding while the state would rather have nothing to do with it. Into this morass came Walder from McKinsey (and before that, Transport for London). “When I heard that he was possibly going to [take the job], I said, ‘There’s no way this guy is going to want to take a pay cut to take this,’” one MTA Board member said to The Observer.
What makes Walder stand out and what gives me hope that he could shine if given the money and support is the fact, as Brown notes, that “he is the first MTA chairman in two decades who was not a campaign contributor to the sitting governor. Instead, he is simply a pure transit technocrat, one whose well-regarded analytical approach-a “performance indicators” report on the agency’s Web site shows month-by-month changes to things like on-time performance-speaks of his time at McKinsey.”
But Walder must also recognize political reality. The governor who appointed him — David Paterson — will be in office for just a few more months before giving way, in all likelihood, to Andrew Cuomo. The current Attorney General has been relatively silent on issues of the MTA and hasn’t given his vote of confidence to Walder. As the MTA’s top spot is often a political plum, I don’t expect him to do so yet, but Walder has a Golden Parachute. Cuomo would be a fool to ignore both the CEO’s credentials and the money owed to him.
For better or worse, the MTA is where it is because previous leaders haven’t had the economic management expertise and the transit knowledge to deliver a better product. Walder may not be the most tactful when it comes to service cuts; he might not be the most invested into the politics; and he may not be the perfect leader. But he should be allowed to stick around for a while, to ride out the financial tide, and to see his pro-rider initiatives implemented. “I,” he said to Brown, “retain the view that our elected officials are going to recognize what the MTA has done in a very difficult climate. I think they will recognize what’s happened.”
Aug
04
Fare media liability expected to stay at $52 million
Posted by: | CommentsAs with any transportation business, the MTA enjoys a small but significant revenue stream from unused pre-paid fares. For instance, if I were to buy a $25 pay-per-ride MetroCard and use only $20 of it before it gets lost to the sands of time, the MTA would enjoy a $5 profit from my card. Last year, when the MTA announced $53 million in fare media liability, I explored the whys of it. That budget item had jumped by 12.5 percent, and I speculated that New Yorkers simply don’t want to take the time to do the math involved with the MetroCard bonus system.
Over the next year, the Daily News reports today, the MTA again expects nearly $52 million to fill their coffers from unused MetroCards. The News notes that this amount is the same as 23 million rides at the base fare, but I have to wonder if it will truly be that high. If the MTA is charging $1 per new MetroCard, will straphangers be more inclined to zero their cards over their lifespans? Or will people simply refill with no regard to the discount or an uneven balance? Plenty of people will still buy cards and forget about them, but if the MTA is requiring us all to watch our MetroCards’ bottom lines, the fare media liability total could shrink a bit.
Aug
04
How the elephant got its stripes
Posted by: | CommentsFor the uninitiated, the MTA’s subway route designation system is a jumble of nonsense. Trains that travel divergent paths share colors, and the number/letter bullet system makes no sense. Sure, the 1, 2 and 3 trains could share a route, but what does the B, D, F and M all have to do with anything?
To educate the online subway crowd, the MTA released the video atop this post a few weeks ago. Featuring some cheesy music and some trippy animation, the authority explains how Manhattan trunk routes lend the subway map its color and how the numbers and letters correspond to both historic designations and current rolling stock assignments. Certain trains can fit and take customers on certain tracks, and there is apparently some method to the madness that is the city’s subway map.
Aug
04
Underground cell service: a panacea or a prison?
Posted by: | Comments
As news of the MTA’s revived attempt to outfit its underground subway stations with cell and wifi service gains steam, the authority has released the details of its revised deal with Transit Wireless. If all goes according to plan, the city’s 277 underground stops could be fully wired within six years, and while the MTA could realize a few hundred million in revenue and New Yorkers would be able to take advantage of 21st century technology while waiting for the subway, many are wondering if this new service will create a subterranean panacea or a cell-phone prison.
When the reports surfaced that the Transit Wireless deal was back on track, the initial stories were spares on the details, but Bloomberg’s Greg Bensinger and Amy Thomson dug them up. In essence, the terms of similar to the original deal in that Transit Wireless will pay the MTA $46 million to start the project and will foot the $200 million bill for installation as well. The funding will come in part from Transit Wireless’ new partner Broadcast Australia, that company that retrofitted Hong Kong’s metro for wireless service.
Although Broadcast Australia would not reveal the extent of its financial obligations, company officials seemed optimistic that their involvement would be beneficial all around. “We’ve been scanning for opportunities like this one,” Chris Jaeger, the managing director of international business, said. “The project fits very neatly with our business aspirations.”
The original plans called for the following stations to be wired first: 23rd Street and 14th Street on the Eighth Avenue line (A/C/E), 14th Street on the Seventh Avenue line (1/2/3), 14th Street on the Sixth Avenue line (F/M), and Eighth Avenue and Sixth Avenue on the L line. According to Bloomberg News, those stations will be wired first, and the project will start within the next two months. After that, says Transit Wireless, stations “could be completed at a rate of 10 to 15 per month.” That seems wildly optimistic for an MTA technology outfit, but if these companies have the expertise, it wouldn’t be an impossible goal to meet. The company says blueprinting and surveying work is through, and since only the stations — and not the tunnels — will be wired, the work will be unobtrusive.
The next step is the toughest. As was the case back in 2007, it’s no sure thing carriers would sign up. Now, as then, the cell companies will have to make sure that the Transit Wireless fees make sense. With such widespread adoption of cell phones and the prevalence of smart phones and data-ready devices, carriers ought to jump at a chance to bring their signals underground.
So then we arrive at the controversial question: Will cell service underground bring a fresh hell to the subways or will it just be an extension of business as usual? Those who never leave parts of Manhattan south of 125th St. are growing concerned that cell service will ruin that one quiet hour a day, but the truth is that subway cell service is far from unique or new. Although the 277 underground stations — with the exception of those close enough to the surface to pick up signals — aren’t currently wired, the 191 stations above ground have always been cell-phone ready. In the Bronx, Queens and Brooklyn, straphangers make their phone calls, check their email and idly surf the net while killing time before the train arrives. At the underground stations lucky enough to get spotty service, the same happens. The world, as far as I know, has not ended.
Underground, in cramped quarters where sound carries, the situation may be a little different. Straphangers may grow wary of hearing each other’s conversations echo throughout the station, and the rush to get in a 20-second phone call as the train pulls into a cell-equipped station may start to drive everyone nuts. But it’s a part of moving society forward. Enough people are mindful of their conversations. Enough people will make use of their smart phones to be productive. The underground world will not end.
Aug
03
Second Ave. Subway merch: A tee for the T
Posted by: | Comments
When Phase 1 of the Second Ave. Subway opens in 2012 2016 2018, the turquoise T won’t be a part of the subway system quite yet. The first part will simply extend the Q line north from 57th St. and Broadway underneath Central Park to the F stop at 63rd St. and then up to 96th St. and Second Ave. In fact, Phase 2, an extension from 96th to 125th Sts. won’t see the birth of the T either. Instead, the new train bullet will make its debut when — or is that if? — the MTA completes the full four phases of Second Ave. Subway, and the train reaches its way down to Hanover Square.
That won’t, however, stop the MTA from cashing in on the new train. Earlier this morning, the Transit Museum posted via Twitter an image of its latest and greatest addition to the subway bullet t-shirt line. That newcomer is none other than the turquoise T with the words “2nd Av Local” underneath. Phases 2-4 may not be up for funding yet, but no one ever said New Yorkers weren’t ambitious. “Wear it,” the museum said, “before you ride it.”
The image of the t-shirt atop the post comes via the Transit Museum. The shirts are available for sale right here.
Aug
03
With the fare hike, anticipating a small ridership drop
Posted by: | CommentsIn the months prior to the June service cuts, the MTA saw its ridership increase for the first time since the recession hit. Now, however, forces are gathering against the authority, and with the cuts in place and fare hikes coming our way in January, the authority believes it will see a slight decline in ridership come 2011.
As Pete Donohue reports in the Daily News, the MTA expects 16 million fewer trips in 2011 than in 2010, a decline in subway ridership of approximately 0.7 percent. The authority believes a rebounding New York economy will dampen the impact of the fare hike as the projected 66,000 new jobs will lead to more transit use. “Because we are cautiously optimistic about the recovery of New York’s economy, we expect the fare increase to cause a very small decrease in ridership,” Jeremy Soffin, MTA spokesman, said to Donohue.
Still, despite the improving economy, if the MTA opts to limit the currently unlimited MetroCards, the ridership drop could be larger than expected. Those riders on a budget who currently enjoy unlimited transportation won’t swipe as often as they do now and may take fewer trips for pleasure. The hikes though will see the authority’s revenue take increase significantly. “Poor people and people of modest means count their trips more often after a fare hike, and they’ll cut out some nonwork trips,” Straphangers guru Gene Russianoff said.
