Clyde Haberman, writing his NYC column in The Times, argues that the City shouldn’t rename the Triborough Bridge after Robert F. Kennedy. I agree. Interestingly, Haberman proposes naming the bridge after Andrew Haswell Green, a 19th-century urban planning who has been nearly completely overshadowed by Robert Moses. [The New York Times]
61 ways to fix your labor relations
After years of strained labor relations, the MTA and the TWU Local 100, the labor union for all the city’s transit workers, are finally working to improve their labor relations. With another round of contract talks due later this year, a panel led by former MTA Chair Richard Ravitch and Hezekiah Brown issued a report late last week that pinpointed 61 ways the MTA and the TWU can work to improve their relationship.
The report, available here as a PDF, is a 36-page document that urges the MTA to extend a lot of much-needed courtesies to the transit workers. Through a series of interviews with employees and union representatives as well as field visits, best-practice research and data analysis, the Blue Ribbon panel grouped its recommendations into five categories.
Organizational Culture
Right now, according to the panel, the seven-headed beast that is the MTA makes it hard to forge one organizational culture. The panel feels that this is one of the top issues facing the MTA as they relate to the TWU members among their ranks. The report says:
There is a real need to also have a cohesive MTA culture that brings all of these entities together under a common set of values and a common vision. An organizational culture creates opportunities to maximize resources across the agencies, especially in times of emergencies; allows for greater efficiencies through collaborative planning; and provides the workforce with more opportunities for career development and mobility. In addition, the organization needs to keep pace with two evolving factors: the changing demographics of the workforce and the increased use of new technologies to gain efficiencies.
In this section, as in most of the report, the recommendations are tailored toward improving managerial workflow and workplace happiness. Reading through the 16 recommendations, which include items such as identifying facilities that need renovations or repairs, I’m struck by how much of this most of us take for granted at our workplaces.
Workforce Development
This area, according to the report, ties in with many of the topics I discuss here on Second Ave. Sagas. With a lot of capital construction projects set for completion in the mid-2010s and other technology upgrades on the way, the report urges the MTA to project and prepare for the added staff that the agency will have to bring on and train before the LIRR East Side Access project and Second Ave. Subway lines are operational. The report also urges the MTA to conduct more top-down and bottom-up reviews of its employees.
Success(ion) Planning
When reports start dropping puns in parenthesis, you know you’re in trouble. The third section concerns retention and advancement opportunities. In a nutshell, the panel wants the MTA to ” identify and develop candidates for senior-level positions to ensure the continuity of managerial expertise and leadership skills in the organization. This is a growing concern at the MTAin light of the increasing number of baby boomers eligible to retire within the next three to five years.” Nearly 50 percent of NYCT employees are eligible to retire within the next three years, and these are jobs that cannot be outsourced to India or Vietnam when the union workers leave the positions.
Employee Availability
The recommendations under this heading focus around work/life issues that were front and center during the 2005 strike. How can the MTA balance granting the right number of days off with the demands of a 24/7/365 system as well as systematic abuse of the paid time off programs?
Labor-Management Relations
This section can be summed up in two sentences from the report: “The new leadership at the MTA has demonstrated a willingness and commitment to improve the current state of labor-management relations by creating an environment that has partnership, accountability, and mutual respect as its cornerstones. To accomplish this requires a similar commitment from labor.” Don’t worry; the actual text is that exciting.
Now, for a seemingly mundane report that reads fairly dryly, the fact that it even exists is a giant step in the right direction. As Roger Toussaint, president of TWU Local 100 said at a press conference last week, the day was a “milestone.”
“I think we will resolve the next round of negotiations without a crisis,” Toussaint said, according to Pete Donohue of the Daily News. And that is music to ears of New Yorkers.
Two Sundays in a row this weekend
With MLK Day on Monday, NYCT is running trains on a Sunday schedule but without the service advisories. Plan accordingly.
Without further ado, the weekend service advisories.
From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, January 19, to 5 a.m. Monday, January 21, 1 trains skip 28th, 23rd, and 18th Streets in both directions due to Part Authority work on the WTC site at Cortlandt Street.
From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, January 19, to 5 a.m. Monday, January 21, there are no 1 trains between 14th Street and South Ferry due to Part Authority work on the WTC site at Cortlandt Street. Customers may take the 2 or 3 between 14th Street and Chambers Streets. There is a free shuttle bus available between Chambers Street and South Ferry.
From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, January 19, to 5 a.m. Monday, January 21, 2 and 3 trains run locally between 96th Street and Chambers Street due to Part Authority work on the WTC site at Cortlandt Street, roadbed reconstruction at 59th Street and station rehab work at 96th Street.
From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, January 19, to 5 a.m. Monday, January 21, Brooklyn-bound 4 and 5 trains skip Fulton Street due to work on the Fulton Street Transit Center.
From 4 a.m. Saturday, January 19, to 10 p.m. Sunday, January 20, free shuttle buses replace 4 trains between Woodlawn and Bedford Park Blvd. due to track panel installation at Mosholu Parkway.
From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, January 19, to 5 a.m. Monday, January 21, there are no 7 trains between Main Street-Flushing and Woodside-61st Street due to signal replacement. 7 trains will make all stops between Woodside-61st Street and Queensboro Plaza. Free shuttle buses and free LIRR service provide alternate service. In addition, 7 express train service is suspended at all times in both directions until 5 a.m. Monday, March 3.
From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, January 19, to 5 a.m. Monday, January 21, uptown A and C trains skip Spring, 23rd, and 50th Streets due to 59th Street-Columbus Circle station rehabilitation.
From 12:01 a.m. Saturday, January 19, to 5 a.m. Monday, January 21 (and weekends through February 4), Queens-bound F trains run on the V line from 47th-50th Sts. to Roosevelt Avenue due to work in the 60th Street tunnel.
From 11 p.m. Friday, January 18, to 5 a.m. Monday, January 21, Coney Island-bound F trains skip 4th Avenue, 15th Street-Prospect Park and Ft. Hamilton Parkway due to roadbed replacement at 7th Avenue. The last stop for some Coney Island-bound trains is 2nd Avenue.
From 11 p.m. Friday, January 18, to 5 a.m. Monday, January 21, there are no G trains between Nassau Avenue and Smith-9 Streets due to switch replacement at Bedford-Nostrand Aves. Free shuttle buses provide alternate service between Nassau Avenue and the Jay Street-Borough Hall AF station.
From 6 a.m. to 6 p.m. Saturday, January 19, and Sunday, January 20 (and weekends until January 26-27), Manhattan-bound Q trains run express from Kings Highway to Prospect Park due to rail replacement.
G train now with less waiting, more inconvenient transfers
Around these parts, we’ve known for a while that service changes were heading the G train’s way. Earlier this week, the MTA made it officially, and the changes are rather extensive to the much-maligned train.
Of course, as with anything MTA, the changes come with the good and the bad. The Daily News reported on these changes earlier this week. Peter Kadushin gives us the details:
The Transit Authority’s 2008 Service Enhancement Program trades increased frequency of G service – up to 50% on weekday evenings and 20% during afternoons – for the elimination of off-peak service to 13 stations across the borough.
The new plan means G service in Queens will end at Court Square in Long Island City, one stop shy of a key location – Queens Plaza on the E, R and V lines. That will force riders to make an extra transfer to get access to Queens Blvd. and Forest Hills.
Of note also is the Church Ave. extension. The G will now terminate at Chuch Ave., deep in the heart of Brooklyn. But why, oh, why is the train stopping at Court Square? (Yes, yes, I know. They can’t turn the train around at Queens Plaza. But still.)
Gene Russianoff, Straphangers Campaign guru, wasn’t too pleased. “The thrust of the G advocacy has been about building ridership,” he said. “But at every turn, they make it hard. These changes make the line less convenient for people.”
Less waiting; more transfers. That’s a questionable trade-off, but in the end, it’s one I would make.
PCAC report focuses on MTA communications issues
Earlier this morning, I introduced the Permanent Citizens Adivsory Committee’s annual report by examining their critique of New York City Transit. Let’s take a peak at what the PCAC had to say about the folks upstairs at the MTA>
The Good
The PCAC runs through the typical list of good things at the MTA. They are very high on the expertise and people skills that MTA CEO and Executive Director Elliot “Lee” Sander has brought to the job. After past leaders proved their inability to do much (cough cough Peter Kalikow cough cough), Sander has indeed been a blast of fresh air. The Committee also praises the MTA for its ambitious capital construction program, the first steps toward regional transportation integration, and their willingness to improve their emergency preparedness in the wake of the August 8th floods.
Where my opinion differs with the PCAC is in the realm of Website building and the presentation of information. The PCAC — whose own Website is, in a word, ugly — praises the MTA for their “information accessibility” and its Website. While the public workshops were steps in the right direction, I had a mixed reaction to it. The moderators weren’t the best, and it was tough to tell if the MTA officials were truly listening.
As for the MTA’s Website, it’s true, as the PCAC notes, that the homepage is better, but once a user starts navigating past those early links, it’s a disaster of outdate information, outdated links and inconsistent formatting. This criticism deserves a post of its own, but for now, I’ll just say that the MTA’s Website needs a complete and total overhaul.
Needs Improvement
Here, the PCAC gets a little technical. The MTA needs to do more with Transit-Oriented Development; the MTA needs to put more of a focus internally on IT and agency-wide technology solutions; the MTA should put their monthly Board and Committee Agendas online. I can’t argue with any of that. Note, however, that the MTA’s plan for the next twenty years is heavy on the Transit-Oriented Development. That’s great for the suburbs and boring for us urban dwellers.
The Bad
For this, the PCAC picks two tangible projects: They are not happy with the efforts to improve security for the MTA transportation network, and they aren’t happy with the whole 7 Line Extension funding drama. The security issue is one that has long plagued the MTA. Lockheed Martin won a contract in 2005 to install cameras and security sensors, but the defense contractor has made little progress. The MTA should put some pressure on its business partners to shape up or ship out.
As for the 7 line, I have long noted that the blame lays with the city. Mayor Bloomberg promised to fund the extension as part of his terrible Olympics idea. When that fell through, the station suddenly became too expensive, and the City has left the cash-strapped MTA in an awkward position. The City should do the right thing and pay for this station. It’s not fair to blame the MTA for this funding debacle.
Fulton St. hub beset with more problems
The Fulton St. Transportation Hub, originally set to open this month, may be facing even more delays as the MTA received just one bid for the contract to construct the ornate glass-domed centerpiece of the project. As Bobby Cuza details at NY1, this news belongs very firmly in the “Not Good” category. I’ll have more on this development later. [New York 1]
Citizens Advisory Committee critique rehashes familiar territory
Ah, the Permanent Citizens Advisory Committee to the MTA. Since 1981, this committee, which has the potential to be a voice for change, has been flying under the radar. For its fancy, the committee doesn’t get its name in the paper more than once a year really when the annual MTA Performance Review hits the news.
Well, guess what? Today’s the day. The Committee has issued their review (available here as a PDF), and the critiques are what you would expect really. For this post, I’ll look examine what the PCAC thinks about New York City Transit, and later this afternoon, I’ll look at the PCAC’s response to the MTA overall. If you’re interested in the commuter rail networks, page through the PDF. It’s a quick read.
Before jumping in, it’s interesting to note that, by and large, the PCAC, much like the Rider Report Cards, isn’t issuing any groundbreaking information. As you’ll notice shortly, I’ve hit upon nearly all of their critiques and praises at some point during the last 13 months. How can I get a spot on this committee?
And here we go.
The Good
With New York City Transit in the crosshairs, the PCAC starts out by praising the man in charge. PCAC likes Howard Roberts, the new head of New York City Transit. Considering that the Committee went out of its way to offer the same compliments to MTA CEO Elliot “Lee” Sander, it seems that no one really liked the old bosses. Nice work, Gov. Pataki.
In more tangible areas, the PCAC praised NYCT for its myriad service upgrades. The Times Square Shuttle is better; the L line is better; the 7 line, running express after Mets games, is better; and even the Staten Island Railway is better. The PCAC also praised the MTA for renovating their elevators. Way to go, guys.
Interestingly, the Committee highlighted the MTA’s communications efforts during planned service outages. They were particular impressed with the MTA e-mail alerts and the new service alert posters. I approved of those changes last year as well.
Needs Improvement
The PCAC wasn’t too thrilled with the Rider Report Cards. I concur. A flawed process and methodology as well as predictable results marred the process. Relatedly, the PCAC criticized the MTA for their vague performance measures. What exactly does it mean for a train to “on time”? What does it mean to suffer from delays during travel? These too are questions I recently posted.
While PCAC criticized a few bus issues — the odd placement of shelters, poor dissemination of express bus routes — they are not happy with the cleanliness, or lack thereof, of the subway system. As long as the stations remain open 24 hours a day, cleanliness will always be an issue.
Unacceptable
No big surprises here: The PCAC was not at all pleased with the inability of NYCT to communicate during the August 8th flood disaster. This story has been covered to death. We know the drill.
The Committee expressed dismay that 86 stations do not have public address systems. Coincidentally, NYCT head Howard Roberts announced plans to address this deficiency earlier this week. Do you think he had an advanced copy of the report?
Finally, the PCAC was highly unamused by the lack of progress with the Public Address/Customer Information Screen projects. We know that one from the lab rat that is the L Line. Those signs are, as The New York Times wrote on Sunday, hardly reliable. With the project already 34.4 percent over budget and three years behind schedule, the Committee questions when, if at all, we’ll see late 20th Century technology arrive in the New York City Subways.
Check back later for the PCAC’s look inside the MTA.
Franklin Ave. shuttle, SIR lacking in safety
I’ve got three trains left in this whole Rider Report Card thing, and I’m saving the Q — the future Second Ave. Subway — for last. Today, we’ve got two lesser-used train lines, and the results are a little bit different than usual.
The result, gradewise, are the same. The Staten Island Railway received a C-plus while the Franklin Ave. Shuttle received a C. But what the riders think are markedly different than the norm.
The Staten Island Railway is a lonely train. It runs for 14 miles from St. George and the Staten Island Ferry terminal to Tottenville and is completely disconnected from any other rail system in the nation. The Franklin Ave. shuttle is a single-track, four-car shuttle that connects the B and Q at Prospect Park with the 2 and 3 at the Botanic Gardens and the C at Franklin Ave. It makes four stops and connects the IRT to the BMT to the IND. That’s pretty nifty.
Anyway, both of these subway lines are rather quirky. They run through some of the least safe neighborhoods in New York City and some of the most deserted, in terms of staffing, stations in the system. Those safety concerns are reflected in the rankings. Take a look.
- Adequate room on board at rush hour
- Sense of security in stations
- Trains depart and arrive as scheduled
- Sense of security on trains
- Cleanliness of cars
- Comfortable temperature in cars
- Cleanliness of stations
- Train announcements that are easy to hear
- Minimal delays during trips
- Availability of MetroCard Vending Machines
- Reasonable wait times for trains
- Sense of security in stations
- Minimal delays during trips
- Sense of security on trains
- Adequate room on board at rush hour
- Cleanliness of stations
- Cleanliness of subway cars
- Station announcements that are easy to hear
- Working elevators and escalators in stations
- Availability of MetroCard Vending Machines
Notice that? Riders ranked safety in stations second in both instances. Having ridden the Franklin Ave. shuttle on the way to and from JFK, I don’t blame frequent riders if they are a bit more on guard here. The rest of the complaints are what we’ve heard time and again with these report cards.
The full grades are after the jump. One more to go.
NYCT will not let you pee
According to a story in the Daily News, if you’re driving a New York City Transit bus and you have to pee, you better hold it in. William Torres was driving an overtime shift along the shuttle bus route mirroring the G train this weekend when, at the end of one ride, he had to relieve himself. The supervisor warned him against it and then sent him home when Torres made the pit stop anyway. The MTA is now investigating why a supervisor would not let a driver use the facilities at some point during a nine-hour shift. [Daily News]
Sander calls for a congestion fee
The MTA is banking its financial future on some form of congestion fee revenue, and MTA CEO and Executive Director Elliot “Lee” Sander began his congestion fee push with a stridently pro-congestion fee op-ed in Metro. It throws the weight of a very powerful MTA head behind a plan that is no sure thing.
In a short, concise and effective piece, Sander gets right to the heart of the matter:
Revenues generated by congestion pricing — hundreds of millions of dollars each year — would be used to provide a steady and predictable revenue stream to the MTA to make the capital investments needed to improve service throughout our system.
The new revenue is critical to the ambitious capital plan that we will present to Albany in March. The MTA hopes to move ahead with big expansion projects while investing in new technologies to improve existing service. For subway riders, that means more trains and less waiting. But congestion pricing would do even more for bus riders. It would allow us to purchase new buses to increase frequency on many routes, and to create new bus routes throughout the city.
Even better, it would speed trips for bus riders and make each bus less expensive to operate.
Furthermore, Sander notes, disarming critics, the increase in subway ridership expected due to the congestion fee is but a small percentage of the current ridership totals. With the added revenue, the MTA would be more than able to keep up with the increased demand.
Sander closes with a point that a lot of activists have been pushing lately. MTA ridership, he writes, “is projected to grow by another 20 percent by 2030 as the city is expected to grow by a million people and the region by 3 million. In order for the MTA to handle all those new riders, we must have robust funding streams in place, like the one provided by congestion pricing.”
For those of us supporting a congestion fee, Zero Hour is heading our way. With the panel set to issue a series of recommendations soon, the future of transportation and air quality in the New York area will soon come into view. But for the subways, this issue of funding should transcend congestion fee revenue. As I noted yesterday, the city and state should guarantee dedicated funding for the MTA outside of any money the MTA may take in from the congestion fee. The MTA really is that important to the economic well-being of New York State to warrant such an investment, and while the congestion fee should be implemented, the MTA’s future should not hinge on such a politically volatile proposal.
Meanwhile, it is refreshing and exciting to see Lee Sander come out in favor of a congestion fee. But to see his voice limited to the low-circulation Metro dampens some of that enthusiasm. Maybe next time, the important voices will find their way to the pages of the city’s more influential newspapers.