Why only 50 percent? some wonder.  Well, you do need payroll, HR, legal, etc.  But let’s either remove half of TransLink Corporate or cut all the salaries in half.

How much would we save?

Enough to acquire and operate about five additional buses per year.

Comments

  1. This is the ridiculous nature of the campaign of cuts now occurring. This obsession with finding every nickel and dime, despite the fact a lot of these cuts are reactionary and ill-conceived, and the total value of them all no where near reaches the needed funding to simply stabilize the transit system we have, let alone expand it.

    It’s a way to kick the can down the road on hard decisions about transit funding, “Let’s just find more savings, yeah, that’ll solve the problem.” Rather than facing the chronic underfunding for the desperately needed regional transit expansion. Are you keep pointing out, Gordon, multiple audits have shown Translink is a very efficient organization, not perfect, but still very good. The problem they face is larger than a few efficiencies.

  2. let’s slash bus idling time by half
    bus is idling either because trapped in congestion, waiting at traffic light, stopping too frequently

    or let’s improve the bus operating speed by 10%, or having them going a mere 2km/h faster on average than now. (by having bus: bus lane,…traffic signal priorities,…bus stop consolidation,…more direct routing wherver it applies, like route 49 at Champlain)

    How much that can buy?

    $40,000,000 a year…that is not chunck change…

    most of it is in the hand of the cities, and more especially Vancouver (where 50% of bus hour are spent) but David nailed it in a previous comment:
    Vision and city of Vancouver, are in the incantation, not the action when come Transit…

    ( good to remind the Vision record on Transit: http://www.francesbula.com/uncategorized/guest-post-by-voony-vancouvers-war-on-buses/, )

    Wonder about how realistic is this solution (“cut bus idling” time) to improve Transit, and how effective it can be:
    Check what happened in Zurich after a lost referendum on Transit…

  3. The amount of money that Translink wastes annually on phoney and redundant public consultation exercises is astounding. The resources they devote to “consultation” puts federal and provincial ministries to shame – and they don’t have deal with accomodation of First Nations interests.

  4. The last audit recommended hiring more staff because it’s often less expensive than hiring contractors.

    From page 42 of the audit:

    “TransLink uses numerous contractors in key positions particularly in IT and engineering functions (e.g., project managers, business analysts) due, in part, to hiring freezes. These independent contractors work for TransLink for extended periods of time, are provided with offices and workstations, and are paid up to three times more than the equivalent employee position. While the use of contractors is sometimes the most appropriate business decision, TransLink would be better served if a significant number were employed positions and the functions were brought in-house.

    Recommendation:
    (17)
    TransLink should replace contracted positions with staff positions.”

    http://www.th.gov.bc.ca/publications/reports_and_studies/Review_of_TransLink.pdf

  5. But if we sacrifice 1/2 of translink administration, who will write these wonderful 200 page primers on sustainable development that nobody reads? http://www.translink.ca/~/media/documents/plans_and_projects/transit_oriented_communities/transit_oriented_communities_design_guidelines.ashx

    Who will update the buzzer blog, monitor the twitter streams and make the transit system more “efficient”?

    Who will study rapid transit in Vancouver and Surrey and Burnaby Mountain only to see their study rejected due to lack of funding?

  6. Apparently according to Jordan Bateman the audits only went high level and did not dig into program spending and apparently “Translink wastes 1/10 dollars, Imagine if they dug deeper”
    I asked Jordan what “programs” he was referring to, no comment so far.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *