Busjack Posted May 12, 2009 Report Share Posted May 12, 2009 I was perusing the April 2009 minutes that just went up. While nothing of direct interest to me (i.e. amendments to to capital plan), I did note that a driver in the South Division did have a well articulated statement about what was wrong with the buses there, instead of the "there junk" we usually hear here. Now, whether the Board actually does something about it, that might be another question, but it was put on notice in a very particular way. There is also a discussion of what the real story is on the 556, but apparently, with the lack of UPS support, there is nothing for BBL to take over on that route. Also, another board action on which I am not commenting. B) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RIPTA42 Posted May 13, 2009 Report Share Posted May 13, 2009 Also, another board action on which I am not commenting. SBD #09-42? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busjack Posted May 13, 2009 Author Report Share Posted May 13, 2009 SBD #09-42? As Stroger spokesperson Eugene Mullins says, "No comment." However, since you bring this up, I don't believe in advisory positions. Influence isn't enough; one needs authority. I'm not the woman who claimed that the paratransit staff was corrupt and then begged to be retained on the advisory committee. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trainman8119 Posted May 13, 2009 Report Share Posted May 13, 2009 As Stroger spokesperson Eugene Mullins says, "No comment." However, since you bring this up, I don't believe in advisory positions. Influence isn't enough; one needs authority. I'm not the woman who claimed that the paratransit staff was corrupt and then begged to be retained on the advisory committee. You may be commentless, but I won't. This shows the glaring problem with the "advisory" boards. The person appointed is nothing but a troublemaker and has been for a long time. A class example of giving in and letting the inmates run the asylum, just like the ADA. If someone who has a clue of how to run things would do it, instead of caving in to every single complaint, suggestion or pressure, I would think you wouldn't need any advisory committee. My feeling....take control of your organization, run it as you see fit to make it feasable for all, not just a few, don't give in to every whiner and your system will function just fine. This applies to all service boards....not just Pace. soapbox rant over...errrrrgh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.