CTA driver training and picks

[BusHunter]

8 hours ago, Busjack said:

But unmanageable (every pick, would CTA have to get out the ridership report to set the pay rate on the particular run?) and not responsive to the problem reflected in the article that bus drivers are running over pedestrians. Time of day, going into the central business district, and maybe predominantly articulated buses on the route at least would be manageable.

If the argument is that drivers should be paid for dealing with passengers (as opposed to not running over pedestrians), I'm sure 75 packed onto a 40 foot bus is worse than 90 on an artic.

Ah, but manageable in the computer age if certain hours were referenced by time codes. It wouldn't have to be an exact science just generalizing, like Metra don't charge you for every block, it charges based on fare zones. Bottom line the question is why is an operator making the same driving the #85A/81W interline and the #77 which has way more traffic, way more passengers and way more to look out for. In certain respects an artic route could be easier especially ones that deadhead in one direction. It's just a suggestion, but it would seem to be relevant to this conversation that's why I bring it up.

[Busjack]

12 hours ago, BusHunter said:

Ah, but manageable in the computer age if certain hours were referenced by time codes. It wouldn't have to be an exact science just generalizing, like Metra don't charge you for every block, it charges based on fare zones.

I didn't mean it in the sense that one run number would pay $32.82 and another $32.84; there would be obvious increments, such as $32.82 and $33.32. What I am saying is that taken to the extreme, your proposal would indicate run K461 would pay $33.32 in April and $32.82 on the June pick. Except, of course, unless they used April statistics in June.At least by time of day and going into the CBD, it would usually be $33.32 (assuming the current base rate of $32.84. I'm not sure how they deal with the current split base rate of $21.33, except those now must be the drivers stuck with the bad picks.

But, again, it isn't much different than those in the steel mills getting 50 cents an hour shift differential if they have to work night shift.

12 hours ago, BusHunter said:

Bottom line the question is why is an operator making the same driving the #85A/81W interline and the #77 which has way more traffic,

That is the problem, compounded by that the driver with the most seniority is going to pick 85A/81W. The union had bargained a flat pay scale, but now is thinking about the problem. Only counterweight is that there aren't very many 85A runs compared to 77.

[BusHunter]

I knew an operator that drove the #81w for years before they retired consistently  (At least 10 years of picks) They retired I believe with 32-33 years in seniority.

The trouble with what you state is like for me if I'm making $33/hr 50 cents ain't bo diddley to me. They would have to give a real incentive like a free hours pay or 2-3 dollars difference. 50 cents won't make me jump ship. The pros and cons would make you not jump ship either like do I want to risk my 33 dollar/hr job on headaches accidents and irate customers. I bet 81w hasn't had an irate customer in years. I bet Belmont has already had one today.

[Busjack]

5 hours ago, BusHunter said:

The trouble with what you state is like for me if I'm making $33/hr 50 cents ain't bo diddley to me.

I only suggested it because you made the comment about zone increments. Obviously, it would have to be up to the union to bargain what increment is worth it for someone with higher seniority to take a tougher route. On the other hand, it would take the CTA "bargaining team" to decide whether CTA can afford it.

 

[BusHunter]

35 minutes ago, Busjack said:

I only suggested it because you made the comment about zone increments. Obviously, it would have to be up to the union to bargain what increment is worth it for someone with higher seniority to take a tougher route. On the other hand, it would take the CTA "bargaining team" to decide whether CTA can afford it.

 

The idea still is alive with the artic incentives they are talking about for senior drivers. i don't know what would make someone jump to an artic from the cushy lifestyle of the #85A for instance. Maybe some kind of benefits package would help more than a money incentive like an extra sick day or something, but it would only be qualified for after certain criteria/hours were met. This way it's a win for the CTA and it's employees as long as it's within reason but I'm sure the union is working in the operators best interests.

[artthouwill]

In my humble opinion,  drivers are  paid to  drive, whether it's a  bus (in the case of  bus drivers) or train (rail operators).  Unions  negotiated  picks based on  seniority  or years of  service.  Senior  drivers  have already  run the gamut of extra  boards, overnights,  split shifts, weekend  work, heavy loading  routes.   If they have earned the  right to  drive a gravy run, so be it.    The extraboards  have to earn their stripes.   

This lunacy ofhigher pay for driving  high volume  and downtown  routes  creates a  mess  and solves  nothing.   Even if the most senior  drivers  lost their  minds and agreed to  Bushunter's idea, it wouldn't have  an effect on  pedestrians  not paying attention.   They get run over  by CTA  buses, charter buses, trolley and  doubledecker buses, bikes, cabs, etc.   I very had pedestrians  walk in front of me  when  I  had the  green  light.   Watching  pedestrians  and cabs and bikes  and now uber drivers  is very stressful.   Can't believe  someone  would  want to be  stressed out  at an older  age unnecessarily. 

[artthouwill]

Here's a  scenario.   Pick one

Greyhound pays by the mileage.   You can

A.  Drive Chicago to Milwaukee  round trip twice.  Your first trip to  Milwaukee  and your  last trip from Milwaukee  will be in rush hour traffic.  You get400 miles at $.40 a mile. You  work  Monday  through Friday. 

 

B.  You drive Chicago to  Minneapolis  via Milwaukee.   At the same  mileage  rate, this  trip pay540 miles.  Due to D.O.T regs you must  spend a night in  Minneapolis every time you  drive  this route before  returning from  Minneapolis  the next day. You may have to  deal with  one rush hour  each day  whether it is  in Chicago  or Minneapolis 

 

Which would  you choose?  What incentives  would  you need to  choose the  other?

[BusHunter]

5 minutes ago, artthouwill said:

In my humble opinion,  drivers are  paid to  drive, whether it's a  bus (in the case of  bus drivers) or train (rail operators).  Unions  negotiated  picks based on  seniority  or years of  service.  Senior  drivers  have already  run the gamut of extra  boards, overnights,  split shifts, weekend  work, heavy loading  routes.   If they have earned the  right to  drive a gravy run, so be it.    The extraboards  have to earn their stripes.   

This lunacy ofhigher pay for driving  high volume  and downtown  routes  creates a  mess  and solves  nothing.   Even if the most senior  drivers  lost their  minds and agreed to  Bushunter's idea, it wouldn't have  an effect on  pedestrians  not paying attention.   They get run over  by CTA  buses, charter buses, trolley and  doubledecker buses, bikes, cabs, etc.   I very had pedestrians  walk in front of me  when  I  had the  green  light.   Watching  pedestrians  and cabs and bikes  and now uber drivers  is very stressful.   Can't believe  someone  would  want to be  stressed out  at an older  age unnecessarily. 

It's just a suggestion, I don't know if I would have phrased it the way you did, as any suggestion is not set in stone, nor is anyone's opinion gospel, but still then is driving an artic for extra pay lunacy, if so then the whole agency just opened a can of worms here. Personally I feel an artic is a bus and a half, with a bus and a half's responsibility.

Think this is bad back a few years ago we had operators with optimas versus those with artics. If you can drive a small truck you can drive an optima, it starts to get very close to a standard drivers license qualification. Back where I was working around O'Hare they claimed that they could operate a 15 passenger van on a standard license even commercially. It's when the company expanded to include small buses the size of Optimas the license needed to be a cdl, so it almost qualifies as a non cdl vehicle. The weight restrictions make it a cdl vehicle though and the 20 or seats including standing room pushes it over the edge as well.

As far as your first paragraph, the agency is giving the operators the right to switch and their not cramming down there throats, so nothing is at stake. If the operator wants to make more money he/she should have the right to do so also.

[artthouwill]

4 minutes ago, BusHunter said:

It's just a suggestion, I don't know if I would have phrased it the way you did, as any suggestion is not set in stone, nor is anyone's opinion gospel, but still then is driving an artic for extra pay lunacy, if so then the whole agency just opened a can of worms here. Personally I feel an artic is a bus and a half, with a bus and a half's responsibility.

Think this is bad back a few years ago we had operators with optimas versus those with artics. If you can drive a small truck you can drive an optima, it starts to get very close to a standard drivers license qualification. Back where I was working around O'Hare they claimed that they could operate a 15 passenger van on a standard license even commercially. It's when the company expanded to include small buses the size of Optimas the license needed to be a cdl, so it almost qualifies as a non cdl vehicle. The weight restrictions make it a cdl vehicle though and the 20 or seats including standing room pushes it over the edge as well.

As far as your first paragraph, the agency is giving the operators the right to switch and their not cramming down there throats, so nothing is at stake. If the operator wants to make more money he/she should have the right to do so also.

Technically  the maximum number of  passengers you could  carry in a van or small  cutaway  is 14 plus  the  driver without a  CDL.  Once you get  to 15 passengers,  a CDL  is required.   Also vehicle weight  is a factor 

 

I have  no problem with  increased  pay differential  for driving  an artic bus.  I'm surprised that  they  don't  have  it.   I believe  at one time  motorcoach companies  had a stick shift differential  because need drivers  couldn't  drive the sticks well and the older  drivers  didn't  want to  drive  them anymore.   With buses  I think the sticks are extinct.

I know you  were  only making a suggestion   but after thinking  through the logistics   it would be a hard sell.  What would  be the pay scale  for someone who drove the 29 State one round trip and then  did two roundtrip on the lighter 111 and 115 routes?  How much extra money  would  this  cost the agency?  What if the senior  drivers  kept their gravy routes?  Would you  want to  pay  rookies  a higher  scale?  Just my humble opinion  again.

[BusHunter]

18 minutes ago, artthouwill said:

Here's a  scenario.   Pick one

Greyhound pays by the mileage.   You can

A.  Drive Chicago to Milwaukee  round trip twice.  Your first trip to  Milwaukee  and your  last trip from Milwaukee  will be in rush hour traffic.  You get400 miles at $.40 a mile. You  work  Monday  through Friday. 

 

B.  You drive Chicago to  Minneapolis  via Milwaukee.   At the same  mileage  rate, this  trip pay540 miles.  Due to D.O.T regs you must  spend a night in  Minneapolis every time you  drive  this route before  returning from  Minneapolis  the next day. You may have to  deal with  one rush hour  each day  whether it is  in Chicago  or Minneapolis 

 

Which would  you choose?  What incentives  would  you need to  choose the  other?

Probably B, because if the hours are not restricted, I can pull out at 8 at night I can make Minneapolis in 8-9 hours via Milwaukee as I have drove that exact trip. The choice A I would make less money, sit in more traffic and burn up equal time as sitting at a dock or at a bus station you are not making any money also. Most CDL jobs are geared around moving as sitting is no good unless you get paid by the hour. Most local trucking companies pay locally by the hour. Trips overnight are gravy, as many of the OTR drivers do just that as they are restricted to 10 hours work per day, per cdl regs. You can do way more mileage at night than you can in the day. I was talking to a JB hunt driver who claimed he was doing an overnight st louis run to chicago which is like 5 hrs and then doing an unload, not a dropoff, and returning in another 5 hrs. Don't ask me how he was passing regulations, maybe unloads don't count on the log sheets, but maybe Missouri is different with their restrictions. 

What would make me choose A you ask? Maybe a few sick days, more vacations, but really it can be based on your personal life as well. If you are single it probably wouldn't bother you to be away from the misses as every other night your on the road, but also you would have to take into account that you'll be out of the house for 24 hours only to be back in the saddle again in 8 hrs. A married man has to take into account his wife's fidelity as long distance relationships don't last. I've talked to wives of truckers, and this going out stresses them as well. So it can become a family issue. Choice A if it can be done in 8 hrs has it benefits. If Choice B goes into Saturday then that would make you choose A.

Also it depends on if you need the money, if you are finiancially secure, choice A makes more sense. So me personally while I may choose Minn. now I wouldn't in a few years because I don't need the money. I also know cdl drivers, that have switched from otr to local because of the stress. Don't know if $17/hr is worth it to go local, but 40 cents a mile sounds like a good deal. Best to get a hazmat endorsement and you may get your cake and eat it too. Fuel rigs can make $30/hr and basically your making more than what an entry level otr driver makes.

So you got to pick my brain!!

 

[BusHunter]

33 minutes ago, artthouwill said:

Technically  the maximum number of  passengers you could  carry in a van or small  cutaway  is 14 plus  the  driver without a  CDL.  Once you get  to 15 passengers,  a CDL  is required.   Also vehicle weight  is a factor 

 

I have  no problem with  increased  pay differential  for driving  an artic bus.  I'm surprised that  they  don't  have  it.   I believe  at one time  motorcoach companies  had a stick shift differential  because need drivers  couldn't  drive the sticks well and the older  drivers  didn't  want to  drive  them anymore.   With buses  I think the sticks are extinct.

I know you  were  only making a suggestion   but after thinking  through the logistics   it would be a hard sell.  What would  be the pay scale  for someone who drove the 29 State one round trip and then  did two roundtrip on the lighter 111 and 115 routes?  How much extra money  would  this  cost the agency?  What if the senior  drivers  kept their gravy routes?  Would you  want to  pay  rookies  a higher  scale?  Just my humble opinion  again.

Ha Ha!! Rookies couldn't make what a senior driver makes anyway as they are about 10-13 dollars an hour light. Now interlines would complicate it especially ones that are not downtown routes, so you may have a point, but if you kept the artic the argument is invalid. Time regulations would expire at said hour and be a non issue as well. Now we can open up another can of worms. Say I want to drive an artic on #155 just cause I want to make more money on a semi gravy route that doesn't really need an artic. The clerk can deny you the use of that bus, but I was told you can request any bus you want to drive. So it's also a matter of abusing privledge. So this may be a can of worms anyway.

I know the new thing in trucks is going to be automatics, no stick shift. I believe Swift was supposed to get some this year or last, but they will probably become the standard in the future.

[Busjack]

1 hour ago, artthouwill said:

, it wouldn't have  an effect on  pedestrians  not paying attention.   They get run over  by CTA  buses

However, the recent discussion was based on the Sun-Times article, which was premised on CTA admitting fault because the bus blew through a red light. Similarly, whatever happened when the bus plowed into 205-225 N. Michigan Plaza, the decedent sitting on the bench was not a pedestrian.

With that and with Greyhound, I think you are bringing up too many strawmen here. The only issue discussed here was:

Acevedo says his union has pushed for financial “incentives” to encourage veteran drivers to take the wheel of the longer, accordion-style “articulated” buses and to take the more-difficult routes.

[artthouwill]

2 minutes ago, Busjack said:

However, the recent discussion was based on the Sun-Times article, which was premised on CTA admitting fault because the bus blew through a red light. Similarly, whatever happened when the bus plowed into 205-225 N. Michigan Plaza, the decedent sitting on the bench was not a pedestrian.

With that and with Greyhound, I think you are bringing up too many strawmen here. The only issue discussed here was:

Acevedo says his union has pushed for financial “incentives” to encourage veteran drivers to take the wheel of the longer, accordion-style “articulated” buses and to take the more-difficult routes.

Which I did allude to  when I said I had no problem with increased pay differential for driving  arttics.  I don't know what  incentives  you could  offer  for a senior  driver to drive an artic on the 151 as opposed to 35th st (KeDzie) or 96 Lunt (North Park).

[Pace831]

6 minutes ago, BusHunter said:

many of the OTR drivers do just that as they are restricted to 10 hours work per day, per cdl regs... Don't ask me how he was passing regulations, maybe unloads don't count on the log sheets, but maybe Missouri is different with their restrictions. 

Drivers of passenger carrying vehicles can be driving for 10 hours, but drivers of property carrying vehicles can drive for 11 hours. Additionally, you can't drive if it has been more than 14 hours since coming on duty. So the JB Hunt driver you knew could theoretically make the run legally, but would definitely be cutting it close. Unloading would be logged as "on duty", but it wouldn't count toward the 11 hour driving limit. These are federal laws, so Missouri would not have different restrictions. The federal hours of service regulations do not apply to intrastate drivers, such as CTA operators, which brings me to:

The analogies being made here are not really relevant to the original point of what could be done to get senior drivers on more difficult runs, with the goal of improved safety. In general, people who can do more get paid more, so CTA is "backwards" in that respect. Artic pay and CBD pay are ideas meant to alleviate that, but can anyone convincingly argue that would reduce accidents? If those incentives were offered, someone would have to assign those runs to more experienced drivers, instead of letting operators pick them. The union might object to that system, and even if they didn't, there could be any number of unintended consequences such as increased turnover. So I don't think any of the ideas expressed in this thread are possible, or at least not politically feasible.

[BusHunter]

7 minutes ago, Busjack said:

However, the recent discussion was based on the Sun-Times article, which was premised on CTA admitting fault because the bus blew through a red light. Similarly, whatever happened when the bus plowed into 205-225 N. Michigan Plaza, the decedent sitting on the bench was not a pedestrian.

With that and with Greyhound, I think you are bringing up too many strawmen here. The only issue discussed here was:

Acevedo says his union has pushed for financial “incentives” to encourage veteran drivers to take the wheel of the longer, accordion-style “articulated” buses and to take the more-difficult routes.

Hmm I heard she was a pedestrian as there is no bench there. She was headed for Metra to go to her south suburban residence. This whole discussion got started because someone thinks that lack of experience may be what caused the accident. You know older drivers have issues too. They might not be as alert as a younger person. Might not be as healthy. I know some that appear to be in a daze, not naming names here, but they are known for driving slow. So there are many factors at stake here. I'm sure we would be saying we'll why hasn't this guy retired because he's too old to drive the bus if an older man was driving. So I think it's nitpicking, but a lawyer always has an angle or he has no case!! 

[Pace831]

13 minutes ago, BusHunter said:

I know the new thing in trucks is going to be automatics, no stick shift. I believe Swift was supposed to get some this year or last, but they will probably become the standard in the future.

Some trucking companies have already gone to an all automatic fleet, but are regretting it. Automatics help with recruiting new drivers, but many experienced drivers prefer a stick shift, which caused faster employee turnover and therefore, higher costs. Automatics probably will eventually become standard as older drivers retire and new hires are no longer trained to drive stick shift.

I don't think a stick shift differential would convince me to give up an automatic. I feel safer driving in heavy traffic if I don't have to think about shifting, so I can focus on everything else going on. What is relevant to the CTA discussion is something like CBD pay. I get a $50 bonus for having to go into NYC, but trucking companies can pass that cost directly on to their customer. How or if CTA could get extra funds to pay incentives to drivers is another issue that makes me think there isn't a practical solution to this.

 

[Busjack]

3 hours ago, artthouwill said:

 I don't know what  incentives  you could  offer  for a senior  driver to drive an artic on the 151 as opposed to 35th st (KeDzie) or 96 Lunt (North Park).

I had mentioned what could be done earlier, by analogy to seniority in other industries. Make someone a Master Bus Operator and he or she gets a pay differential, but only if they take a difficult route. Take 96 and you only get $33/hour, even if you are a Master. Take 151 and you [hypothetically]  get $40/hour.

I don't know if the incentive would be restricted to those with a certain level of seniority, but, if not your driver just gave his money to someone lower down the totem pole.

[artthouwill]

12 hours ago, Busjack said:

I had mentioned what could be done earlier, by analogy to seniority in other industries. Make someone a Master Bus Operator and he or she gets a pay differential, but only if they take a difficult route. Take 96 and you only get $33/hour, even if you are a Master. Take 151 and you [hypothetically]  get $40/hour.

I don't know if the incentive would be restricted to those with a certain level of seniority, but, if not your driver just gave his money to someone lower down the totem pole.

If the senior drivers take the MBO and the Sheridan  route, where does the extra $56 Per day per MBO driver come from, not counting  OT?  At the example of a  $7 Pay differential,  if the senior drivers  don't  take the MBO, do you want  rookies  making  $27 Per hour?  Im guessing  a pay differential for driving  an artic on Sheridan  would have to be offered  across the board.