Jump to content

Attention: In order to reply to messages, create topics, have access to other features of the community you must sign up for an account.
Sign in to follow this  
FamousNYLover

NYC DOE School Bus Strike!

Recommended Posts

I keep hearing from NYCBOE website and media school bus drivers might go on strike.

Does anyone has update on school bus strike?

Does school bus strike only applies to NYC or applies to Long Island and rest of NY metro area?

Edited by Shortline Bus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They say they're going to pay back the parents for the transportation that they'll have to provide their children with during the strike if they can't get a metrocard (or are too young).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The NYDOE Office of Pupil Transportation in LIC in Queens must be in a state of chaos right now. I would know, I provided tech support for the DOE OPT before I moved on to another contract in the private sector that I am furfilling now as a help desk network tech. Much of the reason why we are seeing this is because of the abuses that the owners of the bus companies itself (under contract with the DOE), put the company bus drivers, dispatchers and attendants through rather than the DOE OPT itself. Truth. I've seen it firsthand.

 

*Edit for clarity

Edited by realizm
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure as I don't have the inside information but my guess is that since Alantic Express is one of the largest companies under contract with the DOE, many elementary schools (and to an extent JHS's and HS's if they have sceduled field trips etc.) in particular will be seriously affected. They don't deal with Pre-K facilities, there are other bus companies that serve the Pre-K schools.

 

I think this was the final straw that broke the camel's back in the light of the contoversy that took place in September and October over issues with busses being late, children dropped off at the wrong schools, situations where children are riding for as much as 4 hours and such. It's all public knowledge, it's in the newspapers and NY1 reported it as well I can remember. It was hell for me dealing with it even from the Help Desk end with software problems which was why I quit when I found a new opportunity at a new IT recruiting firm. The pay was excellent however.

 

It's not the fault of the DOE contrary to poular belief. The bus companies f**ked up big time. Some are not even in business anymore as the DOE took them out of commission to avoid lawsuits. Keep in mind the angry parents were suing the bus companies, not the DOE for this reason. I don't blame them. In fact many DOE administrative employees quit as well because the stress was so high it was unbearable. It's sad.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm still confused here--the drivers seem to be saying that they are worried about losing their jobs when the new contracts are made. What exactly do they want? A clause saying they would not be laid off? I don't know of any companies that can guarantee that employees will not be laid off. Even the government can institute furloughs, etc. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gotta love how the media twists this thing into a parents-and-students sob story.  New York has a population of almost 9 million, yet the school buses serve a student population of barely 150,000.  Not counting kids with special needs, I thus pose the question: privileged minority much? For many years, I had to travel across half the transit system in order to get to school, and not once during that time was my family offered the choice of school busing.  If I wasn't offered this service, then why the hell should the kids who live one neighborhood over from their respective schools get it?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gotta love how the media twists this thing into a parents-and-students sob story.  New York has a population of almost 9 million, yet the school buses serve a student population of barely 150,000.  Not counting kids with special needs, I thus pose the question: privileged minority much? For many years, I had to travel across half the transit system in order to get to school, and not once during that time was my family offered the choice of school busing.  If I wasn't offered this service, then why the hell should the kids who live one neighborhood over from their respective schools get it?

 

Because if they didn't get bussed to school, most of them would be crowding up the subways and MTA buses at rush hour, and since they do not pay to ride the buses or subways, the MTA sure as hell would not increase service. So, you'd have rush hour trains and buses that even more crushed and loud than they already are. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Because if they didn't get bussed to school, most of them would be crowding up the subways and MTA buses at rush hour, and since they do not pay to ride the buses or subways, the MTA sure as hell would not increase service. So, you'd have rush hour trains and buses that even more crushed and loud than they already are. 

You could counter argue that if the MTA was given the resources (funding, extra vehicles, etc.) to transport students, then it would also benefit other MTA riders.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You could counter argue that if the MTA was given the resources (funding, extra vehicles, etc.) to transport students, then it would also benefit other MTA riders.

 

But why would the city give the amount of money necessary to transport all these kids to the MTA, a state agency, whose purpose is not to transport children to school. Once you are going to use that money, of course you put it towards a dedicated school bus system, not to adding routes to the MTA that happen to go near schools. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gotta love how the media twists this thing into a parents-and-students sob story. New York has a population of almost 9 million, yet the school buses serve a student population of barely 150,000. Not counting kids with special needs, I thus pose the question: privileged minority much? For many years, I had to travel across half the transit system in order to get to school, and not once during that time was my family offered the choice of school busing. If I wasn't offered this service, then why the hell should the kids who live one neighborhood over from their respective schools get it?

Well, of that 150,000, 54,000 are special needs, so they can't take public transportation.

 

For the remaining 96,000, this mostly affects those in grades K-6. Although I have seen kids who look like they're in second or third grade taking the bus by themselves, I wouldn't want that to be happening on a large scale. (Aside from that, it was within their own neighborhood anyway).

 

They made an exception for SI and other outlying parts of the city where public transportation isn't as good, for 7th & 8th graders. (Which personally, I disagree with, unless public transportation really is that terrible, or nonexistant in your area, which narrows it down to only a few neighborhoods in the city). But other than that, it's mostly little kids we're talking about. (The only thing is that I think they should get rid of it for 6th graders as well, because there's no point in running a bus to a middle school, but only having it 1/3 full)

 

But why would the city give the amount of money necessary to transport all these kids to the MTA, a state agency, whose purpose is not to transport children to school. Once you are going to use that money, of course you put it towards a dedicated school bus system, not to adding routes to the MTA that happen to go near schools. 

They do it right now with the Student MetroCards. (And cheated the MTA out of $144 million). But I don't see the problem with that concept, if done right.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But why would the city give the amount of money necessary to transport all these kids to the MTA, a state agency, whose purpose is not to transport children to school. Once you are going to use that money, of course you put it towards a dedicated school bus system, not to adding routes to the MTA that happen to go near schools. 

In my opinion it would be a better use of resources, but I digress.

 

 

Well, of that 150,000, 54,000 are special needs, so they can't take public transportation.

 

For the remaining 96,000, this mostly affects those in grades K-6. Although I have seen kids who look like they're in second or third grade taking the bus by themselves, I wouldn't want that to be happening on a large scale. (Aside from that, it was within their own neighborhood anyway).

 

They made an exception for SI and other outlying parts of the city where public transportation isn't as good, for 7th & 8th graders. (Which personally, I disagree with, unless public transportation really is that terrible, or nonexistant in your area, which narrows it down to only a few neighborhoods in the city). But other than that, it's mostly little kids we're talking about. (The only thing is that I think they should get rid of it for 6th graders as well, because there's no point in running a bus to a middle school, but only having it 1/3 full)

 

 

They do it right now with the Student MetroCards. (And cheated the MTA out of $144 million). But I don't see the problem with that concept, if done right.

Right, the student MetroCards are a good example of the such. It seems as it has been working out fine.

 

In regards to the Staten Island situation, I feel that the desicion was mainly due to politics of the area, because you get a lot of the "won't someone think of the children" bullshit out there. I recall many were outraged that high schoolers that previously recieved school bus transportation would have to start using public transit, SMFH.

 

Also, I know many are opposed to having younger kids use public transit to and from school, but I'm actually in support of it. I feel that it promotes the use of public transit and encourages long term ridership. It's these kids that gain experience early on and aren't the ones that eventually enter H.S or even college without the common knowledge of how to pay their fare, how to read a timetable, or other lack of knowledge.

 

On a personal level, I myself used public transit to and from school since when I entered school and started commuting independently when I entered 1st grade. In addition, I wouldn't hesitate to allow my future children to use public transit for their daily commute and I feel many should do the same.

 

I think by know you all know my stance on the issue. (MTA) all the way!

Edited by Turbo19

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They do it right now with the Student MetroCards. (And cheated the MTA out of $144 million). But I don't see the problem with that concept, if done right.

Every major city that I can think of has yellow busing for kids, and parent would go nuts if the BOE said that every kid had to take the subway or bus. Parents would have to accompany little kids to school, and would lose money at their jobs, pulling down the whole economy. School buses are safe and, if routed properly, cost efficient. 

 

Frankly, I don't think MTA B/O's particularly want to be school bus drivers transporting kids to and from school, either. Could you just imagine an Orion VII filled with elementary school kids? The school tripper buses get ripped apart as it is. 

Edited by QM1to6Ave
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm still confused here--the drivers seem to be saying that they are worried about losing their jobs when the new contracts are made. What exactly do they want? A clause saying they would not be laid off? I don't know of any companies that can guarantee that employees will not be laid off. Even the government can institute furloughs, etc. 

If I'm not mistaken the drivers (& Union) want guaranteed job security for their drivers.  Let's say a driver is working for company A and that company loses their contract to company B, the driver has to be employed with company B with the same rate of pay, seniority, etc. etc. basically everything they had with company A.

 

This is ridiculous because not only are other bus drivers anywhere not entitled to this job security I am unaware of anyone in any private sector job entitled to this perk.  That would be like someone working in a call center handling a cell phone companies calls, no matter what happens and the company they are employed with loses the contract they have the right work for the company that gets the contract making the same money, seniority etc.

 

An interesting thing here is a business being free to do as they like, If I start a bus company and win a contract who the hell are you (the union) to tell me who I must hire, what I must pay them and the benefits I must provide,  It's outrageous!  For one thing, how would I know it wasn't the drivers of that company that caused them to lose the contract?...and to get what they want they strand children and go on the news saying it's about safety, crap!  Speaking of safety, If I'm forced to hire these drivers will I have the right to the drivers safety and employment records from the previous employer?

 

Where the hell is Cuomo on this one?  He's all over LIPA but what about bus drivers who chose to strand young and disabled children to get what they want?  Order drivers in the drivers seat tomorrow, work on the contract WITHOUT stranding children and putting an extra burden on families.  Anyone who doesn't work is terminated!  Period.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In regards to the Staten Island situation, I feel that the desicion was mainly due to politics of the area, because you get a lot of the "won't someone think of the children" bullshit out there. I recall many were outraged that high schoolers that previously recieved school bus transportation would have to start using public transit, SMFH.

 

Also, I know many are opposed to having younger kids use public transit to and from school, but I'm actually in support of it. I feel that it promotes the use of public transit and encourages long term ridership. It's these kids that gain experience early on and aren't the ones that eventually enter H.S or even college without the common knowledge of how to pay their fare, how to read a timetable, or other lack of knowledge.

 

On a personal level, I myself used public transit to and from school since when I entered school and started commuting independently when I entered 1st grade. In addition, I wouldn't hesitate to allow my future children to use public transit for their daily commute and I feel many should do the same.

 

I think by know you all know my stance on the issue. (MTA) all the way!

Thankfully, high schoolers out here aren't getting school bus service. That discussion only applied to 7th & 8th graders. And the thing that's stupid is that you had a lot of parents who said "Oh, now I have to wake up earlier and drive my kid". If you live in a neighborhood on the South Shore, I could sort of understand complaining about them having to use transit (not saying I agree with it, but I could see where they're coming from), but I find it ridiculous the way they turned to the car as their primary option. Like yeah, if you have to walk 1/2 mile, take a bus on 30 minute headways (and some of these routes aren't particularly reliable, which I don't get why, but whatever), and then walk another 1/2 mile at the other end, then you have my sympathies, but if you're going to spoil your (teenage) kids and drive them door-to-door, then screw you.

 

Well, middle school kids, I could definitely understand, and I support it. But elementary school kids, I still think is too young because of the potential dangers involved. I mean, me personally, I didn't start commuting by myself on transit until middle school (I mean, my elementary school was a few blocks away, so in the younger grades, my mom walked me, and in the older grades, I walked myself). I mean, in first grade, I don't think I could've even handled the walk by myself. With all the apartment buildings and everything, it would just be too intimidating (hell, even crossing Brighton Beach Avenue by myself would've been a challenge at that age).

 

I do think that promoting transit from an early age is a good thing, but I think elementary school is just too young.

 

I mean, I do see where you're coming from. I remember on the S62, a girl who I think was like 11 or so was like "this was my first time riding a bus", and she couldn't figure out how to pull the cord to signal the stop (and I think she forgot to dip a MetroCard too). I mean, we should avoid having kids turn out like that, but I don't think having elementary school kids (in large numbers, anyway. See below) use transit is a good idea.

 

Frankly, I don't think MTA B/O's particularly want to be school bus drivers transporting kids to and from school, either. Could you just imagine an Orion VII filled with elementary school kids? The school tripper buses get ripped apart as it is.

Actually, I remember a B/O saying that there were a few trippers (I think from the Flatbush Depot) for an elementary school.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The article I posted that was posted (on the abc site) an hour and half ago has already been mentioned earlier Wed.?  lol  Posters seemed to still be confused as to why, after you posted that article.  I found this article to be very informative and it covered the sides of both stories.  Someoe dared to post another news article after you did, relax it's information sharing information is not a bad thing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They say they're going to pay back the parents for the transportation that they'll have to provide their children with during the strike if they can't get a metrocard (or are too young).

 

True, they can provide reimbursments for problems with bus service, metrocards and also car fare reimbursments. They did this in the wake of Hurricane Sandy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If I'm not mistaken the drivers (& Union) want guaranteed job security for their drivers.  Let's say a driver is working for company A and that company loses their contract to company B, the driver has to be employed with company B with the same rate of pay, seniority, etc. etc. basically everything they had with company A.

 

This is ridiculous because not only are other bus drivers anywhere not entitled to this job security I am unaware of anyone in any private sector job entitled to this perk.  That would be like someone working in a call center handling a cell phone companies calls, no matter what happens and the company they are employed with loses the contract they have the right work for the company that gets the contract making the same money, seniority etc.

 

An interesting thing here is a business being free to do as they like, If I start a bus company and win a contract who the hell are you (the union) to tell me who I must hire, what I must pay them and the benefits I must provide,  It's outrageous!  For one thing, how would I know it wasn't the drivers of that company that caused them to lose the contract?...and to get what they want they strand children and go on the news saying it's about safety, crap!  Speaking of safety, If I'm forced to hire these drivers will I have the right to the drivers safety and employment records from the previous employer?

 

Where the hell is Cuomo on this one?  He's all over LIPA but what about bus drivers who chose to strand young and disabled children to get what they want?  Order drivers in the drivers seat tomorrow, work on the contract WITHOUT stranding children and putting an extra burden on families.  Anyone who doesn't work is terminated!  Period.

 

I'm glad that I'm not the only one that thinks the drivers' demands are stupid. It sounds like their problems are with the owners of the companies, who are known for being corrupt ant underpaying people, not the city. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think they are asking for too much with the job security stipulation and think it's disgusting they will put the children and parents in the middle to get what they want.  I know it's human nature to want the best for ones self but to not only strike but to try to block school buses at non striking companies is outragous.

 

edited for typo....

Edited by Burrstone
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In my opinion it would be a better use of resources, but I digress.

 

 

Right, the student MetroCards are a good example of the such. It seems as it has been working out fine.

 

In regards to the Staten Island situation, I feel that the desicion was mainly due to politics of the area, because you get a lot of the "won't someone think of the children" bullshit out there. I recall many were outraged that high schoolers that previously recieved school bus transportation would have to start using public transit, SMFH.

 

Also, I know many are opposed to having younger kids use public transit to and from school, but I'm actually in support of it. I feel that it promotes the use of public transit and encourages long term ridership. It's these kids that gain experience early on and aren't the ones that eventually enter H.S or even college without the common knowledge of how to pay their fare, how to read a timetable, or other lack of knowledge.

 

On a personal level, I myself used public transit to and from school since when I entered school and started commuting independently when I entered 1st grade. In addition, I wouldn't hesitate to allow my future children to use public transit for their daily commute and I feel many should do the same.

 

I think by know you all know my stance on the issue. (MTA) all the way!

In Staten Island it was also an issue of safety.  Staten Island is more suburban and spread out in a lot of areas and there are no sidewalks to boot so it makes traveling a bit more dangerous.  After that kid was hit and killed trying to get to school via public transit, there was a serious outcry to put those kids back on the bus who had bus service previously like they did before.  It's also because of the whole being spread out and safety of kids being snatched up.  I'm not going to lie, as a grown man I would take precautions traveling in certain parts of Staten Island because some parts can be very secluded at certain times of the day or night, so I personally don't fault parents for acting the way that they did.  Some call it coddling, but we live in different times now and as QM said, some parents would simply not allow their kids to go on to the public buses and would complain of lost wages, etc.  Many of them have been beaten up by the bigger kids and/or robbed.  Sure you can argue they're being sheltered but as I said before everyone's situation is different and everyone's needs are different.

 

Every major city that I can think of has yellow busing for kids, and parent would go nuts if the BOE said that every kid had to take the subway or bus. Parents would have to accompany little kids to school, and would lose money at their jobs, pulling down the whole economy. School buses are safe and, if routed properly, cost efficient. 

 

Frankly, I don't think MTA B/O's particularly want to be school bus drivers transporting kids to and from school, either. Could you just imagine an Orion VII filled with elementary school kids? The school tripper buses get ripped apart as it is. 

Yep, very true on all accounts... 

 

Gotta love how the media twists this thing into a parents-and-students sob story.  New York has a population of almost 9 million, yet the school buses serve a student population of barely 150,000.  Not counting kids with special needs, I thus pose the question: privileged minority much? For many years, I had to travel across half the transit system in order to get to school, and not once during that time was my family offered the choice of school busing.  If I wasn't offered this service, then why the hell should the kids who live one neighborhood over from their respective schools get it?

Many of those kids have special needs and really can't use public transportation, so their needs are totally different from yours.  Unless you are disabled, you can't even begin to understand what they go through just to get around.  There was a kid on Good Day New York this morning whose mother is going through extreme hell trying to get him to and from school because he is severely disabled so there is no way he can use public transportation.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.