Jump to content

How Will the MTA Spend its New Found Money?


BrooklynBus

Recommended Posts

Trying to cut all ties with someone who knows what they're talking about..... Not surprising....

 

Anyway, What eastward extension on the B71 are you referring to?

Since its inception, the B71 operated only between the East River and Grand Army Plaza. Over the years service kept on getting reduced because the route was so short and of limited use. People asked for more service, but the TA wouldn't hear of it. Finally someone proposed extending it eastward to the Brooklyn Museum stating that would increase ridership. Finally, the MTA listened and it was done. Ridership rose 29% as a result.

 

One of my planning principals is that if a route does not go to the end of a borough, it should hook up with the closest route going in the same direction. In my 1972 thesis I proposed the B71 extension that was made but I continued the route along St. Johns Place to become part of the B14 at Utica Avenue extending every other B14. I based this on riding the B45 for years, noticing there was very little through ridership to Downtown Brooklyn. Most of those passengers boarded along Washington Avenue and St Johns had its own riders. It seemed to me that people living near St Johns preferred to take the IRT instead to Downtown Brooklyn instead because it is so much faster. That's why I would cut the B45 by 50% to pay for the B71 extension. There is also the B65 to Downtown Brooklyn so you don't need all those B45s to Downtown Brooklyn. But you have no way of getting to Park Slope and Cobble Hill from Crown Heights. That's why the B71 needs to either be extended to St Johns Place or south along Flatbush Avenue to Empire Blvd and eastward to improve access around Prospect Park.

 

What I learned in government is that the person above you never wants anyone that is smarter that they are and since many of them are "poliitcal appointees" with no idea of what they are supposed to do, they frown upon anyone who is below them that has even the slight bit of knowledge. Thus many of these managers resort to the "my way or the hghway" supervision approach to keep the employees in line. It is these type of individuals (I worked with many of them) that have no compuction of using every trick in the book to keep the employee in line.

 

In a bureaucracy such as the MTA, it is this type of political (my way or the highway) manager that makes the decision as to what and where things will be done or ever get done. It is the reason that many of the meaningful suggestions that are posted here and on other forums that never see the light of day. It is a crying shame that the more bureaucratic an agency becomes, the less responsive it is to the needs of the public. This is what is happening on all levels of government and until it is reversed, it will only get worse. Not everyone wants to work in that sort of environment and it is the main reason that many employees do not seek promotions regardless of the financial gain.

 

Anyone who has worked in government can relate the horror stories of working with the political appointees and the "my way or the highway" style of management. This is why I stayed in same title for 29 of 31 years that I worked in government. At least I had some protection even though I was targeted many tines during my tenure..

 

The money should should go to a new contract for the workers (not to the bureaucrats) as they are the ones keeping the system running and in good order.

 

You are starting to sound exactly like me. I realized that after only six months with the MTA.

 

In 1987, I was transferred to the newly formed Contracts Department. It was totally unbureaucratic. If I wanted something done, all I had to do was justify it to my boss and the response was always, "Go do it.". No further approvals were necessary. What a pleasure, but it didn't last long. After only a couple of years, that department became just as bureaucratic as the rest of the MTA, and everything needed multiple levels of approvals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


My thanks to B/35 via Church for telling the absolute truth as when it comes to the MTA (and for that matter most governmental agencies today),it is common practice.

 

Brooklyn Bus' boss when he did the Southwest Brooklyn Bus changes was a relative of someone connected with the board and he did not know anything about transportation and yet he was protected. When he messed up there, he was assigned to another part of the agency to basically hide from public view. He is not the only one and today it is no different from the beginning of the 20th century when there was "interlocking directorates" among the private companies. These were individuals that sat on the boards of similarly related companies and making decisions for all of them.

 

Today the difference is it is not the proviate companies that engage in this practice but politicians who place their people on the boards or policy making positions of agencies. Here the person is responsibile to the political person that gave him/her this job and not to general public who they should be accountable.The only way that a person like this is removed is when his political mentor leaves office or (very rarely), he/she is not confirmed by the legislative body that approves the appointees. Usually a favor is involved and the political appointee is moved to another job either within the agency or another agency. You can't tell them what they are doing wrong (New York State Civil Service Law 75(b)(2) offers absolutely no protection whatsoever) and because of their own incompetence, there is resentment toward the employee by the poliitcal appointee which becomes worse in that situation.The mainstream media will not cover the story as it seems that the interest involves a person in the labor class it will be front page news. When it involves management, it may appear only in the Civil Service Paper "The Chief"  and not covered by the "media".. When a poliitcal appointee leaves, another replaces him and what the employee is afraid of is that person may be far worse (and more incompetent) as compared with the previous person.

 

Some poliitcian was quoted as saying that "many of these individuals would have not lasted five minutes in private industry"  I have to agree with that statement to a certain extent as to some of the persons in the top positions but as far as the vast majority of government employees, they would do the same great job that they do day in and day out as they are doing today.The problem remains the MTA bureaucracy and I do not see any change coming in the near future.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My thanks to B/35 via Church for telling the absolute truth as when it comes to the MTA (and for that matter most governmental agencies today),it is common practice.

 

Brooklyn Bus' boss when he did the Southwest Brooklyn Bus changes was a relative of someone connected with the board and he did not know anything about transportation and yet he was protected. When he messed up there, he was assigned to another part of the agency to basically hide from public view. He is not the only one and today it is no different from the beginning of the 20th century when there was "interlocking directorates" among the private companies. These were individuals that sat on the boards of similarly related companies and making decisions for all of them.

 

Today the difference is it is not the proviate companies that engage in this practice but politicians who place their people on the boards or policy making positions of agencies. Here the person is responsibile to the political person that gave him/her this job and not to general public who they should be accountable.The only way that a person like this is removed is when his political mentor leaves office or (very rarely), he/she is not confirmed by the legislative body that approves the appointees. Usually a favor is involved and the political appointee is moved to another job either within the agency or another agency. You can't tell them what they are doing wrong (New York State Civil Service Law 75(b)(2) offers absolutely no protection whatsoever) and because of their own incompetence, there is resentment toward the employee by the poliitcal appointee which becomes worse in that situation.The mainstream media will not cover the story as it seems that the interest involves a person in the labor class it will be front page news. When it involves management, it may appear only in the Civil Service Paper "The Chief" and not covered by the "media".. When a poliitcal appointee leaves, another replaces him and what the employee is afraid of is that person may be far worse (and more incompetent) as compared with the previous person.

 

Some poliitcian was quoted as saying that "many of these individuals would have not lasted five minutes in private industry" I have to agree with that statement to a certain extent as to some of the persons in the top positions but as far as the vast majority of government employees, they would do the same great job that they do day in and day out as they are doing today.The problem remains the MTA bureaucracy and I do not see any change coming in the near future.

 

I think you are referring to my boss when I took over the screwed up Brooklyn Transit Sufficiency Study, not when I made the Southwest Brooklyn Bus changes because I was not working for the MTA at that time. But what you say makes perfect sense. We knew he was related to someone but never figured out who that was. I say it makes sense because when I was transferred out of Operations Planning because we could no longer get along with each other after 18 months, his boss called me into his office to transfer me. He said to me that it was obvious that the both of us could no longer work in the same department and then he said, "Since I can't do anything about him, I'm going to transfer you."
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@ InterestedRider and BrooklynBus

 I can attest to your observations about the BS that applies to many agencies, especially within the (MTA). There are people who came up through the civil service ranks and have taken non-civil service supervisory positions in NYCT who can't run a bus in a circle without screwing up. They couldn't run a Lionel train around a circular track without help but yet they have ascended to these positions either through politics or outright brown nosing.. I had a superintendant who used to call my dispatcher when the service went in the crapper. The super, dispatcher, and I all started our careers at the same time and we were trained by the same people yet when a problem arose he would seek the advice of my dispatcher, usually with my input. I used to tell them I had no aspirations for further promotion because I couldn't see myself being "on call" 24/7/365 for anyone. I had an outside life and I speak my mind when asked a question. Basically what I'm saying is that he was being propped up by those below him. To make a long story short he was living a charmed life until we got a new General Superintendant in the IRT. This new man actively disliked the line supt. and was determined to make life hard on him. He transferred him to a different line. He put him on the midnight shift. Finally the new General Supt. came to me, an hourly employee, and asked me if he should get rid of the man. I told him it wasn't my call to make but I had no objection to what ever decision he would make. The GS told me that he came to me because he heard that I knew more about the line than the man he had targeted. I watched this soap opera play out until I retired. The General got re-assigned and he's now retired yet his incompetent target is still sitting pretty because of politics and brown nosing. I read these threads in the bus and subway forums and realize that a lot of these young posters have no idea of how the (MTA), PA, or any agency really operates. Carry on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@ InterestedRider and BrooklynBus

 I can attest to your observations about the BS that applies to many agencies, especially within the (MTA). There are people who came up through the civil service ranks and have taken non-civil service supervisory positions in NYCT who can't run a bus in a circle without screwing up. They couldn't run a Lionel train around a circular track without help but yet they have ascended to these positions either through politics or outright brown nosing.. I had a superintendant who used to call my dispatcher when the service went in the crapper. The super, dispatcher, and I all started our careers at the same time and we were trained by the same people yet when a problem arose he would seek the advice of my dispatcher, usually with my input. I used to tell them I had no aspirations for further promotion because I couldn't see myself being "on call" 24/7/365 for anyone. I had an outside life and I speak my mind when asked a question. Basically what I'm saying is that he was being propped up by those below him. To make a long story short he was living a charmed life until we got a new General Superintendant in the IRT. This new man actively disliked the line supt. and was determined to make life hard on him. He transferred him to a different line. He put him on the midnight shift. Finally the new General Supt. came to me, an hourly employee, and asked me if he should get rid of the man. I told him it wasn't my call to make but I had no objection to what ever decision he would make. The GS told me that he came to me because he heard that I knew more about the line than the man he had targeted. I watched this soap opera play out until I retired. The General got re-assigned and he's now retired yet his incompetent target is still sitting pretty because of politics and brown nosing. I read these threads in the bus and subway forums and realize that a lot of these young posters have no idea of how the (MTA), PA, or any agency really operates. Carry on.

Looks like the only thing thatters is money POOLS OF MONEY.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I once hand delivered a memo to a top operating official and was told to wait for an answer. Either he read the memo out loud like a third grader or he asked me to to explain some simple English in the memo so he could give me his reply, I forget exactly which.  But when I told the story to someone they told me he was only a high school graduate and wasn't very smart, but he somehow worked his way up the ranks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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