>> "Craig Simpson also testified that the average wage for Circulator employees is only $31,000, too low for most families to meet regular household expenses"

No one is twisting your arm to start a family on one wage.

by Jason on Dec 15, 2009 1:12 pm • link • report

Amen, Jason! 'Just for fun, let's pay people more than their work is worth!' That's sure to improve service. Oh wait, we spent the maintenance budget on union wages. Fail.

by abbie on Dec 15, 2009 1:29 pm • link • report

My vote: hurt. Given the history of board directed agencies/project (dcps) I can't see anything except special routes close to board members friends coming out of this.

Given a choice, I'd rather spend the budget on union wages rather than board compensation.

by m on Dec 15, 2009 2:20 pm • link • report

abbie: If you're an authority on how much driving a bus is worth, how much do you think a bus driver should make?

by Ron on Dec 15, 2009 2:37 pm • link • report

A bus driver should make what the maket dictates. If Circulator can find qualified, competent people willing to work for $31,000, then that is the wage. If they can find those same people willing to work for $25,000, so much the better.

No one is entitled to a job.

No one is entitled to any wage above the minimum wage.

by alt67 on Dec 15, 2009 2:59 pm • link • report

This doesn't sound like a good idea to me. While anything could always be better, it seems to me like DDOT is doing a good job running the Circulator program. The flip side of "acting without notice" is that they act nimbly-- they seem to be able to get new services off the ground and change them quickly as conditions warrant. A new board would add bureaucracy. And the fact that WMATA has an independent board doesn't seem to be doing us a lot of good there.

by Josh B on Dec 15, 2009 3:12 pm • link • report

A couple points:

@ Jason: Most "families" in the District consist of a single parent. According to the National Center for Children in Poverty in the District, 86% of children in "poor" families live with a single parent. 47% of children in "non-poor" families live with a single parent. Not exactly a small problem that is just rectified by "choice."

The D.C. Circulator pays bus operators between $14 & $16 per hour depending on length of service. If the Circulator service contract was not administered through WMATA, it would be subject to the Service Contract Act in the District where the average bus operator wage (school bus, urban transit bus, etc. in the Maryland and Virginia suburbs and DC) was at $18.95 per hour in May of this year.

WMATA bus operators start at $15.61 and top out after 23 years at $27.98. The average WMATA bus operator makes around $24 per hour.

My point in testimony is that it has been public policy of the District of Columbia and the federal government not to undercut locally determined wages, but that policy has not been followed in the case of D.C. Circulator.

by Craig Simpson on Dec 15, 2009 3:13 pm • link • report

I don't know if there should be a board, but if there is one I totally want to be on it! I ride the circulator every day.

by sb on Dec 15, 2009 3:22 pm • link • report

It could also mire all decisions in political calculation or hinder innovation.

Another costly board adding another layer of bureaucracy. DDOT is already accountable through mayoral elections. A board can act just as secretly as DDOT did and DDOT could operate more transparently as this proposed board. The only sure thing with this legislation is that the city will end up hiring more people to serve on a board to do a fraction of the work a civil servant in DDOT is expected to do.

by Eric F. on Dec 15, 2009 3:50 pm • link • report

Right, because having a largely appointed and basically unaccountable board has worked out so well for Metro. If a board is created all (or at least a majority) of members should be elected.

by Jacob on Dec 15, 2009 3:53 pm • link • report

I think David wrote that Graham's bill is not cast in stone.

The disadvantages to a board could well be politically influenced transit decisions or simply another layer of bureaucracy but it doesn't have to be that way.

To Graham's credit, he included directly elected representatives and a requirement that Mayor and Council board members be regular riders.

I think DDOT has done some pretty good experimentation with bus routes, bike lanes, bike sharing and some other areas, but it too can make mistakes. DDOT also can be subject to political influence and can make other decisions which are questionable.

The BID's have had a positive influence in improving transit, but there is an equity issue in some of the Circulator routes. The Councilmember who represents Georgetown and the Georgetown BID both weighed in heavily in favor of keeping Circulator service running up Wisconsin despite low ridership and overlap with the relatively frequent service on the 30s.

Likewise, the Union Station to Navy Yard bus is running very frequent during the day with relatively low ridership while providing no service in the evenings (except for Nats games).

A representative board could help to oversee such decisions while weighing other transit options for the dollars available.

by kreeggo on Dec 15, 2009 4:39 pm • link • report

An elected transit board sounds like music to my ears. Transit effects my daily life much more than public schools.

by tour guide on Dec 15, 2009 6:19 pm • link • report

"The D.C. Circulator pays bus operators between $14 & $16 per hour depending on length of service. If the Circulator service contract was not administered through WMATA, it would be subject to the Service Contract Act in the District where the average bus operator wage (school bus, urban transit bus, etc. in the Maryland and Virginia suburbs and DC) was at $18.95 per hour in May of this year."

So what you are saying is that DC law should be artificially inflating the salaries of bus drivers, and, by extension, the burden of the bus system on the riders and taxpayers.

Again, if Circulator or Metro can find qualified, competent people willing to drive busses for the miniumum wage, then they are, in my opinion, morally obligated as a public agency, to pay that wage.

A public transit agency is not an anti-poverty program for its employees who make terrible life choices and lack the skills, education, or motivation, to get better paying jobs. The DC welfare state is big enough (and a big enough failure) without expanding it to include the bus drivers.

In this economy, with many people out of work, the wages for jobs like driving a bus, which involve a relatively easily teachable skill, should be falling. Rather then charging riders more, these easily replaceable employees should have their pay cut. That this is not happening shows a serious problem with the economics of the transit systems.

by alt67 on Dec 15, 2009 6:46 pm • link • report

@alt67:

You are, of course, entitled to your opinion but it does go against what have been long standing policies by the District and federal governments.

Following your logic, we should repeal minimum wage, living wage, prevailing wage and the service contract acts. Probably should also do away with earned income tax credit, workers compensation, unemployment insurance, food stamps and other social safety net programs. Yes, and why should we provide health insurance? We should get rid of medicaid and CHIPs also. And the biggest socialist program of all: social security. Let's let those who "make terrible life choices and lack the skills, education, or motivation, to get better paying jobs" fend for themselves. In short we should go back to those far sighted policies of the 19th century which resulted in starvation wages, mass strikes and revolutionary movements throughout the world. That sounds like a good plan.

by Craig Simpson on Dec 15, 2009 6:58 pm • link • report

Holy straw-man argument, Batman!

by Eric F. on Dec 15, 2009 7:05 pm • link • report

It might be worth thinking about whether paying minimum wage would indeed get good bus operators. A transit system might get a lot of drivers, but then find that there's a spike in bad customer service and more crashes. The agency might not be able to tell ahead of time which poorly-paid driver is likely to crash, but will have more crashes nonetheless. Once there's a crash, it's too late and suddenly they have high legal bills for the lawsuits that ensue.

I don't always try to get the cheapest carpenter to come do work on my house, because if I did, I'd likely end up with something that breaks pretty quickly. Sometimes it's worth paying a little more for good quality.

Of course, we might not be getting good quality anyway. It would be helpful to have data on whether higher-paid drivers tend to do better jobs and treat customers better. If not, okay, but we shouldn't just assume drivers are interchangeable parts and the ones you can get for $30K/year are no different than the ones you can get for $50K/year.

That's sort of how we've typically treated teachers, and look where it's gotten us.

by David Alpert on Dec 15, 2009 7:47 pm • link • report

WMATA low-balled bus operator wages from 1999-2007. A relatively low starting wage was introduced combined with a requirement to work part time (Part time work in the transit industry means you work 3 to 3 1/2 hours in the morning, have five to six hours off and then come back and do it again in the evening rush hour). In addition, WMATA paid minimum wage for a 4-6 week training period.

Many were hired and quickly left for better paying jobs. Those that remained are some of the operators that people complain about. Many had never worked in jobs requiring customer service or held steady jobs before.

The underlying problem was fixed at WMATA by two upward adjustments in the starting wage, increasing the "training wage" to "living wage" standards and eliminating the requirement to work part time before becoming full-time. Catoe should be credited with this fix which largely occurred shortly after he arrived.

Could you hire some good people now at relatively low wages? Probably, but they'd be gone as soon as the economy turns around and you'll lose the experience which is critical in operating trains or buses.

The Circulator is a relatively new, small system in a time period where you can get workers fairly easily. There will be increasing pressure on wages fairly soon or the experienced operators will quit for better paying jobs. They have already unionized and negotiated one contract so don't expect the upward pressure on wages to go away.

by kreeggo on Dec 15, 2009 8:05 pm • link • report

I'm OK with the quality drivers leaving for better opportunities when the economy improves. Bus driver should not be a lucrative career. What's next? Meter maids should be paid great wages so we don't lose the most diligent ones? Unskilled jobs are meant to be transitional jobs in the food chain not careers.

As for David's analogy to teachers - teaching is a skilled job. Besides, even the answer with teaching isn't to pay them all more. It's to pay the ones that have proven to be effective more...

by Jason on Dec 15, 2009 9:55 pm • link • report

I find it rich that the Grahamstander introduces a piece of legislation requiring members of this new board to be regular riders of the circulator when he, as Chair of the Metro Board rarely if ever rides Metro or MetroBus...

This is also Jim's MO...let's introduce a piece of legislation that is "not set in stone" as far as the particulars go and then it passes because it seems like a good idea and then he and the Mayor and the other Wilson building croneys, craft all these ridiculous rules and regulations that have the final law looking nothing like what was approved.

It would be nice if the Grahamstander could introduce some legistlation that he's (or more to the point his staff) have put some thought into before introducing it.

by Adams Morgan on Dec 16, 2009 12:37 pm • link • report

A transportation commission is probably in order. Arlington has one, so does the City of Tempe. But it should have a broader purview than that proposed by CM Graham's legislation.

http://www.arlingtonva.us/departments/commissions/tc/EnvironmentalServicesTransportationCommission.aspx

And we should have a comprehensive transportation plan for the city, which would cover this issue and more, rather than a bunch of piecemeal legislation.

by Richard Layman on Dec 16, 2009 4:10 pm • link • report

In my opinion, since all DC kids ride free why not have the adults ride free too!!!!

Then we can pay the Board members around 35,000.00 a year like the Metro Board. Or do they make around $60,000.00 a year. What do they make?

by Don on Jan 1, 2010 12:35 am • link • report

@Don: They make nothing from their jobs as WMATA board members, except maybe the PG county representatives that might be compensated by that county.

by Michael Perkins on Jan 1, 2010 9:34 am • link • report