Greater Greater Washington

Transit


Sarles focusing on "basics" of safety, reliability, finances

WMATA General Manager Richard Sarles sat down with bloggers from Greater Greater Washington, Unsuck DC Metro, DCist, and We Love DC last night for an on-the-record chat about Metro's challenges and his short-term 6-month plan to address them.


Photo by erin_m.

Mr. Sarles presented his plan (PDF) to improve the system's safety, reliability and financial stability over the next 6 months. He emphasized the importance of getting the system "back to basics," pressing accountability for maintenance and management to responsible people, and getting the funding and resources needed to maintain a state of good repair.

To improve safety, Sarles mentioned a number of actions to improve safety oversight, reporting and worker perception. The safety department got a new manager and increased staffing. They're working to close out audit findings with identified fixes. They're developing a tracking system to make sure near misses and safety problems don't fall through the cracks, and they're improving the ways workers can bring up safety problems, reducing the risk of retaliation from their peers or their supervisors.

I asked him about the finding by the TOC that some workers were getting retaliated against by rail operators for reporting safety problems:

That's all part of getting people to understand, dealing with safety issues is the responsibility of everyone, and that nobody should take any grief for bringing that up. In that area, we've already worked to better communicate what's going on to the train operators, the specific locations of track workers so that [the rail operators] are more aware of that, and also to communicate to the workers out in the field that if the situation isn't quite right for them that they should report it immediately and step back from the work if necessary if there's a condition that they don't feel entirely safe in. So it's a matter of communicating to people that they have the right to step back if they feel it's unsafe.

On customer service reliability, Metro is going to start publishing performance metrics, similar to the performance metrics reported by Chicago Transit. And not just to the Board, to the public too. There will be an annual summary in September, as well as monthly updates starting in June. This is something I've wanted for a long time since I found the CTA metrics. The exact measurements have not been selected, but on-time performance and mean time before failure are likely candidates.

The elevator and escalator division will have help from consultants, performing a top-to-bottom review of the maintenance and repair procedures. Accountability will be enhanced by dividing up the population of escalators and elevators among various teams, and then tracking the reliability of each team to see who is following best practices, and who can improve.

For improvements in Metro's financial stability, nothing new came up that has not been discussed at length here at GGW and in the press.

I asked him about the progress on obtaining an agreement with Google Transit. Previously, a Metro spokesperson had said that the negotiations were progressing but he wasn't able to say how much longer it would be. Mr. Sarles bragged about how he liked the Google Transit service and how his former agency, New Jersey Transit, beat New York's MTA to the punch. He promised to ask his staff about progress and wrote a note to follow up.

I also asked him about whether Metro could release the data collected by NextBus as a public API so other developers could write apps for mobile devices or other ends. He commented that it sounded like something they could look into, and scribbled another note.

I brought up the number of latent failures in the system and how it's affecting Metro's ability to see problems with the system. Sarles declined to comment, citing the ongoing NTSB investigation since that was the context of my comment.

Finally, I asked about some of the customers who have had problems getting an adequate response from customer service representatives, either never getting a response other than the automated initial response. One friend of mine who reported that his bus showed up late with a driver who had to ask the customers for directions. All he got from a line supervisor was a mention that he should be grateful he had a bus at all.

Mr. Sarles shook his head at that one, and said that after they've tried the normal customer service route, if they're still unsatisfied they could email him. He wouldn't directly offer his email address but it's not hard to figure out. [First initial][Last name]@wmata.com is the general pattern.

When asked about whether he's yet ridden a Metrobus, he got a little defensive. He's been a bus rider since he was growing up, and rode the bus with previous transit agencies. He just hasn't had a chance to ride with this agency yet.

Before people recognized his face, he was able to act as a "secret shopper" on the system, observing customer interaction with police, station managers and other employees. Now that people recognize him, he said he often discusses Metro service while riding the train to and from his home in Pentagon City.

Michael Perkins blogs about Metro operations and fares, performance parking, and any other government and economics information he finds on the Web. He lives with his wife and two children in Arlington, Virginia. 

Comments

Add a comment »

Thanks for the summary Michael. Matt J just posted This Link about how the union wants to slow trains top speed from 59mph to 40mph. Shame you couldn't ask about this one.

by Matt Glazewski on May 11, 2010 12:17 pm • linkreport

if they're still unsatisfied they could email him. He wouldn't directly offer his email address
Uh... surely I'm not the only one who sees the contradiction here.

by Gavin on May 11, 2010 12:22 pm • linkreport

Ah, but he's a trickster because you can easily figure out what his email address is.

by Michael Perkins on May 11, 2010 12:51 pm • linkreport

Bummer I couldn't make it :-(

Thanks for the article

by metroman on May 11, 2010 2:25 pm • linkreport

Any response from him about Google Transit? You know, that project that is 3yrs and 7 months behind?

by James on May 11, 2010 3:47 pm • linkreport

@james. Thought I discussed that in the article.

And by my count its about a year behind since I only count it from our petition last year.

by michael perkins on May 11, 2010 7:07 pm • linkreport

Good piece. I do have a suggestion: how well and how diligently are the maintenance records being kept and the appropriate maintenance being performed?

I ask this because as a veteran Naval Officer, maintenance was unyieldingly critical to day-to-day basic functioning of the surface ship fleet. Incorrect maintenance, unperformed maintenance logged as performed, or unlogged or improperly logged performance could lead to, respectively, re-doing maintenance, leading to safety risks, or inadvertent safety risks. I cannot stress the magnitude of importance of Reliability Centered Maintenance, which is where I think that a fair amount of scrutiny should be placed.

Safety is equally as important; don't get me wrong. I was the Assistant Safety Officer for my last command and as the assistant, I was swamped with understanding codes and violations thereof, reporting requirements, mishap procedures, and on, and on, but the one thing I did notice is that safety and maintenance worked hand-in-hand far more often than not.

As I read further into the article about the metrics-based improvements, the first thought that came to mind was: Six Sigma (it's real. Google is how I first learned about it through random searches and eventually got my Green Belt in it). I would caution Sarles with this if it is the case: incremental improvements will occur, but on a fundamental process level, not necessarily translating to improved customer service and operations performance right away, if even the project is scoped to improve such processes. In other words, it can be a double-edged sword. All processes CAN be improved, but by statistically significant differences for each and every process is generally considered unattainable, especially when considering that, unlike the military, whose budget is authorized for spending by Congress through the Pentagon, WMATA has no dedicated source of continuous funding; moreover, process improvement projects are usually considered to be cost-control implementing procedures to given processes.

Sorry if I bored you to tears, but I think that, aside from some good old fashioned bureaucracy, the items I listed are where I think the main problem lies within WMATA.

by C. R. on May 11, 2010 10:17 pm • linkreport

@ MP re: google transit

You did cover it in the article. I was wondering if he'd gotten back to you since he was going to check with staff.

by James on May 12, 2010 7:43 am • linkreport

Oh, not yet. From staff I heard negotiations are ongoing, same as the past few months. It's with the lawyers.

by Michael Perkins on May 12, 2010 8:04 am • linkreport

@ CR Very much on point. New safety officers and reporting are nice cosmetics but the key is in maintenance, engineering data analysis, and safety coordination. New rail cars are dramatic but the maintenance and control of the systems that support them are key. Wayside systems aren't as sexy as rail cars. The Metro system is paying the price for it's lack attention to the it's people and its many component pieces.

by Interested on May 12, 2010 10:23 am • linkreport

@ Interested

The reason I bring this up, is that, after M O'M lit up WMATA on WTOP's Ask the Governor on Monday, I asked him what long term plan he had aside from the Purple Line for solutions to mass transit (which of course he dodged), but my point of asking him was more so about the "mixed-use developments" or Transit-Oriented Developments, the second part of my question to him. He basically said that initial research and planning is being reviewed, but until Maryland could get more dollars the projects won't get off the ground. From a technical standpoint, I give hime the benefit of the doubt, but I am inclined to think that any project which could produce scores of benefits, including reduced traffic congestion, reduced sprawl (as is most evident especially in Prince George's county) and increased access to jobs, leisure, and entertainment activities, what sane, right-minded person would not begin procurement and investment into areas surrounding the Metro stations?

Maybe it's a bias for common sense, but I don't know.

I would want Metro to become stronger so that more people would want to move to these areas of mixed use. (I can think that the 1/4 mi radius surrounding Branch Avenue as a prime target) That, in turn, can alleviate a percentage of Metro's funding woes, and to me, since it seems that there is sentiment for it elsewhere throughout the country, we should be at the forefront of this movement.

Ah, but elections are coming up in a few months, are they not? >:)

Just like the quote at the top of the blog page: It (Washington Metropolitan Area) can be GREATER.

by C. R. on May 12, 2010 7:06 pm • linkreport

@ MP

I'm not convinced in any way that means that anything is actually happening. We need to see substantive action, not the tired refrain, 'negotiations are ongoing'.

by james on May 13, 2010 1:47 pm • linkreport

You know what I know. And I know all that the wmata spokesperson and the GM were willing to say.

by Michael Perkins on May 13, 2010 2:03 pm • linkreport

Add a Comment

Name: (will be displayed on the comments page)

Email: (must be your real address, but will be kept private)

URL: (optional, will be displayed)

Your comment:

By submitting a comment, you agree to abide by our comment policy.
Notify me of followup comments via email. (You can also subscribe without commenting.)
Save my name and email address on this computer so I don't have to enter it next time, and so I don't have to answer the anti-spam map challenge question in the future.

or