 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The New York City Transit Authority (TA) and its unions seem poised to offer New Yorkers the holiday gift from hell. With the threat of a New York City bus and subway strike, the nation's largest and world's greatest city is threatened with genuine gridlock, not the largely imagined type so frequently cited by reporters from Cedar Rapids to Salt Lake City.
It could be called the "just say no" strike. The TA and the unions are preparing to "just say no" to the 56 percent of New Yorkers who don't have cars, the 52 percent who use transit to get to work, and the 75 percent who commute to Manhattan — by far the nation's largest business center — every day. They may as well realize they are saying no to the future of New York, giving businesses yet another reason to abandon the city for the suburbs. True, Manhattan has more jobs in a smaller space than anywhere else in the world. But over the past 50 years not a single additional job has been added there, while three million have been added in the tri-state metropolitan area. New York is a city of transit superlatives. Nowhere else in the nation do people rely so much on transit. New York is built for transit. In addition to the Manhattan jobs, the city has virtually all the high-density development in the nation. For New York to work requires transit that works. But you wouldn't know that by the way New Yorkers have been treated over the years by politicians, transit management, and transit unions. Labor and management have, figuratively, shared the same side of a bargaining table, where the voice of the riders and taxpayers is as scarce as mountain air on Broadway. Over and over their contracts have led to higher fares and higher taxes to support an organizational structure whose time has long since passed. The bureaucracy has grown too large and too expensive. Wages, salaries, and fringe benefits are well above what the market would bear if the market were allowed to operate. The average compensation of a TA employee is at least 20 percent above that of the average New Yorker. Work rules seem designed to keep squeeze only a minimum amount of service out of every dollar. This needs to change. Unlike so many other world-class systems, transit in New York continues to operate as a public monopoly. This cozy arrangement serves labor and management well, most of whom are paid more than if there were a competitive market and they are not paid for working more. Outside New York, the world has moved on. Nearly 20 years ago, London transit officials were faced with a similar set of circumstances, and resolved to put customers first. Now, virtually all bus service — 6,000 buses — 60 percent more than New York — is operated under competitive contracts by firms in the competitive market. Costs per mile have been reduced one-half since the program began in 1985 (inflation adjusted). The transit authority tells the private companies where and when to operate, what fares to charge and what the buses should be like and requires interconnectivity of transfers and service. From modern lows, ridership has risen to its highest level in 25 years. Even subways are being competitively contracted. Stockholm is using the private sector to operate its entire subway network. The payoff has been 20-percent-lower costs, better service and higher ridership. Tokyo may have world's best transit system — it certainly has the largest. There, private rail and bus operators operate without subsidy and carry more riders than all transit systems in the United States combined. Even the government-owned subways and buses receive little subsidy. How different it is than in New York, where taxpayers pay more than three billion dollars in subsidies annually. From Copenhagen to Melbourne, transit systems are being converted to competition. Even the European Union is requiring the competition in transit. But not so in the United States. Imprudent federalization of transit policy has endowed a museum filled with exhibits of obsolete operating practices and discredited organizational structures. It is no wonder that costs have been driven up and potential passengers driven away. Nonetheless, E. S. Savas and E. J. McMahon of the Manhattan Institute found that, where it is used, competitive contracting saves an average of 38 percent in U.S. transit. At one-half or even one-quarter of these savings (easily achievable), the TA's deficit would be a thing of the past and more transit service could be provided for New Yorkers. New York needs a 21st-century transit system — one dedicated to serving customers rather than employees and managers. — Wendell Cox is a transportation consultant and a visiting professor at the Conservatoire National des Arts et Metiers in Paris. He was a three-term member of the Los Angeles County Transportation Commission and chaired two American Public Transit Association committees. |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
<% dim printurl
printurl = Request.ServerVariables("URL")%>
pox on both their houses.
