Grand River Transit

[Rainrider22]

I don't know what the issue with the camera's are. It sounds like they object to the discpline program, which in my opinion, should be unrelated to the cameras, the cameras are unbiased witnesses, if the process is unfair to drivers, then the removal of witnesses won't solve that.

As for the barriers, I'm not in favour because I feel they make transit unfriendly to the users, but if the reality is we have violence on our buses, that's a shame, and maybe they're necessary, but I remember this came up years ago, why are we talking about it again? I've heard the region offered to install them over 3 years, that's absurd, they've already been piloted and tested, or at least they planned too...so why can't they be installed over the regular maintenance program...I assume our buses are maintained more frequently than every 3 years.

The discipline aspect also came up in the previous contract negotiations in 2017 (https://kitchener.ctvnews.ca/safety-disc...-1.3349905). During those negotiations, it was revealed that drivers were being disciplined for hitting construction pylons and not reporting it, even if they didn't know they hit the pylons, as according to management it was "leaving the scene of a collision."

Well that is just idiotic...Because it isn't an accident.  I agree that is ridiculous,

[PhilippAchtel]

I'd rather not get sucked into a big debate online about this, so I'll just say that Nextasy's posts on that and other recent reddit threads sum up my thoughts on the issue as well.

These drivers and mechanics are out picketing in the snow and rain, taking a significant pay cut to do so, while Mike Murray and the rest of the regional admin team enjoy their heated offices at their full six-figure salaries. Given those conditions, and what we already know about regional mismanagement, if I have to give benefit of the doubt to one side or the other, I know which side I choose. And that's before I factor in my normal skepticism of management vis-a-vis labour.

If you think they've initiated the first transit strike in GRT history for the right to a longer smoke break or to swear at their customers without oversight, you're dreaming.

[danbrotherston]

I really don't like the idea that drivers are hitting pylons without knowing it.

There is clearly a balance to be struck, I don't believe in an invasion of privacy, if management was reviewing every minute of every bus ride, that would be a problem, if they are responding to complaints, in my opinion that's perfectly fine, I suspect the truth could be somewhere in between, but I really have no idea.

What is also clear is that both sides find this delicate, but that the Union is really losing the PR battle.

It's a simple matter of physics why they wouldn't know about hitting a pylon, especially if it gets hit by the rear end of the bus. This comment from reddit I believe perfectly sums up the issues with the policy around reporting collisions with construction pylons. https://www.reddit.com/r/waterloo/commen...?context=1

Pylons are stationary, buses have mirrors, a driver should know if they will be close to a pylon and should look to see if they will be hitting it.

As an occasionally stationary object standing near curbs, I really need bus drivers to be aware of things they might be hitting with the rear of their vehicles.

I cannot understand how someone can believe it is okay for a driver not to know they've hit something. I am not saying they should be fired, or even always not hit pylons, just that they must KNOW when they are hitting something.

[tomh009]

Indeed, and it lends credibility to the idea that a 3 year rollout is the region dragging their feet.

250 buses. Something like $6000 per bus so there is substantial labour involved in the installation. I expect this would be done as part of a regular maintenance cycle rather than taking buses out of circulation.

And I will note here that the GRT and union negotiators did agree on this installation timeline, just a week before the strike.

[white_brian]

The other issue is response times for drivers who need assistance, this will be the toughest one to solve. If there is an issue on a bus that requires a supervisor or assistance with a problem passenger, the GRT covers alot of ground within the region. The police are already stretched to thin, I know a few supervisors who work for the GRT and they are stretched thin as well

[Bytor]

The other issue is response times for drivers who need assistance, this will be the toughest one to solve. If there is an issue on a bus that requires a supervisor or assistance with a problem passenger, the GRT covers alot of ground within the region. The police are already stretched to thin, I know a few supervisors who work for the GRT and they are stretched thin as well

And that's part of the problem - GRT runs too darn lean. If a driver is sick, something happens and they have to leave early, rather than having a supervisor drive that bus a bit for a bit until an on-call driver can get in, they will just pull a bus from another route with no notice to fill in for the missing one. Quite often the route they pull from is the 302 and formerly the 200 because an hour long hole in a little-used suburban route with 0-5 impacted riders is apparently worse than a 20 minute hole in a heavily used express route and 40-80 impacted riders. The real time displays also still act as if the diverted bus is still on the route.

Same thing goes for when a bus breaks down. Instead of a mechanic driving another bus to the location, a supervisor gives them a ride to the breakdown and they decide whether the bus can be driven back to the barn or wait for a tow truck. Again, the real time displays show as if there is no hole.

This is also why it takes GRT so long to get shuttle busses running when there has been an accident involving a tram. They wait for a bus to get to the end of the line where they would switch directions (or even change routes like the 8 & 12 do) and then those busses head to the ION station to play shuttle.  (Leaving a hole with real time info not updated, yadda yadda.) What they should be doing is two supervisors need to to be hopping in a bus the minute ION central command tells them of an accident, get to opposite ends of the gap and shuttle for an hour or so until the on-call drivers can get in and take over, without diverting any busses.

[Bytor]

Video from Unifor on drivers' experiences.

https://www.facebook.com/UniforCanada/vi...=2&theater

[timc]

I'm still confused. The union is looking for barriers, and GRT has agreed to install barriers. Is it that it's not happening fast enough?

[JoeKW]

In Quebec hitting a pylon is treated very harshly as it could easily be a construction worker. My sister ended up with a giant fine for merely nudging a cone this summer.

[Bytor]

I'm still confused. The union is looking for barriers, and GRT has agreed to install barriers. Is it that it's not happening fast enough?

Three years ago the Region agreed to barriers, did a small pilot project testing only 1 kind, and then dropped it.
How trusting would you be?

[KevinL]

They also have concerns about how video footage is used. I'm fairly sure that is the main roadblock at this point.

[ac3r]

Regarding how the video footage is used, it seems they are a bit ticked off that they can be disciplined if caught on video doing things they are not supposed to be doing - which I think is fair. Safety goes both ways. Video cameras are there to hopefully ID someone who may decide to grope a passenger or steal their laptop bag. But they are also there to watch the drivers, many whom love to stop off and have a smoke, love to text while behind the wheel, will run over curbs or traffic cones. If they're doing a job without any issues, what is the problem with having a camera that has the driver in its field of view? It will see nothing but them driving and greeting passengers. If it's a driver who loves to pull out their phone at red lights or stops to check their notifications, then yes, they should be disciplined for doing that, as it puts a bus load of passengers, other drivers and pedestrians at risk.

[ijmorlan]

In Quebec hitting a pylon is treated very harshly as it could easily be a construction worker. My sister ended up with a giant fine for merely nudging a cone this summer.

Depends on the circumstances. It should be OK for a driver to notice that they’re about to hit a cone, and judge that just nudging it a bit as they squeeze by is harmless. I was talking to a driver once who said that if they so much as touched a sign with their mirror, they were supposed to do the full collision protocol. Completely absurd.

I do agree that it’s not OK for them to be unaware.

I’m not advocating sloppy driving, but in the real world, sometimes one needs to squeeze through a spot that is smaller than it ideally would be. Also, there are certain circumstances in which bus drivers really should be much more aggressive. In particular, re-joining traffic from a bus bay should pretty much be a matter of putting the signal on, waiting a moment, and driving. It’s not their problem if some idiot won’t yield. OK, not quite at that level, because it could endanger people on the bus (I don’t care about the idiots; they’ll kill themselves somewhere else before too long), but they really shouldn’t have to just meekly sit there until there is no traffic coming — they’re supposed to have the right-of-way.

[tomh009]

I'm still confused. The union is looking for barriers, and GRT has agreed to install barriers. Is it that it's not happening fast enough?

Three years ago the Region agreed to barriers, did a small pilot project testing only 1 kind, and then dropped it.
How trusting would you be?

Either you trust a signed contract ... or else, why are you even bothering to negotiate one?

[bgb_ca]

Another tentative deal reached. To be voted on Thursday.

https://kitchener.ctvnews.ca/mobile/regi...-1.4787621