[sustran] Follow up to Dr. Pendakur's comments

[Eric Bruun]

Dr. Pendakur gets to what is often the unspoken difference in
viewpoints for the debate on contracting. We can often agree that
contracting saves money, but it is ultimately a value question
whether we want to push wages as low as they can be driven
just because we have the power to do it.

My personal viewpoint is that I am often at odds with some
unions in the US over their work rules and perhaps overly generous
compensation in some cases. But it is because this means that we receive
less service under inadequate public service budgets and that people at
the very bottom often get hurt.  It is not because I begrudge workers a
middle class income. In a country where 50 percent of the population
receive only 20 percent of the income, I support unionization
as a matter of social equity.  The prevailing political opinion
and many transportation professionals obviously disagrees with me.

Eric Bruun



On Wed, 3 Sep 1997, Dr. V. S. Pendakur wrote:

> 
> There is susstantial experience ( number of systems and number of years )
> in this regardamong the smaller transit systems in British Columbia here. 
> There are sevral success stories and also several complex experiences. 
> Success stories,generally,  combine compatible land use planning within the
> transit corridors.  Complex ones involve competetive bidding by new comers
> essentiaslly offering lower wages and benefits to new employees a la Wall
> Mart.  There are some major questions of social policy in this context
> unlike say in the US where these questions are noty considered important or
> significant in the transit field.
> 
> cheers.
> ****************************************************
> Dr. V. Setty Pendakur
> School of Community and Regional Planning
> University of British Columbia
> Vancouver, BC, Canada  V6T 1Z2
> 1-604-822-3394-voice, 1-604-822-3787-fax
> ***************************************************
> 
> ----------
> > From: Wendell Cox  <wcox at publicpurpose.com>
> > To: Jon Caldara <joncaldara at aol.com>; Hil Hornung <subway33 at aol.com>;
> Jerry Schneider <jbs at u.washington.edu>; Bill Barton <bbarton at xmission.com>;
> Steve Buckstein <cascadepol at aol.com>; George Watts <gwatts at lochrie.com>;
> Steve Excell <excell at cris.com>; Don Shoup <shoup at ucla.edu>; Gen Giuliano
> <giuliano at almaak.usc.edu>; Harry Richardson <hrichard at usc.edu>; James Moore
> <jmoore at almaak.usc.edu>; John Kain <johnkain at husc.harvard.edu>; Charles
> Lave <calave at orion.oac.uci.edu>; Martin Wachs
> <MWACHS at UCLINK4.BERKELEY.EDU>; Mel Webber <webber at ced.berkeley.edu>; Peter
> Gordon <pgordon at almaak.usc.edu>; Greg Schwann Schwann
> <g.schwann at auckland.ac.nz>; Ken Small <ksmall at uci.edu>; Victor Regnier
> <regnier at usc.edu>; pickrell at volpe1.dot.gov; MWACHS at UCLINK4.BERKELEY.EDU;
> Catherine G. Burke <cburke at almaak.usc.edu>; utsg at mailbase.ac.uk;
> sustran-discuss at jca.ax.apc.org
> > Subject: [sustran] Wall Street Journal Public Transport Editorial
> > Date: Wednesday, September 03, 1997 5:44 AM
> > 
> > This morning's Wall Street Journal carries an editorial on urban public
> > transport: "Getting There." Them is competitive tendering (competitive
> > contracting) and failure of the US federal subsidy program to increase
> > public transport ridership.
> > 
> > Available at the following address to subscribers --- 2 week free trial
> is
> > available.
> > 
> >
> https://interactive.wsj.com/edition/current/articles/SB873237388293645500.ht
> m
> > 
> > Entry to the site is at
> > 
> > http://www.wsj.com
> > 
> > Best regards,
> > Wendell Cox
> > WENDELL COX CONSULTANCY
> > International Public Policy, Economics, Labour, Transport & Strategic
> Planning
> > The Public Purpose: Internet Public Policy Journal
> > http://www.publicpurpose.com
> > Voice +1 618 632 8507; Fax  +1 618 632 8538
> > P.O. Box 8083;. Belleville, Illinois 62222 USA
> > 
>