Comments
SlightlyStoopkid t1_j9vhnb7 wrote
>Historically, only existing MBTA employees qualify for dispatcher jobs, and Interim General Manager Jeff Gonneville said the agency is exploring the idea of hiring externally for the role.
sounds to me like they haven't hired anyone from outside yet, but instead just trained people from other roles in the org, and now the problem is:
>our vehicle availability and staffing of operators and front-line management
aka they shuffled people around within the mbta to say "look how well we're doing, we have so many dispatchers now," and in the process they moved so many conductors that they can't run enough trains to maintain their old operating schedule. "we've tried nothing and we're all out of ideas"
silocren t1_j9w8ea3 wrote
They've literally hired one new dispatcher. It took them a year to do it.
They went from 15 to 16.
This is why everyone thinks the MBTA is a sad joke.
trowdatawhey t1_j9weakr wrote
That's hilarious actually lol
But if you think about the type of shit that a train driver has to deal with on the daily and the horrible attitude that forms because of it, would you want to be a dispatcher who then has to deal with those train drivers?
rip_wallace t1_j9zet05 wrote
Hilarious if true, which is not. False claims like the one above do nothing towards fixing the T and discourage folks from funding it/taking it leading to a death spiral. All for internet points..
rip_wallace t1_j9ygjx1 wrote
Source on this? Their board presentations say otherwise
silocren t1_j9yzqy9 wrote
"In June, when the FTA published interim findings of its safety probe, the operations control center had only 15 rapid transit dispatchers total."
"As of Friday, the operations control center had 21 permanent heavy-rail dispatchers employed, five who were performing those duties while “on loan” from other MBTA departments, and another three in training"
So they have 21 now, 5 of whom are on loan. 21 - 5 = 16. They had 15 before, meaning they've only hired one new person.
rip_wallace t1_j9zbkak wrote
It’s a reading comprehension error on your end. It’s 21 permanent dispatchers, ANOTHER 5 on loan (which makes it 26) and another 3 in training.
But take your upvotes for shitting on the T with a false claim, I guess.
Edit: Here is the MBTA’s presentation disproving your bullshit lie. https://cdn.mbta.com/sites/default/files/2023-02/2023-02-24-1-report-from-the-general-manager.pdf
silocren t1_j9zniai wrote
Cool, so we should be back to a regular schedule, right? I mean it has been over a year.
Oh we're not? And we won't be until July 2024, per the MBTA's own dashboard?
https://cdn.mbta.com/sites/default/files/2023-02/2023-02-01_sd22-6_cap6_redacted.pdf
Sorry for not giving the MBTA the benefit of the doubt, they definitely deserve it after the stellar service they've provided - a train hasn't caught fire in months! Running reduced service for only 3 years should be celebrated!
rip_wallace t1_j9znw45 wrote
Lol you got caught spewing a bullshit lie and now you’re changing the subject
silocren t1_j9zoit2 wrote
Relax dude - I referenced the exact source, which made it sound like the 5 dispatchers "on loan" were part of the 21 total, with 3 "additional" dispatchers in training. Blame the reporter for being ambiguous.
It doesn't matter if they have 5 dispatchers or 50 if they can't run a normal schedule for 3+ years. The number is irrelevant.
Imagine simping for the MBTA in 2023.
SlightlyStoopkid t1_j9wkq1u wrote
LMFAO
Barstomanid t1_j9yl4h1 wrote
Hiring externally requires renegotiating multiple union contracts. That's... not going to be an easy or quick process. I don't even know if they've started.
SlightlyStoopkid t1_j9zte06 wrote
Why would they have to renegotiate multiple contracts to hire people? Can’t they join the union and start working?
Apprehensive_Text_68 t1_j9zui5j wrote
I don’t have any experience with this union, but I have lots with other unions. There are often work change polls, seniority issues to work out along with grade changes and a bunch of other stuff before moving to external offerings. It’s a long and ridiculous process, especially if you have multiple unions working in the same group. The most I worked with was 5 unions and it took months to ‘get permission’ to hire someone externally. Hell, I wanted to move some machinery to a different building and it took me nearly a year because the union thought it was being done to ‘reduce overhead’ when I was literally just moving it to a different building to give them more room to work.
SlightlyStoopkid t1_ja027ku wrote
I just don’t understand why either party would sign a contract that prevented them from hiring enough people to do the job. Even if it does take such a long time, wouldn’t you take that into consideration and start the process sooner?
Barstomanid t1_ja056xy wrote
As I understand it, the current contracts only lets them promote into the roles they need from people with sufficient seniority. If you don't have enough people with 5 years of experience or whatever (I don't know the exact number) they can't fill the roll until someone earns the necessary seniority.
Which is, yes, a shitty contract that no one should have signed. Colored me surprised that the MBTA boxed themselves in by signing a bunch of shit contracts.
I could be wrong though, this is all hearsay.
SlightlyStoopkid t1_ja078ri wrote
You’d think, after sticking yourself with a multi year time delay to hire an employee, that you’d want to start that process as soon as possible, instead of letting it get so bad that the federal government had to jump in and tell you you were dangerously understaffed.
[deleted] t1_j9vitgk wrote
[removed]
michael_scarn_21 t1_j9vgt2f wrote
The T are playing whack a mole with excuses again I see.
PresidentBush2 t1_j9vqsma wrote
Did Healey appoint an MBTA GM yet? Any update?
TheSausageFattener t1_j9ybea3 wrote
I don’t think the GM is necessarily the issue here. The interim guy has been there for 20 years and my recollection is he’s worked his way up to that position. He knows his stuff. I mean sure, they could maybe use some higher level direction but as the article states a lot of their constraints are hiring practices, financial incentives, and increasingly rolling stock.
The whole dispatcher thing for example is a really tough tightrope because right now the MBTA can only do internal hires and would need to renegotiate its agreements with several unions to go external, while FTA would have to make sure the system for taking on external hires still requires some familiarity with the system and ops.
This gets to a real issue. Would you want to work for the MBTA as a bus driver working weekends and early mornings for 5 years just to go full time? Who wants a 14 hour dispatcher shift? Also, lets not forget that working for the MBTA is a perfect career for people into public humiliation given how many “experts” think the solution is to gut the agency.
rip_wallace t1_j9ygae4 wrote
Imagine being called a hack and people thinking you don’t deserve a pension because they don’t have one
liberal_hack t1_j9x86ex wrote
No one wants the job lol
Buffyoh t1_j9we67d wrote
Any organization with over 5000 employees where people don't want to move up to supervisory positions has a very toxic organizational culture. You can't have an Army of PFC's and Spec Fours - you need Captains, Majors and Colonels to lead, and it looks like the MBTA simply can't find leaders within its own ranks.
senatorium t1_j9w9xon wrote
AFAIK the T has said its understaffed to the tune of hundreds of positions.
88stardestroyer t1_j9vksco wrote
Sad to read this. When will the feds take over?
Goldenrule-er t1_j9wxa1a wrote
Unfortunately, not soon enough.
SuckMyAssmar t1_j9vnoje wrote
Jesus fucking christ.
Accurate-Temporary73 t1_ja2rr8r wrote
CRRC has completely failed to provide the new subway cars.
eigiarce OP t1_j9vezli wrote
Also: https://www.universalhub.com/2023/lack-dispatchers-no-longer-only-reason-t-cant-run
Choice quotes:
>“We are transitioning to the point where increasing Red, Orange and Blue [Line] service is not solely dependent now on our heavy rail dispatchers, but also our vehicle availability and staffing of operators and front-line management,” Benesh said.She did not provide more details on the vehicle and front-line operator pressure points, nor lay out a timeline for when the conditions will support restoring service.Members of the T board did not ask Benesh or Gonneville about the apparent shift in what will be needed to reverse service cuts. Instead, they heaped praise on MBTA staff for the presentation about operations control center hiring and policy changes.“It’s awesome to look at this. From where we were a year ago, it’s incredible,” said board member Bob Butler.
​
>For the next couple of months, the speed data will be published in a PDF form, and the T will transition to an interactive dashboard by early April, [interim GM] Gonneville said.“That interactive dashboard is going to be impressive. From what I understand and what I’m being told by the team, we may actually be one of the leaders of transit systems, at least large transit systems in the United States, once this dashboard is done and completed,” he said.
How any member of that board can view the current state of the system as anything more than an utter disgrace is.... well, an utter disgrace. A requirement for being a MBTA board member should be that you use the system on a frequent basis (i.e. and not just a token T ride every few months). Then maybe they'll understand how ridiculous statements like these sound when commute times has doubled over the past year (at least for the RL).