smallspy
Senior Member
They're trying to sell it as such, but you are correct, in many cases its not.Yeah - this definitely isn’t about service levels (that’s the line I’ve seen used to help justify this).
If that were the case you could state (I think?) that any cross-border pickups should not reduce service levels? Or that service levels can’t be dropped from the time the agreement is ratified? This seems all about preserving jobs in specific areas as opposed to the flexibility and heath of the system as a whole, or utility to users.
For instance, a number of the routes in the west end are duplicated with Mississauga Transit routes that see far more service than the TTC provides. The total amount of work that the TTC would "lose" by allowing MT to provide local service on those corridors is less than a dozen pieces of work.
The jobs start at the garages, but many pieces of work require the driver to travel on transit to a point on the route where they take over the bus from another driver.Why would it matter to the employees? The jobs "start" at the garages not in the areas the bus runs.
Dan




