TTC being privatized?

[smallspy]

Equipment/machinery is all there, just need asses for the seats, with an indefinite lockout looming, I doubt they'll be a shortage of asses to put in the seats.

Employment economics 101 for you....

If wages are kept artificially low, you will get fewer asses filling the seats as people will not think that it is worth their while.

For several years, the TTC has had problems filling the seats they do have, and that is despite the high wages that you are railing so much at. Why do you think that lowering those wages will result in more asses to fill the seats, especially once they've done away with the skilled and trained labour that has been there for a while?

Supply and demand, or more specifically, elasticity of demand.

Why is it that so many right-wingers are so god-damned blind to how the real world works around them? (The same could be said about the left-wingers, but we'll save that one for another topic.)

Dan

[rob9701]

Do engineers do overtime? I am prerty sure they are steady hours

Part of the reason why any bus driver makes money is because of siuations that need drivers to work extra overtime.. IE subway shuttles.

Sick coverage as well I suspect. If you get a whole bunch of staff using all of their sick days no matter what it must be hard to find coverage.

My pharmaceutical plant gives us 6 sick days a year, you basically earn half a day per month. Is this close to what the TTC staff are allocated?

Employment economics 101 for you....

If wages are kept artificially low, you will get fewer asses filling the seats as people will not think that it is worth their while.

For several years, the TTC has had problems filling the seats they do have, and that is despite the high wages that you are railing so much at. Why do you think that lowering those wages will result in more asses to fill the seats, especially once they've done away with the skilled and trained labour that has been there for a while?

Supply and demand, or more specifically, elasticity of demand.

Why is it that so many right-wingers are so god-damned blind to how the real world works around them? (The same could be said about the left-wingers, but we'll save that one for another topic.)

Dan

I'm not sure Dan - I've kept an eye on that site. I don't think they did any recruiting in the second half of 2010 and doesn't it say they won't be accepting applications again until late 2011? If it was so hard to find people I would think they'd be constantly recruiting.

[Archer]

It's quite simple to get to a position where the workers are locked out, there's absolutely nothing they can do about it, that's what I was getting at.

It's a good route for the city to investigate, let the contract run out, do everything needed to get them into strike position, lock them out, and get an external player in to run the show.

Yeah... um... no. That isn't how it works at all. Again, just because the contract has hit the expiry date does not mean it has "run out". It still remains in place until a new contract is negotiated. To do as you propose is the same as simply bringing in an external player if the union goes out on strike (aka hiring scabs), and is very much illegal in the Province of Ontario, as written in Section 78 of the Ontario Labour Relations Act.

Also under the same section... the only people who could perform the work of the union members in a strike/lockout situation are management members who were employed prior to the end of the contract or union members who cross the picket line. And the management members have to be from the section/division in which they are performing the work (aka the only people who would be authorized to work in Malvern garage in a strike/lockout would be managers who immediately supervise employees from Malvern garage).

In short, I suggest you look at the OLRA very carefully before you propose more illegal ideas.

[bmountdriver]

Yeah... um... no. That isn't how it works at all. Again, just because the contract has hit the expiry date does not mean it has "run out". It still remains in place until a new contract is negotiated. To do as you propose is the same as simply bringing in an external player if the union goes out on strike (aka hiring scabs), and is very much illegal in the Province of Ontario, as written in Section 78 of the Ontario Labour Relations Act.

Also under the same section... the only people who could perform the work of the union members in a strike/lockout situation are management members who were employed prior to the end of the contract or union members who cross the picket line. And the management members have to be from the section/division in which they are performing the work (aka the only people who would be authorized to work in Malvern garage in a strike/lockout would be managers who immediately supervise employees from Malvern garage).

In short, I suggest you look at the OLRA very carefully before you propose more illegal ideas.

Don't waste your time arguing with jules18 or any other uninformed idiot who hasn't got a clue about labour laws. They conveniently ignore the facts and realities of the actual labour laws and like to spread their distortions and uninformed opinions. They believe that if you tell the lie often enough, it will become the truth. They always pull out the old "pull a Ronald Reagan" line without realizing that you cannot do this in Canada because of both Ontario and Canadian labour laws with respect to the RIGHT to unionize. The air traffic controllers in the USA did NOT have a legal right to strike under US federal law (they were deemed as an "essential" service by US law). When their concerns about workload, stress levels, forced overtime, etc. were not being dealt with seriously by the US Government, these workers knowly and willingly staged an illegal strike. The US government brought in US military ATC's to perform the job function. Yes, Reagan did fire the strikers, but most of them were rehired because the US government couldn't find qualified people for the job. The military personel who filled in started to suffer from stress and other job-related problems that the strikers had been complaining about. In the end, the US government actually did address the reasons for the strike, and most of the strikers were hired back at the same pay BUT with improved working conditions.

[502 Downtowner]

You can get overtime with any of those jobs, just like a bus driver. Hopefully everyone sees this and apply to TTC. I know they said they were in need of drivers, this should get people applying.

What I don't understand though is why the employment page on the TTC's website states that they won't be hiring until late 2011 if they are in need of drivers. I've been applying non-stop since early 2008 and have still come up dry.

As for privatizing, if wages for TTC operators are dropped at all, even a couple of dollars per hour, let alone the huge cuts some people are calling for, I would hazard a guess that a large percentage of current operators would either quit, retire, or walkout. IMO, the amount of money they make is completely justified.

[Archer]

What I don't understand though is why the employment page on the TTC's website states that they won't be hiring until late 2011 if they are in need of drivers. I've been applying non-stop since early 2008 and have still come up dry.

I believe they just finished a large recruitment campaign and are processing the applicants through. It isn't the fastest process.

As well, some of the overtime is going to be for things like delays on a line which push an operator past their finish time, or things like subway shuttles where you simply need as many bodies ASAP and for as long as possible. Things like flood response, if severe enough (think that massive rainstorm in '09 that flooded out most of the downtown loop stations) are also going to require overtime. I also imagine that trades workers aren't scheduled over a full 24 hour shift, as the might be needed on the off shift for a problem maybe 20% of the time for an issue.

Overtime isn't a bad thing, per see... going back to the trades example above, if you call in a trades person on the off shift for a problem, you have to pay them 4 hours OT (so 6 hours regular pay). You save 2 hours in costs there by not having them regularly scheduled for that shift. Use the 20% number I pulled out of my ass, and that corresponds to 48 shifts... or saving 96 hours per year by paying OT instead of scheduling per tradesperson.

[bmountdriver]

This link explains what is going on: http://www3.ttc.ca/Jobs/transit_operator_d...recruitment.jsp The TTC had to slow down the hiring of new operators as part of the 2010 budget process. TTC has only been hiring operators to fill vacancies (retirements, resignations, etc.) all of last year. There have been very few new operators coming on board in the last year. There is a link within this page that gives further explanation: http://www3.ttc.ca/Jobs/Successful_Operato...uly_2009_to.jsp Hope that this info helps!

[bmountdriver]

So if this much money is being wasted on OT, why are they not hiring extra employees to pick up the slack? In a job where you need to be alert and well rested does anyone not find it odd that someone is working enough to make 160k a year, with that amount of OT are they adequately rested? None of these practices are in the best interests of the rider and the taxpayer.

Fatigue leads to accidents, accidents lead to lawsuits, lawsuits cost the taxpayer.

See my post above about TTC Operator vacancies. There are actually several laws that apply in Ontario regarding hours of work under the Employment Standards Act (Section 17 - Hours of Work) and Hours of Rest (Section 18 - Hours Free From Work). As well, for operators, the Highway Traffic Act also covers the above as they relate to the operation of a commercial vehicle. Both the employer and the employee are responsible for maintaining and enforcing these rules. Severe penalties apply for both parties for non-compliance. As a TTC Operator, I am responsible for ensuring that I am personally responsible for complying with ALL relevent laws and regulations.

[BBC 9197]

Hmmm... If it's so great, why aren't you working for the TTC or other city agency?

The City of Toronto's Works Dept. (garbage collection) does compete with the private sector and is more efficient, it does this and still pays their employee's a living wage. Why would you want your 'hard earned' tax dollars to go into the pockets of some large corporation which is possibly based overseas? I'm getting a strong whiff of jealousy here, nasty stuff!

[GTAnonymous]

People shouldn't be pulling in $100+k for operating a bus. Get that back to a reasonable level, and it will make transit better and more accesible.

Stop that gravy train!!!!

As someone mentioned the whole "gravy train" is in reference to wasted money. Money paid to operators at the TTC is probably THE most efficiently spent money you can track. If an operator has an 8 hour shift to do, he/she does 8 hours. If an office worker has 8 hours, some of it is spent socializing with other workers, surfing the web shopping, and other such non-productive tasks In a worst case scenario you may only get 6 hours out of them. I know this is not true of EVERYONE in such a position, but the chances of it happening are far greater in that environment. I know I've been in that type of job before AND it wasn't with the TTC it was private sector, so don't think for a MINUTE that private sector = efficient. The truth is no sector is as efficient as proponents for any given sector claim they are. Further if a "bad apple" operator does find a way to be less efficient, they are picked on almost instantly and therefor the amount of "bad apple" operators is immensely smaller then what you would find of "bad apple" office (or other similar type jobs) workers. Out of (how many thousands of TTC operators) only a handful are slackers, you just hear about it more due to media and the plain and simple fact that they are front line workers.

As for privatizing, if wages for TTC operators are dropped at all, even a couple of dollars per hour, let alone the huge cuts some people are calling for, I would hazard a guess that a large percentage of current operators would either quit, retire, or walkout. IMO, the amount of money they make is completely justified.

Thank you, YES! If there are some that choose to do so much overtime that they break into a 6 figures income, they deserve EVERY penny of it. Make no mistake, the life of a transit worker is not for everyone, it's not as easy as they make it look. Don't believe me, TRY it!

[rocketdriver2019]

Thank you, YES! If there are some that choose to do so much overtime that they break into a 6 figures income, they deserve EVERY penny of it. Make no mistake, the life of a transit worker is not for everyone, it's not as easy as they make it look. Don't believe me, TRY it!

To add to the topic of overtime, jules18 or D40-90 (can't remember which and I'm not scrolling back) mentioned earlier that money was "wasted on overtime". Operators working that much overtime is not a waste of money, in fact the opposite is true... rather than the commission hiring a whole other person with a whole other benefits package to cover the work, one of their existing employees covers the work instead. Thus, even though that operator is working at time and a half, it is still cheaper for the TTC to utilize that operator than to hire a new one.

Operators making $100000+ are most definitely NOT overpaid... they are working for every penny. These operators and collectors are working pretty much 12 hours a day, seven days a week without any holidays or vacation to make that kind of salary. They essentially have no life outside of work.

And no, we aren't that as easy to replace as some on this board would like to believe. Bus training is four weeks long, streetcar five weeks, and subway six weeks... multiply that by more than 6000 operating employees and you'll see how long it would take to replace us all.

I'd write more but I have to get back to driving trains on the second piece of my 10.5 hour-long split shift on a Sunday (one of the many reasons why we're paid as much as we are)...

[leylandvictory2]

To add to the topic of overtime, jules18 or D40-90 (can't remember which and I'm not scrolling back) mentioned earlier that money was "wasted on overtime". Operators working that much overtime is not a waste of money, in fact the opposite is true... rather than the commission hiring a whole other person with a whole other benefits package to cover the work, one of their existing employees covers the work instead. Thus, even though that operator is working at time and a half, it is still cheaper for the TTC to utilize that operator than to hire a new one.

What TTC needs to do is to hire part time employees to eliminate over time and providing benefits. I highly doubt this will ever going to happen especially how strong the transit union is.

Operators making $100000+ are most definitely NOT overpaid... they are working for every penny. These operators and collectors are working pretty much 12 hours a day, seven days a week without any holidays or vacation to make that kind of salary. They essentially have no life outside of work.

And no, we aren't that as easy to replace as some on this board would like to believe. Bus training is four weeks long, streetcar five weeks, and subway six weeks... multiply that by more than 6000 operating employees and you'll see how long it would take to replace us all.

I'd write more but I have to get back to driving trains on the second piece of my 10.5 hour-long split shift on a Sunday (one of the many reasons why we're paid as much as we are)...

I cannot dispute the fact that some of the transit employees deserve the salaries they are earning as not everybody is qualify for the job. However some of the transit employees are clearly overpaid (i.e. booth collector). Booth collectors are a lot like the cashiers at supermarket or fast food restaurants. Booth collectors' base salary is a lot higher than those people working at service industries (most of them earn minium wages). Some of people argued that booth collectors have to deal with a lot of people and complains. Well if you work in a MacDonald at Scarborough Town Center or Tim Hortions at Finch Station, you have to deal with a lot of people and they have to deal with angry customers too. Some of you will argue the fact that the number of passengers far outnumber the number of customers visiting a fastfood chain. How many passengers actually visit the booth to buy tokens, metropass, et cetera.

my 0.02

[bmountdriver]

What TTC needs to do is to hire part time employees to eliminate over time and providing benefits. I highly doubt this will ever going to happen especially how strong the transit union is.

What you don't understand is that this will never happen. ATU113 staged a 41-day work to rule campaign in 1989 over this issue. This job action crippled and disrupted the TTC (and the city) and resulted in a dramatic loss of ridership that took over a decade to recover from. The job action was ended when the TTC signed an agreement with ATU113 to drop this issue and not to revisit it.

[rob9701]

What you don't understand is that this will never happen. ATU113 staged a 41-day work to rule campaign in 1989 over this issue. This job action crippled and disrupted the TTC (and the city) and resulted in a dramatic loss of ridership that took over a decade to recover from. The job action was ended when the TTC signed an agreement with ATU113 to drop this issue and not to revisit it.

"Never" being 30 or 40 years maybe.

[Archer]

Some of people argued that booth collectors have to deal with a lot of people and complains. Well if you work in a MacDonald at Scarborough Town Center or Tim Hortions at Finch Station, you have to deal with a lot of people and they have to deal with angry customers too. Some of you will argue the fact that the number of passengers far outnumber the number of customers visiting a fastfood chain. How many passengers actually visit the booth to buy tokens, metropass, et cetera.

Difference is that at the McD's or Tim Hortons, the cashier's manager happens to be right there and can help resolve the issue on the spot. Collectors do not get that benefit - they are very much on their own if something happens. I also don't see a lot of cashier positions where there is absolutely no one else who is employed around... even at a 24hr Sobeys, there will always be at least one other person up front with the cashier. Again, a Collector is very much on their own.

As for angry customers, I worked at McD's. Yes, I had angry customers. But know what? In 4 months as a subway janitor student I saw more vile and obscenities hurled at Collectors for doing their job than I ever received as a cashier. A big part of that is there are a lot of people who feel that they are entitled to public transit even if they don't have the exact fare required to get on, and it's the Collectors fault that they can't get on (as they are the ones stopping them). At McD's... not really an issue, because people generally wouldn't show up expecting food if they didn't have the proper money.

Collectors are also responsible for far more money at a given moment than any cashier with a good manager would be (as the manager would be pulling the tills to ensure that the float is kept low in case of robbery).

You're comparing apples to oranges. In some regards, yes, Collectors are similar to cashiers, but they are different in many ways.

"Never" being 30 or 40 years maybe.

No, never in legal terms is very absolute. None of us here know what that exact agreement states, but I can imagine that the ATU113 lawyers were all over it to ensure that it was very specific that never be absolute.

[cloudj]

However some of the transit employees are clearly overpaid (i.e. booth collector).

How many times does it have to be said that collectors are injured workers. The TTC would need to pay them regardless.

[bmountdriver]

"Never" being 30 or 40 years maybe.

The issue of "part-timers" or "casual workforce" at the TTC (for positions performed by the unionized workforce, at least) is actually quite clear. This would have to be included as part of the negotiated collective agreement. It isn't something that the union would agree to, and no arbitrator would impose this as it is such a significant change from any existing agreement between the TTC and ATU113. There are "temporary" positions allowed such as the summer student program BUT the contract would not allow year round casual positions to occur. These are the types of issues that have to be handled through the collective bargaining process; they cannot be arbitrarily imposed just because the TTC management, TTC Commissionners, or City Council want it to happen.

[The Canadian Roadgeek]

The only hopes of ever getting fund to do something important, like modernization of the stations (ahem... platform screen doors, and get rid of their marketing Futura-like font, get rid of transfers (at-least give us 2 hours) and implement PRESTO...)... and new subway lines is to privatize...

Like I know there's a lot of negative views on privatizing, but you can tell that the level of innovation is higher once it comes to privatization. Like what I mean is, under the government right now we have no funds to go anywhere. In a city of 2.6 million people, we're stuck with 3 subway lines and 1 rapid transit and numerous outdated streetcar lines. This is a shame, and unless you can prove to me that the government can fix this, I'd say privatization is the only way for the funds to come in (and don't really quote Viva on this, cause like someone said before, the system is under York Region, just the operation of the fleets are privatized...)

For the Keep TTC Public campaign site, they have York Region in as one of the most expensive fares in Canada, but when you look at the TTC, the fares don't really differ that much, less than a dollar difference (excluding cash fares...)

[Archer]

The only hopes of ever getting fund to do something important, like modernization of the stations (ahem... platform screen doors, and get rid of their marketing Futura-like font, get rid of transfers (at-least give us 2 hours) and implement PRESTO...)... and new subway lines is to privatize...

Like I know there's a lot of negative views on privatizing, but you can tell that the level of innovation is higher once it comes to privatization. Like what I mean is, under the government right now we have no funds to go anywhere. In a city of 2.6 million people, we're stuck with 3 subway lines and 1 rapid transit and numerous outdated streetcar lines. This is a shame, and unless you can prove to me that the government can fix this, I'd say privatization is the only way for the funds to come in (and don't really quote Viva on this, cause like someone said before, the system is under York Region, just the operation of the fleets are privatized...)

For the Keep TTC Public campaign site, they have York Region in as one of the most expensive fares in Canada, but when you look at the TTC, the fares don't really differ that much, less than a dollar difference (excluding cash fares...)

And again, how many bus lines are we willing to sacrifice? Very few bus lines turn a profit, and no private company is going to operate them at a loss. Also, that dollar-ish per ride adds up... say someone takes transit twice a day, 20 working days per month. $40 extra right there, which then goes up to an extra $480 per year. A lot of people can't afford that who are using the service now. And lets not forget how much people bitch and moan when the fares go up by 25 cents... the city barely tolerates fares at $3 as it is.

[Articulated]

The only hopes of ever getting fund to do something important, like modernization of the stations (ahem... platform screen doors, and get rid of their marketing Futura-like font, get rid of transfers (at-least give us 2 hours) and implement PRESTO...)... and new subway lines is to privatize...

Like I know there's a lot of negative views on privatizing, but you can tell that the level of innovation is higher once it comes to privatization. Like what I mean is, under the government right now we have no funds to go anywhere. In a city of 2.6 million people, we're stuck with 3 subway lines and 1 rapid transit and numerous outdated streetcar lines. This is a shame, and unless you can prove to me that the government can fix this, I'd say privatization is the only way for the funds to come in (and don't really quote Viva on this, cause like someone said before, the system is under York Region, just the operation of the fleets are privatized...)

For the Keep TTC Public campaign site, they have York Region in as one of the most expensive fares in Canada, but when you look at the TTC, the fares don't really differ that much, less than a dollar difference (excluding cash fares...)

Privitization does not make sense. When you pay a private company to provide transit service, you must factor in profit - no private company will do anything if they cannot make some form of profit out of it.

There are two ways in this scenario that the company can make a profit. First, they can provide the services exactly the same as a government-run system (same wages, same staffing, same costs, etc.), and add profit onto this. This will result in a higher cost to the government paying the company. Secondly, the company will cut as many corners as possible to lower costs. This will lower the quality of service but cost the same to the government.

As for privitization helping to build infrastructure - yeah right. Private companies do not take risks - especially something as big as a multi-billion dollar investment in creating public transit infrastructure. There will be no company in the entire world that has a spare $6 billion (the initial cost estimate for the entire Transit City network) to invest in a transit service that currently does not even come close to breaking even. Sure a rapid transit line would attract more customers than a bus line - but it operates at a much higher cost as well. The latest attempt in the GTA of any sort of private investment in transit infrastructure was the Blue 22 line between Union and the Airport. The private company involved wanted the government to pay for the majority (if not the entire cost outright) of the construction costs of the line (which they were going to secure the construction contract), and then have the exclusive contract to operate the service on that line. This is a perfect scenario for them: they have minimal investment, any cost overruns are covered by an external source (the government), and then have a long-term operating contract guaranteeing long-term return on investment (and profit once their minimal investment was paid off). However, the private company pulled out because the government wanted the private company to pay more of the construction costs. A higher initial investment means it takes longer to earn back those costs, and it was evident they didn't want to wait that long.

Your argument of less than a dollar difference should really be invalid as a measure of comparison... when your variance is 30% of the largest amount, you can claim a lot of values are within this region and is really not significant for showing anything.

[The Canadian Roadgeek]

I understand for the "fear of downsizing"... but you got to realize that we're assuming it's running in monopoly, and monopoly gives no room of improvements at all. Then we end up losing the unprofitable bus routes... whereas with competition, companies will seek ways to gain more customers, and then this problem will be resolved. And the problem is, people in the city are too reliant on cars (still). If the government can do something about it (I don't know, alternate days driving, or toll booths for all cars crossing say south of Eglinton)... If that can force people into taking transit, then privatization would become even more efficient.

They are not going to give the employees the same wage anymore. Face it, we're spending too much money on transit personnels... (I know a lot of you guys here are actually transit personnels, so you actually don't want it to privatize as that'll mean a decrease of money)... And they'll get rid of jobs that are completely obsolete and unnecessary. Really? A person to sit at those barrier-free access and collect money? We can cut those off. And no more ticket collectors, all automated. Buy a ticket off a machine and get in the station or simply use the Presto. That's not lowering service in terms of that, but instead, even better (for me at least, not having to deal with nosy collectors at the booths)... And competition is really the key here, it's a regulator that private companies don't cut as many corners as they can to maintain competitive advantages.

The government is not going to be doing much either, like they're going to spend $6 billion on the project (they keep pushing the deadlines back...)

Well for an adult oneride fare it's a mere $0.25 difference (between YRT and TTC), that's less than 10%.

[BBC 9197]

I understand for the "fear of downsizing"... but you got to realize that we're assuming it's running in monopoly, and monopoly gives no room of improvements at all. Then we end up losing the unprofitable bus routes... whereas with competition, companies will seek ways to gain more customers, and then this problem will be resolved. And the problem is, people in the city are too reliant on cars (still). If the government can do something about it (I don't know, alternate days driving, or toll booths for all cars crossing say south of Eglinton)... If that can force people into taking transit, then privatization would become even more efficient.

They are not going to give the employees the same wage anymore. Face it, we're spending too much money on transit personnels... (I know a lot of you guys here are actually transit personnels, so you actually don't want it to privatize as that'll mean a decrease of money)... And they'll get rid of jobs that are completely obsolete and unnecessary. Really? A person to sit at those barrier-free access and collect money? We can cut those off. And no more ticket collectors, all automated. Buy a ticket off a machine and get in the station or simply use the Presto. That's not lowering service in terms of that, but instead, even better (for me at least, not having to deal with nosy collectors at the booths)... And competition is really the key here, it's a regulator that private companies don't cut as many corners as they can to maintain competitive advantages.

The government is not going to be doing much either, like they're going to spend $6 billion on the project (they keep pushing the deadlines back...)

Well for an adult oneride fare it's a mere $0.25 difference (between YRT and TTC), that's less than 10%.

The grass is always greener on the other side, do some research into London's transit issues after they basically did what you are suggesting.

[Orion VIII]

And they'll get rid of jobs that are completely obsolete and unnecessary. Really? A person to sit at those barrier-free access and collect money? We can cut those off. And no more ticket collectors, all automated. Buy a ticket off a machine and get in the station or simply use the Presto. That's not lowering service in terms of that, but instead, even better (for me at least, not having to deal with nosy collectors at the booths)

What are we going to do when there are emergencies in stations? When people need help?

[D. DeLarge]

I understand for the "fear of downsizing"... but you got to realize that we're assuming it's running in monopoly, and monopoly gives no room of improvements at all. Then we end up losing the unprofitable bus routes... whereas with competition, companies will seek ways to gain more customers, and then this problem will be resolved. And the problem is, people in the city are too reliant on cars (still). If the government can do something about it (I don't know, alternate days driving, or toll booths for all cars crossing say south of Eglinton)... If that can force people into taking transit, then privatization would become even more efficient.

Yeah, like any government wants to commit what amounts to political suicide when they're at the helm. Yes people are too reliant on the automobile, but if one government, politician or party proposes to enact restrictions on it, they're not going to be popular in the next vote.

And if you're going to force people to take transit, it better be a damn good system.

[rocketdriver2019]

They are not going to give the employees the same wage anymore. Face it, we're spending too much money on transit personnels...

Actually we'll get the exact same wages we always had. The union has successor rights if they privatize transit here, therefore no matter who is running the service, it'll still be unionized and the union most certainly won't let them decrease our salary. And good luck trying to find 6000 more qualified transit operators on short notice if they try to replace us... the TTC has enough trouble doing that now with our current salary and benefits (and the current hiring freeze is a budgetary thing, we have lots of open work at most divisions everyday so we can most certainly use the extra bodies). While the TTC always gets many applications, very few of them are qualified... and of those that are qualified who make it through the selection process, a frightening number of them don't make it through training, and not always because they failed. But I digress...

As for privatization in general... take a look at the Canada Line in Vancouver to see why privatization doesn't work. It was built under a Public Private Partnership... the line is completely inadequate. It doesn't have enough carrying capacity and is thus always overcrowded. The trains are only one articulated unit (two cars) each when they should be longer, the stations were not designed in such a way that they can be easily extended, and the amount of trains they have is not enough for the service (they only have one spare unit in case of a breakdown... yikes!!). This is all because it was built with profits in mind and thus corners were cut at every opportunity.

There's a reason why many cities now have public transportation where they once had private... Toronto included. Privatized transit would provide the same if not worse service, at a higher cost to the city because the private company needs to make a profit. Transit operator wages would not change (nor should they), so there wouldn't be any profit to be had there.

As for the competition argument... well we can see how well that's working with the airlines, who constantly cry for government bailouts while nickle and diming passengers for every little thing from extra luggage to pillows while charging outrageously expensive fares. Don't think the same won't happen on a local transit scale.