747 drivers ticketed by road inspectors because there is luggage on the floor

[emdx]

This is fresh; today, several drivers of the 747 airport bus have been ticketed because passengers left their luggage on the floor.

The 747 airport has been a resounding success, and the buses with luggage racks are not sufficient for the demand, so they pressed ordinary buses into that service. Some seats have been removed so the luggage can be left on the floor.

Apparently this is against the law, and several STM drivers have been fined by the SAAQ road inspectors for allowing loose luggage on the bus floor! So whenever a regular bus is on the run, the drivers have to tell passengers to put their luggage on the seats (even though it is prohibited!), or to wait for the next bus.

[eclair14]

This is fresh; today, several drivers of the 747 airport bus have been ticketed because passengers left their luggage on the floor.

The 747 airport has been a resounding success, and the buses with luggage racks are not sufficient for the demand, so they pressed ordinary buses into that service. Some seats have been removed so the luggage can be left on the floor.

Apparently this is against the law, and several STM drivers have been fined by the SAAQ road inspectors for allowing loose luggage on the bus floor! So whenever a regular bus is on the run, the drivers have to tell passengers to put their luggage on the seats (even though it is prohibited!), or to wait for the next bus.

Seems that some SAAQ inspectors were behind on their monthly ticket quota ...

[SMS]

This is fresh; today, several drivers of the 747 airport bus have been ticketed because passengers left their luggage on the floor.

The 747 airport has been a resounding success, and the buses with luggage racks are not sufficient for the demand, so they pressed ordinary buses into that service. Some seats have been removed so the luggage can be left on the floor.

Apparently this is against the law, and several STM drivers have been fined by the SAAQ road inspectors for allowing loose luggage on the bus floor! So whenever a regular bus is on the run, the drivers have to tell passengers to put their luggage on the seats (even though it is prohibited!), or to wait for the next bus.

Unbelievable! They need to convert more buses to have luggage racks.

[AlexLy]

Oh crap, this might soon become a major issue as the modified buses can be used on the regular routes... If they add racks on these regular buses, people will be confused.

[tristan]

Oh crap, this might soon become a major issue as the modified buses can be used on the regular routes... If they add racks on these regular buses, people will be confused.

What about other bus routes using highway 20 near the airport? If someone brings a large suitcase on the 411 and leaves if on the floor could the SAAQ give the driver a ticket? Can the driver refuse the passenger to board the bus if he carries luggage?

[novalfs26001]

With 16 modified buses, they should have enough to run that line. When I see a 747, half the time it is not a luggage rack equipped bus. The STM should put a bit more effort to keep these buses assigned to the 747. Taking seats out of a regular bus and having people leave their luggage on the floor is not acceptable!

[Chris_the_traveller]

But where are the luggage rack-equipped buses if they aren't on the 747 or in the garage for maintenance? Several months ago I would see 747 runners on routes such as the 74, 75, 116 and 178, but I thought they had stopped that practice. It's been months since I've seen a true 747 runner (i.e. with the airplane chevron livery) that wasn't running on the 747.

Nonetheless, they should have done a feasibility study before hastily converting those third gens to an illegal setup!!

Speaking of these modified buses, has anyone been keeping track of which buses had seats removed to create "luggage areas"?

The units I've spotted with the new interior configuration are:

30-012

30-013

30-016

31-004

31-214

31-218

31-232

[Matt Demers]

But where are the luggage rack-equipped buses if they aren't on the 747 or in the garage for maintenance? Several months ago I would see 747 runners on routes such as the 74, 75, 116 and 178, but I thought they had stopped that practice. It's been months since I've seen a true 747 runner (i.e. with the airplane chevron livery) that wasn't running on the 747.

Nonetheless, they should have done a feasibility study before hastily converting those third gens to an illegal setup!!

Speaking of these modified buses, has anyone been keeping track of which buses had seats removed to create "luggage areas"?

The units I've spotted with the new interior configuration are:

30-012

30-013

30-016

31-004

31-214

31-218

31-232

So they removed the seats from this already-luggage-rack-equipped bus to make even more space for luggage?

With 16 modified buses, they should have enough to run that line. When I see a 747, half the time it is not a luggage rack equipped bus. The STM should put a bit more effort to keep these buses assigned to the 747. Taking seats out of a regular bus and having people leave their luggage on the floor is not acceptable!

And they are already paying a premium fare to travel on a bus with convienience amenities like racks. If they run buses costing $9 a ride that is the same as the regular bus, why not take the 211 instead for $3?

[novalfs26001]

29-156 was parked at Saint Laurent this week. This bus has luggage racks but does not have 747 livery