The Hamiltonian can be reached at admin@thehamiltonian.info
As a follow up to our interview with ATU President Eric Tuck, we reached out to Metrolinx to get their perspective.
The questions we posed were as follows:
1. Does Metrolinx see ATU local 107 as a significant stakeholder in transit matters related to Hamilton and specifically with respect to LRT?
2. What efforts has Metrolinx made to establish a working relationship with ATU Local 107, and is this something that you would deem appropriate at this juncture?
3. What provisions are you making, if any, to recognize the men and women who are unionized members who currently support transit in Hamilton. Will there be any measures to bring them into the fold as service providers?
4. The following is an interview we conducted with ATU Local 107 President Eric Tuck. http://www.thehamiltonian.net/2017/05/with-eric-tuck-on-atu-and-lrt.html Do you have any comment on Mr. Tuck’s responses?
5. Is there anything else you ’d like our readers to know about a potential LRT implementation in Hamilton, from Metrolinx’s perspective?
The response we received from Metrolinx is as follows:
ATU local 107 is recognized as an important stakeholder in the Hamilton LRT (LRT) project. Metrolinx is working closely with the City of Hamilton to integrate HSR with Hamilton LRT, further enhancing the connectivity of the system and ensuring seamless integration.
We are aware that ATU has expressed interest in beginning the dialogue with the City of Hamilton and Metrolinx on its role in the LRT project. We look forward to further discussions with the City in the coming months on potential options.
The Hamilton LRT project will be delivered using a Design-Build-Finance-Operate-Maintain procurement model. This means the consortium responsible for designing and building the project will also be responsible for operating and maintaining it for a set period of time (typically 30 years). This approach transfers risk to the consortium and provides a strong incentive for high quality design and construction since the same people building the project will be responsible and accountable for operating and maintaining it after it is complete.
To be clear, the project will remain publicly owned by Metrolinx once complete and the consortium will operate it on our behalf. This is similar to the way a number of transit lines are currently operated across the region today, including the entire GO Rail network, York Region Transit, and the York VIVA Bus Rapid Transit project.
It is also consistent with the delivery model used for the Waterloo LRT, and Hurontario LRT in Mississauga and Brampton.
Thanks to the folks at Metrolinx for your response.
This is a very good read. Along with the companion article with Tuck. This is exactly the kind of information that we need to be better informed. Some time ago I read in The Hamilton Spectator that they were going to link up with blogs such as this one and Raise the Hammer to do something different and progressive. What happened to that? I think the work you do here would be a great add on to the work they do there.
ReplyDeleteGordon
Sorry Gordon. We did not realize your post came with a question. We don't know what happened. You may wish to follow up with our friends at The Spectator directly.
DeleteWho is to say that this consortium cannot include ATU as part of the consortium? Thats what you were getting at with question 3, but it wasn't answered. ATU should insist that it be included in this consortium.
ReplyDeleteJust saying
No barrier to that possibility, AFAIK. The bid process is open.
Delete"The RFQ is the first step in the procurement process to select a team to deliver the project. IO and Metrolinx will evaluate submissions to prequalify project teams with the relevant experience and financial capacity to deliver a project of this size and complexity. Qualified teams will receive an invite to respond to a Request for Proposals, anticipated in summer 2017."
http://www.infrastructureontario.ca/Request-for-Qualifications-Issued-Hamilton-LRT/
As Metrolinx notes, the prospect is not without precedent: York Region's VIVA/YRT workers are members of ATU113, but employed by Veolia Transportation.
Noted
Some VIVA/YRT workers are also represented by ATU1587, the same union that represents GO Transit workers.
DeleteBombardier has provided fleet maintenance services to GO Transit since 1997 and operated GO Trains since 2008. That contract was put out to tender in 2006.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/go-transit-looks-to-bombardier-to-run-trains/article18148559/
Noted
As Metrolinx notes, the prospect is "highly unlikely"
DeleteCharles McGill
Look at that " the same people that build the LRT will be responsible and accountable" Not your local elected official! Not your Elected Provincial Officials! Not Metro-linx but the Private for Profit Consortium who have never been held accountable. When did this government hold the Private Contractor who built our leaky Stadium accountable. We will pay $500,000 to fix this mistake. One of many examples of holding a Private Consortium accountable. Not let's keep Hamilton Transit Publicly owned and Publicly operated.
ReplyDelete"When did this government hold the Private Contractor who built our leaky Stadium accountable."
DeleteUh, they're suing them and it's in court right now.
http://www.thespec.com/news-story/7306169-city-of-hamilton-steps-in-again-to-fix-leaky-stadium/
From the quoted article:
"The city maintains it will be reimbursed by the stadium builder and Infrastructure Ontario — either via negotiation or through a lawsuit — for any money spent fixing "deficiencies and latent defects.""
I get you have an agenda - looking out for your union members - but please leave the spin at the door. Let's see what happens before we jump to conclusions.
Voice of Sanity
"Uh, they're suing them and its in court right now."
DeleteWhile the stadium continues to leak, unabated, years after "completion"
The Voice of Sanity believes detached observance is all that is required.(that and a raincoat) Fred is counting on lots of detached observance. People still jumping to avoid falling debris?
How this will conclude is anyone's guess, but I think we can reasonably predict further mismanagement and irresponsibility in a vision which continues to evolve as we speak.
Mike Stark
Mr. Tuck,
DeleteAs you may be aware, it has been suggested (here and elsewhere) that despite voting to accept the MOU, Councilor Green in particular, and a citizen calling himself "Mike Stark" have been diligently advocating on behalf of ATU behind the scenes.
I consider such talk difficult to reconcile.
Can you confirm the legitimacy of the statements and the effect of the advocacy in the minds of rank and file?
Regards
Mike Stark Sez:
Delete"The Voice of Sanity believes detached observance is all that is required.(that and a raincoat) Fred is counting on lots of detached observance. People still jumping to avoid falling debris?"
Where are the current safety issues? Please do tell, as I am unaware. Sure, 1 speaker fell during the 200+ days the stadium is unused each year. Subsequent checks done revealed no further issues. What does this have to do with a leaky stadium again?
Mike Stark Sez:
"How this will conclude is anyone's guess, but I think we can reasonably predict further mismanagement and irresponsibility in a vision which continues to evolve as we speak."
True, we have no crystal ball to know how the City's lawsuit will play out. The next part does not refer to anyone in general so I am unsure who it's directed at. Municipal politicians? Contractors? The province? Please elaborate.
Voice of Sanity
the leaky roof thing turned out to be something of a blessing when one remembers drinking fountains were left off the plan.
DeleteSpeaker(s) fell. A subsequent check revealed still more unfixed and waiting to crash.
How about the standing water that remains after every deluge? Despite the lawsuit. Add in exposed, improperly terminated electrical connections. What could go wrong?
Yes, them.
James Taylor.
Competitive tendering?
ReplyDeletehttp://socialistproject.ca/bullet/1382.php
Mark 3:25
Paul Johnson "highly unlikely"
ReplyDeleteName a publicly owned consortium likely to be bidding the project.
Anybody?
Indeed. Can't someone put together an application on their behalf?
DeleteRimshot
like the Councilors who just voted them off the island?
Delete3 Pointer
I love this "transfer risk" notion. It was a popular thing in the 80's. Problem with the model is that the transfer of risk is only as good as the weakest link in the consortium chain. When things fall apart, the mess ultimately lands on the step of the public.
ReplyDeleteThe model is better called " putting the risk at risk".
Sorce
Yup. Best to just let the public carry the full cost of society full stop. Let governments decide when they want to save up and when they want to go into debt and have taxpayers shoulder the rest.
DeleteCogito
Nope. Government needs to listen to the 48%ers. Let people decide when they want to save, when they want to spend. Let those in Ward 2 pay the rest.
DeleteCharles McGill
There is the risk associated with the shared risk model, which, as I mentioned is better called "putting the risk at risk", and then there is the risk of having selected a model that relies very heavily on user uptake and an increase in public transit ridership. Which is unlikely to happen given a number of factors including:
ReplyDelete1. The freedom afforded by the car culture, which will prove unshakeable. Noone is going to trade in their Ford Focus or BMW to take LRT.
2. The lack of congestion to justify the "intervention"
3. The fact that the technology will be dated before it's even available.
4. The fact that many Hamiltonians don't "get it"./ Meaning, they don't understand why there is such a push by some councilors on lRT. Thus, there is little support, as born out in the "survey"
5.The tail has wagged the dog, the LRT lobby and developers and contractors salivating to make a buck, caring less about the public interest, and all about financial wealth.
I can go on but my Double Double needs attention.
Sorce
Oh..almost forgot. The resentment that will rage once this nonsense causes the first disruption to businesses, drivers and head scratching Hamiltonians who are bewildered but yet another monstrosity. A perfect match to the grotesque thought of a stadium in the middle of a nerighbourhood.
DeleteSorce
"The fact that the technology will be dated before it's even available."
DeleteAgreed that the City and province should be acquiring technology hat has yet to be released, like autonomous vehicles that maintain employment among bus drivers.
Rimshot