Metro Transit has this week kicked off a PR campaign to convince people to ride the bus. It may be something of an uphill battle, as even mayor Mike Savage hasn’t used a bus since he’s been elected, says Savage’s spokesperson, Shaune MacKinlay. Savage has taken the ferry across the harbour to attend meetings at the city’s Alderney Landing offices, but that doesn’t count: the campaign is called “Do it on the bus,” after all, not “Fly with the ferries.”
But some Metro Transit employees appear to be embracing the idea of doing it on the bus with gusto. The Coast has learned of two worrying incidents involving Metro Transit employees misusing intoxicants.
The first occurred last fall. On Wednesday, October 24, at 11pm a RCMP officer came across an empty, but idling, Metro Transit bus at Highway 7 and Lake Major Road. The RCMP had stepped up patrols in the Lake Major area in response to unknown people pelting passing buses with rocks, and since this wasn’t a normal stop for the bus, the officer investigated. At that point, the bus driver came out of the woods, and the officer “noticed the odour of marijuana,” says Scott MacRae, a spokesperson for the RCMP’s Halifax division. The officer “didn’t believe” the bus driver was impaired, and the driver was not arrested or charged. The officer did, however, notify Metro Transit of the incident. The driver’s name has not been released.
The second incident occurred on Saturday, January 26. At 1:45pm, Halifax police received a call from a citizen saying there was a vehicle driving erratically at Burnside Drive and Akerley Boulevard. The citizen followed the vehicle to 200 Isley Avenue, which is the Burnside Transit Garage. Police arrived, and at 2:15 arrested a man for impaired driving and for having a blood alcohol level in excess of the legal limit. Charged is 48-year-old Steven MacPhee of Westphal. He is to appear in Dartmouth court on March 12. Constable Dianne Woodworth, speaking for the Halifax Regional Police Department, says Metro Transit assisted in identifying MacPhee. MacPhee is a service supervisor. When arrested, he had been driving his own vehicle, but sources tell The Coast MacPhee was about to start his shift, and would’ve been expected to drive one of Metro Transit’s SUVs to perform his supervisorial duties.
Neither incident appeared in either the RCMP’s or the Halifax Regional Police Department’s media releases.
Metro Transit spokesperson Tiffany Chase says both MacPhee and the unnamed driver have been suspended pending the results of internal investigations.
“Safety of the public is our foremost concern,” says Chase.
Metro Transit employees are subject to the terms of HRM’s Substance Abuse Policy, adds Chase.
Metro Transit does not routinely test drivers for drugs or alcohol.
Metro Transit has about 800 employees. Arguably, two incidents doesn’t constitute a trend or indicate systematic problems. But on the other hand, so long as both the police departments and Metro Transit don’t publicize such incidents, we can have no real understanding at how widespread substance misuse in the transit agency is.
#DoItOnTheBus
The PR campaign’s “Do it on the bus” tagline has been the subject of much ridicule on Twitter, and thoroughly panned by Coast readers.The campaign started Monday and will run for 12 weeks.
“‘Do it on the bus’ is a purposely cheeky, multi-media and multilevel engagement campaign to improve the relationship and eventually ridership between Halifax residents and their transit system,” reads a program description Chase sent to The Coast. “A strong headline is essential to cut through the clutter of thousands of messages the average person sees every day and also to generate some buzz.”
The PR campaign has a budget of $191,000. Acart Communications, an Ottawa firm, is to be paid $50,000 in professional fees. Acart was the successful bidder on a Request for Quotations offered by the city last October. The balance of the campaign budget, $141,000 is to be spent on media buys, and at local advertising and video production firms. Advertising includes print (including in The Coast), radio and television, and on transit buses and at the ferry terminals.
Metro Transit intends to evaluate the campaign against two objectives. First, “to shift towards a more positive public view of transit by promoting recent service improvements and alter the momentum towards public transit being seen as a great option to get around,” reads the program description. This will be evaluated through telephone surveys. The pre-campaign survey, held from January 14 through January 23, contacted 476 households throughout HRM and “was used to inform the campaign message and highlighted customer benefits. The post-campaign survey will measure the reach and impact of the campaign on the target audience, as well as existing transit users.”
The second objective is to increase ridership after the PR campaign is over. Specifically, “to increase transit ridership by one to two percent in the six month period following the campaign,” that is, from June through November.
To measure this, Metro Transit will compare transit revenue from this coming June through November to the same period in past years. Recent revenue for those months has been:
2010/11—$15,346,877
2011/12—$15,673,873
2012/13 (following the transit strike)—$15,371,555
By this measurement, a one percent increase would be $153,716 in total revenue, while a two percent increase would be $307,431, over and above the 2012/13 figures. (All figures are provided by Chase.)
There are problems with the evaluation logic, however. First, the post-PR campaign revenue evaluation period comes after an expected fare increase of 11 percent, from $2.25 to $2.50. Metro Transit has asked for that fare increase in its upcoming budget, and if council approves in April, the increase would become effective a few months later, before the PR campaign evaluation period starts. So even if ridership goes down, as is typically the case after a fare increase, total revenue will likely increase beyond the two percent evaluation criteria.
“That’s true,” says Chase. “We’ll have to take that into account.” But how the several moving balls—decreases in ridership due to the fare increase, but supposed increases in ridership due to the PR campaign, coupled with increases in revenue from the fare increase—could be explicated is nowhere explained, and certainly not in any document written before the PR campaign tender was awarded.
Second, the increase in revenue is being measured against last year’s post-transit strike period, when revenues were already down 1.9 percent from the year before. Even if transit ridership merely came back to the pre-strike level, the PR campaign will be judged a success.
Third, to Metro Transit’s and city council’s credit, the bus system has seen significant expansion in recent years, with the addition of new routes and increased frequency on existing routes, as well as larger buses that can accommodate more riders per trip. This expanded service is reflected in increased fare collection, as witnessed from a 2.1 percent increase in revenue from 2010/11 to 2011/12. How is it possible to attribute an increase in revenue later this year to the PR campaign as opposed to the natural growth in revenue brought about through expanded service?
“We can’t entirely indicate that the campaign is responsible,” agrees Chase, adding however that the PR campaign is part of an overall council directive to increase ridership.
This article appears in Mar 7-13, 2013.
Something like: “Let us do the driving today”, would have been better, I think. The “Do it on the bus” message scares me. I can’t see that making our municipality more attractive in the eyes of people who might want to move here and are expecting to use public transit.
– Kathleen Higney
Stoned or stunned ? In Newfoundland it would be the latter.
A better ad campaign would be a picture of a bunch of union slobs standing around a barrel of burning lumber, with their T!mm!#s cups and the caption:
“THIS IS WHY IT’S GOING TO COST YOU $3.00 A RIDE”.
For all those Transit haters out there, unless you have all your facts about how things work and what drivers go through in a run of a day, the negative comments made are just a lot of hot air being posted without knowing the facts. It’s easy to find negative in everyday life and comment with the “shoulda’s woulda’s and coulda’s, we’re all guilty of that to some extent. However, bashing drivers for decisions that Halifax City Council and the Management staff at Transit make is by far the rudest thing I ever seen or read.
The very people who PAID for and Put the newest Ad out don’t even take transit. So, how can they effectively expect to see an increase in such a “dirty slogan” (as it is perceived by so many) if they themselves don’t “doitonthebus”? After all, if you believe is something and want to increase profits, wouldn’t you also be part of the solution and NOT the problem? Also, remember, Council and Transit Management use City vehicles (not the bus) to get to meetings, otherwise known as YOUR tax dollar funded Cars, Gas, Insurance and new purchases every couple of years. Money well wasted when there is a bus they could take.
So, before you jump down the backs of the Blue-collar workers ask Council and Transit Management why they don’t use the very thing they PAID BIG money for.
That was Ken Wilson, everybody.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MFWrQUtx018
Now before Kenny gets back to “passin de duchie pon de lef han side” lets just point out that City Council and MT management have had to resort to this juvenile ad campaign in order to recoup losses sustained by the driver’s extortionate strike a year ago. (Bet you’re wishing you had left it for this winter , right guys? Damn C!ndy D@y’s Grandmother all to heck!)
And it also needs to be pointed out that the new Dartmouth Bridge Terminal is one of the best things that Council/MT have done in the last 30 years. Now, in 5 years it may just be another garbage strewn, graffiti covered urinal where Dartmouth’s elite meet and greet to get swarmed, shanked, rogered & robbed. But right now it’s a pretty sweet deal, and I wouldn’t mind a fare increase to pay for that. Or to keep the ferry’s running (another thing that MT does well)
As far as the last point is concerned:
“Council and Transit Management use City vehicles (not the bus) to get to meetings, otherwise known as YOUR tax dollar funded Cars, Gas, Insurance and new purchases every couple of years. Money well wasted when there is a bus they could take. “
Quick show of hands, folks. Who here thinks that Council’s already valuable time (har har) could be better spent waiting for, and doing “it” on the 80?
Right.
I think that money would be better spend designing a new set of routes for Halifax. Then promote it next year. It’s better to promote good transit that people will want, than mediocre transit that needs PR to get riders.
I recall reading somewhere that fares in New York City are $2.25 for transit (subway, buses, ferries). Granted they have a large population to warrant money-by-volume, I’m sure they started off with routes that would attract the public to use the service.
In Halifax, they seem to think raising fares will somehow entice people to use the bus? The routes are all ridiculous with so many buses following main roads.
If you want me to get on a bus, rework the routes so that all buses don’t get to a terminal and leave at the same time (on paper) where if your bus is late, you’re SOL for 15-30 minutes. Have more circular routes rather than going up-and-down a drag. Also make it more efficient by not having stops closer than 1/4 mile (400 m) from each other (there are many stops that are ~200 m (measured) apart). I think 1 km would be OK, if you’re smack in the middle then you have a *gasp* 500 meter walk….
A few free ideas for making transit more attractive, pro bono (that may be the problem, money is not wasted on a consultant).
well actually the ad campaign DOES talk about doing it on the ferry (Do it on the boat) as well Tim.
so since the mayor is using Metro Transit in one way or another it’s better than taking a smart car or his own and charging us for parking etc.
The way I took the new ad is, are they attempting to make a positive out of a negative? They’re pretty much saying that you’ll be on the bus so long, you’ll have loads of time to do other things than if you were driving and arriving at your destination way sooner.
Let’s say, you’re heading from the Woodlawn area of Dartmouth, to downtown Halifax. You’re talking a ten to fifteen minute drive(depending on traffic) compared to a 30-45 minute bus ride(depending on traffic). So, that means I’ve got more than double the time to catch up on reading or reviewing my schedule for the day(no wifi on the bus, so can’t websurf).
I really don’t think it’s an effective ad. I agree with Schuyler Smith, if they truly want to bring more people to the buses, efficiency is what will draw people in, not bad adverts.
I also agree with Ivan about the new terminal. Well done! If only Transit could come up with a few other winning ideas to piggyback on the success of the terminal, they could get some momentum going to entice increased ridership.
I agree with Kathleen that “do it on the bus” scares me. I’m a woman who lives in Dartmouth and takes transit, I am already at risk of violence and assault as I get from point A to point B in our community, and have been the object of attention for bus masturbators in past. I do not want to “do it” on the bus and I don’t want anybody to think that I want to!
I could have sworn the originator of #doitonthebus was the same person that thought of Bridget, that colossal failure of a marketing campaign for the bridge commission.
Although it is a much bigger system, NYC’s MTA – with 2,290 commuter rail cars, 6,399 subway cars, 468 subway stations, 1069 km of subway track, 5,920 buses, over 15,000 bus stops – had a fare of $2.25 until December of last year when it was raised to $2.50. As Metro Transit is hoping to do. The difference in value for dollar is striking, let alone service, quality and amenities.
It is about time Metro Transit adopted a Metrocard like system for fares, and it will save them money (and valuable time) not having to print out, and hand out, and inspect paper transfers.
It is about time they got GoTime working, since they started the project in 1982 and have dumped tens of millions into it already – for a problem hundreds of cities have solved successfully, with technology available in the marketplace for years.
Metro Transit seems to mismanage not only it’s finances, but also technology and service delivery. Google has done more with their Google maps transit service, for free, than Metro Transit ever has.
Do the customers of Metro Transit need a union to get fair treatment from Metro Transit too? How are they held accountable to the public?
Metro Transit also seems to spend an inordinate amount of time creating misleading graphics, and playing with metrics. The table they used to shame Haligonians for daring to think about rail transit a few years back – when there are a number of cities Halifax’s size (or that were Halifax’s size) when they undertook mass transit like Calgary – is a great example.
http://www.halifax.ca/metrotransit/documen…
Too bad Metro Transit can’t use their efforts improving their service instead of “proving” what it is we _don’t_ need.
In any _successful_ city in the world, transit is recognized as one of the pillars of civilized society. No wonder Halifax doesn’t get it.
Metro Transit couldn’t be more out of touch if they tried, and it shows.
“Half the money I spend on advertising is wasted — I just don’t know which half.” – John Wanamaker
City Councillors should all receive a metro transit pass and if they want to drive they have to pay for parking in the downtown core like the rest of us. If we did this transit would be top of there agenda.