CTA Tattler

I eagerly await the comments about how that's a criminally high wage for bus drivers.

How much of that has to go toward union dues?

If I were expected to have to deal with safely driving a 40' bus through rush hour traffic in Chicago, AND have to pick-up a bunch of foul-attituded passengers, check fares, give transfrers, answer stupid questions, and listen to complaints that I can't resolve, I want more than a lousey $17.46/hour. The top pay of $26.86 is getting closer, but not quite there. Toss in a crappy supervisor, and you couldn't pay me enough to do that job!

And just to apply for the job, you've either already have to have a CDL passenger and air brake endorsements and $12, or you'll have to shell-out $72. Just to APPLY!

Do part-timers get any benefits, or is it just the wage?

But hey, anyone who thinks this is a great deal ought to apply! I think anyone doing their job deserves more, but if you think that's a fair wage, or especially if you think it's too high, then you really ought to apply.

"Not bad for a part-time job"!?! I can think of a lot of part-time jobs that this wage would be "not bad". For this job, "not bad" is not an accurate discription.

Funny you guys should mention bus drivers and pay. The bus driver I was talking with yesterday morning about bus bunching (I drove a bus part-time in college) told me he made $80,000 a year (with overtime)

Let me repeat that. $80,000 a YEAR!!!!

"I make more money than my sister, who has a masters degree.. and I only graduated from high school!"

Now, I know, from experience, that driving a bus is monotonous, thankless work and it takes a tremendous amount of patience to deal with the crazy bus-riding public and insane traffic. BUT, That bus driver makes almost twice what I do, and I have a degree and a good job. WTF???

Like the pilot of a plane, my life is in the hands of a bus or train driver anytime I'm using the CTA. As such, I'd prefer that these people are content and well paid, and not disgruntled individuals. Of course, I realize that we're in an imperfect world, and that wages do not equate to job satisfaction, or performance, or safety, but I'm all for paying drivers a fair sum for the tremendous responsibility that they take on.

$17.46/hr is more than I make, FT, though I do get benefits as well. I know I wouldn't take that job, no matter what pay!

Hey Emily, maybe you should, you know, find another job.

Considering that the top pay scale is $26.86 an hour as noted above -- that means a full-time driver would make just under $40,000 a year.

To rake in $80,000 he must be working a hell of a lot of overtime. If so, do you work 60+ hours a week for your pittance?

Critical thinking... really, who needs it When you have anecdotal bullsh*t.

WTF indeed.

Yeah, my math sucks. I withdraw the comment.

"Considering that the top pay scale is $26.86 an hour as noted above -- that means a full-time driver would make just under $40,000 a year."

Church:

What are you talking about? Read the original post again, this time while paying attention. The wage mentioned is only for part time workers. Why on earth do you think you can figure out how much full time workers make when their wage wasn't mentioned. My understanding is that full-time bus drivers make a whole lot more than that (not to mention their benefits which required the real estate transfer tax increase to bail them out).

Whatever amount goes in union dues, I'm sure it's a lot less than the difference between the current pay and what pay would be if there were no union.

that's a good bit more than i get- and i'm in the "they deserve every penny" camp! I feel i am paid fairly for the work that i do, and i also feel that the work bus drivers do is so much more vauable. my life runs on bus drivers, and without them life in chicago would be impossible for me. good for them!

I feel that bus drivers deserve every penny. Even the surly ones. Thinking of the traffic they have to drive in, idiot cars and cabbies they have to navigate around, the idiot passengers and just being responsible for the lives of your passengers - um - yeah - they deserve to be paid well.

Those people who think that wages should be decided based on what people "deserve" are being extreamly short-sighted. I'm curious, Mcgirl and Caitlin Lee, if you are one of the people who complained about the real estate transfer tax increase or the sales tax increase or if you have ever complained about a fare increase. I'm also curious how you would respond if someone asked you whether riders deserved to pay a lower fare or whether they deserved more extensive service. Or how you would respond if asked if chicago residents deserved to pay lower taxes. If your answer is yes to any of these then you really cannot convincingly suggest that bus drivers should receive a high salery simply because they deserve it. The money comes from somewhere, presumembly from people who also deserve something. What somebody is payed should never be based on morals. It is always extreamly short-sighted to think that the moral thing to do is to base wages on what people think is the "good" and "moral" anount. It means other people suffer. And let's face it, this type of thinking is one of the major reasons why the CTA needed a bailout and why the system has deteriotated enough that this entire year will need to be spent elimanating a huge amount of slow zones. Everyone benefits when wages are determined by market forces. The CTA should pay the wage that it thinks would benefit the system the best, nothing more. That really is just common sense.

Everyone benefits when wages are determined by market forces.

So union organizing doesn't count as a "market force"?

"So union organizing doesn't count as a "market force"?"

That's debateable. There is no doubt that unions have often caused a great deal of harm to specific companies and organizations and their customers as well as to entire industries. In fact, they often do more harm than good in the long term to their own employees. For example, the massive layoffs and major benefit reductions from GM, Ford and others in recent years would undoubtadly not have been neccessary if the compaines hadn't been forced into a horrible financial positon from years of strong concessions to the unions (that doesn't mean there were not other factors such as a failure to design good new vehicles). And, of course, the union concessions also resulted in a large market share of the products, in that industry and others such as steel, being made in foreign countries. Yes, to a certain extent, unions are market forces. However, that is not completely the case since they likely would not exist on a massive scale if it weren't for government laws that protect them. So they really are not a result of the free market.

But, in any case, for the CTA I think it is less of an issue of the unions existing rather than the management (in the past) not really making a real attempt at negotiating with them. Likely because of political pressure and the fact that the major costs of kissing up to the unions would not come into play until several years after the negotiations, the CTA basically gave the unions what they wanted. That is inexcusable and an aggrevious decision of the CTA's leadership to not exucute their responsibilities to the people they were serving. And the reason they did that was pretty clearly because there is a major attitude prevelant among the residents of Chicago that you should just give blue coller workers high saleries and not worry about the costs. Instead of the CTA leadership worrying about the reaction from people when they did not ensure good fiscal prudence they worried about the reaction they would get from union leaders who would accuse them of being evil and esploitive if they did not give the unions what they wanted. The fact that a large number of Chicagoens would have bought that is a big problem. With the CTA, that is more of the issue than the fact that there are unions in the first place. If the overwhelming majority of those who use and pay taxes to the CTA cared about it spending its money wisely rather than wanting to be goody-touchous and give the workers huge wages and benefits then the unions would not have had much of an effect.

If a job sucks -- and I think being a bus driver in Chicago traffic surely must face high suck potential -- logic dictates that the wages should be higher than jobs that don't suck. You have to give people SOME reason to show up every morning, and if it isn't going to be "polite, kind customers," "intellectual challenge," or "smooth-run infrastructure meaning everything goes according to plan," that pretty much leaves cash. I'd rather we have well compensated skilled drivers who stay with the CTA for a couple of decades than have to cycle through several idiots a year while saving $20k -- the #2 Hyde Park Express was seemingly an idiot magnet for a while as we had a new driver every second or third week and each one interpreted the route and schedule in new and exciting ways. Give me the higher-paid veteran drivers who stick around and won't get the bus stuck, hung up on a railroad-tie retaining wall in a parking lot (sadly, no joke; I have pictures).

"You have to give people SOME reason to show up every morning,.."

This is so very true.

Many of us have done some really crappy jobs on our way up the corporate ladder. We accepted that we have to deal with disgruntled customers, odd hours, and dracorian conditions because it prepared us for the next, better step.

But being a CTA bus driver is not simply a stepping stone on the corporate ladder. Sure, a few will go on to be supervisors or trainers, but for the most part, there's no promotional ladder in this career choice.

So not only do you have to get up and face the job every day now, the only relief in sight is to get a couple of decades of seniority so you can pick a gravy run. And we're not talking about something a few years down the line. We're talking a couple decades down the line.

Money, in and of itself, isn't necessarily the best motivator. And they say money can't buy happiness. But money does allow you to buy some things that'll make your life away from work more comfortable for you and your family.

Or if you want to look at it the other way, what kind of people would take a job like CTA bus driver if the compensation wasn't as good?

If the money wasn't as good, the type of person who has any motivation at all wouldn't stick around more than a couple years before finding a way to get out. You don't want drivers who think that the best part of the job is that you're not standing over a deep fryer.

But it really comes down to this: If you look at their wage, compare it to your own wage and think, "Compared to me, they get too much", then what you need to do is obvious: You need to apply for this job.

And if you don't want to apply for this job, your reasons why you don't want the job are just some of the reasons why they're paid as much as they are.

I think I can safely say that most of us are not going to apply for the job despite what, at first glance, may seem like a high wage.