Even for a route that is supposed to run every 15 minutes ("Why don't people just wait for the next one?"), if one misses a bus, the next one might very well not be for another 25 or 30 minutes.
Why this is so is somewhat of a mystery. The usual suspects ("wheel-chair riders" or "too much traffic on the road" or "the bus broke down") don't add up, for instance, in the morning non-rush hour, when there are neither many riders or a lot of traffic on the road.
Suffice it to say that for many Metro riders, there is ample reason to try to get on that bus that is still at the bus-stop and NOT wait for the "next one."
As Metro cannot even guarantee regular bus service in the Tunnel between the International District and downtown, even for buses beginning their route their, such as the 71, 72, 73, it seems difficult to believe that the additional projects underway (subway and streetcars) will be much better.
Another example, the #36 schedule has it running every 10 minutes from downtown through the International District to Beacon Hill. But waiting 15 minutes for a #36 on Third Avenue is common.
Does upper management Metro know about this? Does it care at all? Who loses anything if the buses don't run according to schedule except for the riders?
The results of everyday macro- and micro-mismanagement at Metro are evident, but no one seems to care.
Considering how much money gets thrown at Metro (and the frequent fare increases), one might expect better management.
* * * * *
Take for example today. To get to Madison Valley from downtown, it took 35 minutes, the bus #11 being 16 minutes late. From Madison Valley to Queen Anne, it took an hour and a half, the #8 being 15 minutes late and the #2/#13 being 40 minutes late.
A total of an hour and 11 minutes spent WAITING for three buses!
I'VE GOT OTHER THINGS TO DO!
And Metro, in its latest full-page ad (The Stranger 9/26/2012, p. 14) boasts of 91% rider satisfaction!
* * * * *
Maybe Metro should lower the boom on bus drivers who take long breaks at the end of their respective bus lines, at the price of beginning their routes late. I have noticed that when buses are running late, some bus drivers will insist on taking a full break when they get to the terminal point, thus causing the bus to be late from then on out until that bus driver signs off for the day.
More responsible driver will adhere to the printed schedule. These bus drivers should receive recognition for their committment and punctuality.
Metro bus drivers get breaks lasting anywhere from 10-20 minutes at the end of the line, i.e., about every hour (or less) of driving. Do they really need to insist on taking a "full" 20 minute break each time they get to the end of the line if the bus is behind schedule?
What about "eliminating waste" at Metro by eliminating deadbeat bus drivers who are consistently late and blame it all on traffic and wheel-chair riders..and always take 20 minutes at the end of a run to grab a sandwich, smoke, sleep, etc. no matter how busy the time of day?
Why this is so is somewhat of a mystery. The usual suspects ("wheel-chair riders" or "too much traffic on the road" or "the bus broke down") don't add up, for instance, in the morning non-rush hour, when there are neither many riders or a lot of traffic on the road.
Suffice it to say that for many Metro riders, there is ample reason to try to get on that bus that is still at the bus-stop and NOT wait for the "next one."
As Metro cannot even guarantee regular bus service in the Tunnel between the International District and downtown, even for buses beginning their route their, such as the 71, 72, 73, it seems difficult to believe that the additional projects underway (subway and streetcars) will be much better.
Another example, the #36 schedule has it running every 10 minutes from downtown through the International District to Beacon Hill. But waiting 15 minutes for a #36 on Third Avenue is common.
Does upper management Metro know about this? Does it care at all? Who loses anything if the buses don't run according to schedule except for the riders?
The results of everyday macro- and micro-mismanagement at Metro are evident, but no one seems to care.
Considering how much money gets thrown at Metro (and the frequent fare increases), one might expect better management.
* * * * *
Take for example today. To get to Madison Valley from downtown, it took 35 minutes, the bus #11 being 16 minutes late. From Madison Valley to Queen Anne, it took an hour and a half, the #8 being 15 minutes late and the #2/#13 being 40 minutes late.
A total of an hour and 11 minutes spent WAITING for three buses!
I'VE GOT OTHER THINGS TO DO!
And Metro, in its latest full-page ad (The Stranger 9/26/2012, p. 14) boasts of 91% rider satisfaction!
* * * * *
Maybe Metro should lower the boom on bus drivers who take long breaks at the end of their respective bus lines, at the price of beginning their routes late. I have noticed that when buses are running late, some bus drivers will insist on taking a full break when they get to the terminal point, thus causing the bus to be late from then on out until that bus driver signs off for the day.
More responsible driver will adhere to the printed schedule. These bus drivers should receive recognition for their committment and punctuality.
Metro bus drivers get breaks lasting anywhere from 10-20 minutes at the end of the line, i.e., about every hour (or less) of driving. Do they really need to insist on taking a "full" 20 minute break each time they get to the end of the line if the bus is behind schedule?
What about "eliminating waste" at Metro by eliminating deadbeat bus drivers who are consistently late and blame it all on traffic and wheel-chair riders..and always take 20 minutes at the end of a run to grab a sandwich, smoke, sleep, etc. no matter how busy the time of day?
