Toronto Ontario Line 3 | ?m | ?s

adys123 said:
I'm not sure where you're getting that information, but it is definitely not universal. Hours are scoped in the workplan for public consultations at base rate even the ones held in evenings.
Click to expand...
When it is done by the municipality, not the company that is doing the work, it is overtime. When it is done by the company, that overtime is still in the mix.
 
micheal_can said:
You would think so, but no. The biggest thing is still the dollar amount. TBH if we went by technical merit, most companies would not get any work.
Click to expand...
So what about the f35 procurement... iirc the Saab gripen was much lower bid yet they lost it.
The feds stated that the f35 was the only jet to meet all their needs. Why can't ML also have the same answer? Should be competence and assurance of timely delivery also be a critical "need"?
What's the point in going through the massive rounds of rfq and rfp evaluation stage when all you really need in the end was a lower dollar figure?
 
cplchanb said:
So what about the f35 procurement... iirc the Saab gripen was much lower bid yet they lost it.
The feds stated that the f35 was the only jet to meet all their needs. Why can't ML also have the same answer? Should be competence and assurance of timely delivery also be a critical "need"?
What's the point in going through the massive rounds of rfq and rfp evaluation stage when all you really need in the end was a lower dollar figure?
Click to expand...
Federal procurement is funny. For some things, it is whatever the Americans tell us to get.
For the longest time,provincial and municipal contracts went to the lowest bidder. I have heard that is supposed to change, but whether it does, that remains to be seen.
 
adys123 said:
Most professionals in the municipality are paid annual salaries.
Click to expand...

Just to add to that, many City employees and I know of some in the private sector, who are planned, as part of their employment to work some weekends or Evenings often get lieu time in exchange.

So if you have to work Saturday, you can take Monday off.

Work 2 evenings and you can take Monday off. etc.

Not at all uncommon, I personally know several City staff w/this arrangement.
 
adys123 said:
Most professionals in the municipality are paid annual salaries.
Click to expand...
Northern Light said:
Just to add to that, many City employees and I know of some in the private sector, who are planned, as part of their employment to work some weekends or Evenings often get lieu time in exchange.

So if you have to work Saturday, you can take Monday off.

Work 2 evenings and you can take Monday off. etc.

Not at all uncommon, I personally know several City staff w/this arrangement.
Click to expand...
While they may be able to do that, they also may not want to do it, and unless it is forced, they likely won't do it.If it were written in that they must do it,we might see things change.
 
micheal_can said:
While they may be able to do that, they also may not want to do it, and unless it is forced, they likely won't do it.If it were written in that they must do it,we might see things change.
Click to expand...

You're arguing for a position for which you have no evidence. This is a long standing problem w/your posts.

Its one thing to have fantasies about where rail may operate in this country; though still problematic when you conflate fantasy w/reality.

But its another entirely when you simply make stuff up and say, 'but it could be'.............

That's not post-able material, never was, never will be.
 
micheal_can said:
It would be good if the governments were allowed to do that. The problem then becomes a legal one that we could see governments end up in court over disallowing companies from bidding or winning when they were the lowest bid. I do think it should be done, but understand why.


Public input and consultation is important, but sometimes it becomes the barrier to any progress. Remember, NIMBY exists among other things. This issue with the forest is NIMBYism at its finest.
Click to expand...
I think at times too much logic is used, that you end up throwing the baby out with the bathwater
 
Northern Light said:
You're arguing for a position for which you have no evidence. This is a long standing problem w/your posts.

Its one thing to have fantasies about where rail may operate in this country; though still problematic when you conflate fantasy w/reality.

But its another entirely when you simply make stuff up and say, 'but it could be'.............

That's not post-able material, never was, never will be.
Click to expand...
How does it feel to be up on that high horse? Why not let people live their lives?
 
turbanplanner said:
I think at times too much logic is used, that you end up throwing the baby out with the bathwater
Click to expand...
Go back a century or so. No public input and no environmental assessment. Now, both cripple progress. We need to find the middle ground where there is public input, an environmental assessment and real progress.
 
ARG1 said:
its not that there should be no consultation whatsoever, but rather that there needs to be a massive rethink on this continent on how and for what consulting is done. As it stands, consulting is something that is done during work hours where the only people that can attend are retirees that don't have weekday commitments, and often carry views that favour enforcing existing status quos, whilst offering feedback on engineering decisions that they frankly have no qualifications to give.

In turn, this means that "consulting" just devolves into giving a massive soapbox for NIMBYs to stand on and give feedback that often doesn't align with the views of the local population. An easy example of this would be the quagmire that is transit planning in LA, with the sepulveda line mess being a prime example. Despite the scoping period returning data that 93% of residents support building the line as Heavy Rail, the project has a serious risk of being built as the awful monorail because local SOHA and Bel-Air NIMBY's have done a great job politicking in favour of the monorail through equity arguments, threats of lawsuits, harassment of metro employees, and spreading nonsense BS that reads like facebook level conspiracy theories. No joke, Fred Rosen (the former CEO of ticketmaster) spent months spreading complete nonsense like "A TBM digging under Bel-Air would create a Tsunami-like Tidal Wave in the local reservoir" (I'm paraphrasing here). View attachment 547597

And look, I'm not going to claim that there is no place for consultation because there's an obvious need for it. There is a need to have checks and balances for the government to make sure that it doesn't get too disconnected from regular citizen needs and result in bulldozing local neighbourhoods to build a 12 lane highway. I am for the most part sympathetic to "Don't Tread on Me" Ideas, but its also important to have clear limitations especially in dire ecological/environmental circumstances where we need to build public transit to minimize our carbon emissions, and to add capacity for the millions of immigrants we invite to Canada each year. The last thing we need is crucial projects getting cancelled or delayed because of people like this: https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/a-...cle_a4a16eec-07b2-525b-930e-67836ae24962.html
Click to expand...
How do you get people to care enough to get involved? Nobody feels ownership with their community or even if they do, that their voice will be heard minus a small group? I feel like the problem runs really deep and solutions will be hard to find. But I do agree a small amount of people have a disproportionate amount of sway
 
micheal_can said:
Federal procurement is funny. For some things, it is whatever the Americans tell us to get.
For the longest time,provincial and municipal contracts went to the lowest bidder. I have heard that is supposed to change, but whether it does, that remains to be seen.
Click to expand...
You clearly don't understand the procurement process. Never has the procurement process been purely about the lowest bidder. What do you think is about to change? What have you heard and from who? Are they now going to receive two equivalent proposals and choose the most expensive one?
 
ARG1 said:
its not that there should be no consultation whatsoever, but rather that there needs to be a massive rethink on this continent on how and for what consulting is done. As it stands, consulting is something that is done during work hours where the only people that can attend are retirees that don't have weekday commitments, and often carry views that favour enforcing existing status quos, whilst offering feedback on engineering decisions that they frankly have no qualifications to give.

In turn, this means that "consulting" just devolves into giving a massive soapbox for NIMBYs to stand on and give feedback that often doesn't align with the views of the local population. An easy example of this would be the quagmire that is transit planning in LA, with the sepulveda line mess being a prime example. Despite the scoping period returning data that 93% of residents support building the line as Heavy Rail, the project has a serious risk of being built as the awful monorail because local SOHA and Bel-Air NIMBY's have done a great job politicking in favour of the monorail through equity arguments, threats of lawsuits, harassment of metro employees, and spreading nonsense BS that reads like facebook level conspiracy theories. No joke, Fred Rosen (the former CEO of ticketmaster) spent months spreading complete nonsense like "A TBM digging under Bel-Air would create a Tsunami-like Tidal Wave in the local reservoir" (I'm paraphrasing here). View attachment 547597

And look, I'm not going to claim that there is no place for consultation because there's an obvious need for it. There is a need to have checks and balances for the government to make sure that it doesn't get too disconnected from regular citizen needs and result in bulldozing local neighbourhoods to build a 12 lane highway. I am for the most part sympathetic to "Don't Tread on Me" Ideas, but its also important to have clear limitations especially in dire ecological/environmental circumstances where we need to build public transit to minimize our carbon emissions, and to add capacity for the millions of immigrants we invite to Canada each year. The last thing we need is crucial projects getting cancelled or delayed because of people like this: https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/a-...cle_a4a16eec-07b2-525b-930e-67836ae24962.html
Click to expand...

turbanplanner said:
How do you get people to care enough to get involved? Nobody feels ownership with their community or even if they do, that their voice will be heard minus a small group? I feel like the problem runs really deep and solutions will be hard to find. But I do agree a small amount of people have a disproportionate amount of sway
Click to expand...

The issue here isn't consultation - but politicization and weaponization of transit. Ironically, the leadership of the current government had been one of the worst at such practices (and doesn't hesitate to turn the other cheek when their own electoral interests are at stake - e.g. how quickly it caved at Royal Orchard).

AoD
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top