Rahm Emanuel decides public employees must use public transit

[marmar]

from Grist:



Rahm Emanuel decides public employees must use public transit

by Sarah Laskow
14 Oct 2011 11:28 AM


Employees of the city of Chicago are going to have to get used to taking the bus and the subway. Starting next year, they’ll have to use public transit, unless they have a really good excuse and are down for filling out a lot of paper work. Whose idea was this? Mayor Rahm Emanuel, of course.

Rahmbo doesn't want city employees on official business to take their personal cars or #*(%&@ cabs. They're public employees; they'll take *#@%(& public transit!

This isn’t just for green reasons; it’s also because Chicago -- surprise! -- is totally corrupt. Apparently city employees were taking advantage of the reimbursement system, and the city was paying for car washes and parking tickets. The new policy's supposed to save $1 million. ..........(more)

The complete piece is at: http://www.grist.org/list/2011-10-14-rahm-emanuel-decides-public-employees-must-use-public-transit

[hughee99]

1. So Rahm is including himself in this, right? Right? n/t

[DCKit]

6. Series!111!!! His personal carwashes would probably pay most of our bills for a year (or two).

Fish spoils/rots from the head.

Just another Limo Liberal.... aka "DINO". Not a damn thing "D" about that political operative.

And here I am thinking I couldn't hate him any more than I already did.

[Enrique]

2. sounds like a good policy to me

:shrug:

[marmar]

3. Yep. For once, I'm in agreement with Rahm.

nt

[Liberal_in_LA]

22. I'd hate someone telling me how to travel to and from work. None of their business

incentives, yes. Mandates, no

[Sannum]

4. I actually agree with this one...

I have worked as the Office Manager for a construction company (where many of our projects were within the area of the loop/downtown).

I was the one who had to enter and seek approval for expense reports - seriously recieved reports that subbmitted charges to park at the BUILDING NEXT DOOR, when I knew for a fact that they commuted via METRA or had a parking pass for our building. On these attempts, it would actually take more time to drive 2 blocks than walk.

Not saying this is what happens everywhere, but as someone who has had to deal with flack about approving/not approving things - this makes sense. I once had someone try to submit expenses for a haircut. Seriously? There is room for abuse with this one, and I think that the transit system is just fine to use for most people in most situations

[Why Syzygy]

5. If Chicago

public transit is like others, it will take these employees three times as long to get their travel done. Not much of a money saving device.

[Kalidurga]

7. How about just not reimbursing for parking and car washes?

Then the employees can decide if they want to pay for their own parking or not.

[marmar]

8. Sitting in traffic in Chicago can take far longer.

nt

[Posteritatis]

13. Maybe requiring government folks to endure it's the thing that'll get it improved. (nt)

[WinkyDink]

18. Yeah, because teachers and govt Dilberts have that kind of clout.

[MH1]

15. As a big city, it's probably more like Philadelphia, which has very good public transit

I hate it when I have to drive in to work instead of taking transit for some reason.

That said, a mandate seems rather extreme. Why not just give free transit passes, while taking away free parking and any other car-associated perks? If people have to pay their own gas and parking vs. taking transit for free, many will switch of their own accord, once they figure out the logistics.

[Withywindle]

25. It's not like a lot of other places.

Chicago's mass transit is only #2 to New York's, and miles ahead of every other city in the US. I've lived in Chicago for 19 years and not only have never owned a car during all that time, I've never wanted one and frequently been grateful that I wasn't stuck with one.


But I would really only applaud Rahm's attempt to impose this if I knew for a fact that he had sworn to live by it every day himself.

[TomClash]

9. Nothing wrong with that as long as . . .

. . . Rahm the 1%er is leading by example.

[kestrel91316]

10. I am actually all FOR that. It works great, as long as the public transit system

functions well and provides adequate service. This could be a good way to ensure that it DOES, lol.

Of course in Lost Angeles this would be a major FAIL. Our transit system is specifically designed to serve people who work 8-4 on weekdays. Minimal midday and evening service, and less than minimal weekend service. Public servants wouldn't be able to GO ANYWHERE during their work hours, lol. It would take them hours and hours, standing and waiting for late and missing and nonexistant buses.

[JNelson6563]

11. I like it.

[Downwinder]

12. Going to make the Police ride the bus?

[Posteritatis]

14. That'd probably fit under the security exemption. (nt)

[WinkyDink]

16. Wow. This seems illegal, unless the city is paying for the transport. And filling out forms if one

wants or needs to drive after work where only cars or taxis would go (taxis are not "public transportation," their being privately owned)?

Let's see if Rahm follows his on edict.

[surrealAmerican]

23. The city IS paying, because this only applies to ...

... city employees "on official business".

What they do on their own time, with their own money, will still be their choice.

[blogslut]

17. I dig it

I wish more people took advantage of public transportation.

[WinkyDink]

19. Gee, somehow he doesn't think the children of said employees must attend PUBLIC SCHOOLS.

You know---to SUPORT PUBLIC EDUCATION.

[onpatrol98]

27. Wouldn't people think he was crazy?

How could he think he would have the right to tell his employees where to send their kids? Heck, where does he send his kids? Not, that I care. I don't. I agree with another poster. Stop subsidizing travel by personal vehicles. Stop paying for tickets and car washes unless Chicago public employees have crappy parking situations.

[Silver Swan]

20. I worked in downtown Chicago for 35 years

I can count on one hand the times I did NOT take public transportation to work.

I could never understand why anyone would choose to drive to work.

[boppers]

21. Because you get "paid" for parking, carwashes, maintenance, etc.

...Even if you're really just taking the train.

[Withywindle]

26. +1

Anyone who willingly drives into the Loop and then pays parking charges there is as dumb as a box of hair. There are SO many places where you can park safely and take the train the rest of the way if you work downtown. And you can even read or nap the rest of the way!

(Full disclosure: I live in Humboldt Park and work in the Loop. I have to take a bus and transfer to the Blue Line. It takes about 45 minutes. Not only am I cool with this, I cherish the reading time!)

I have no sympathy whatsoever for people who've convinced themselves that they MUST drive directly to their downtown office jobs. What bullshit.

[Reader Rabbit]

24. Which bus/el does Rahm take to and from work?

Someone needs an ass-kicking. Just sayin'.

[Lucinda]

28. Seems reasonable as long as it is just work related business

and they can drive their own vehicles to and from work if they wish.