honoluluadvertiser.com

Sponsored by:

Comment, blog & share photos

Log in | Become a member
The Honolulu Advertiser

Posted on: Sunday, August 17, 2003

EDITORIAL
City resigning itself to unneeded strike

Must we really plunge over this cliff?

The city is rushing headlong toward a bus strike on Aug. 26 with no apparent way to stop it.

The bus drivers say they will strike that day if the city proceeds with plans to lay off about 40 drivers, which would result in a cut of 100,000 hours of bus service. Negotiations between the union drivers and their employer broke off Thursday.

The administration said on Tuesday it would cancel the layoffs and cutbacks provided the City Council would that day indicate its intention to approve fare increases sufficient to wipe out TheBus' operating deficit.

The City Council that day dithered. It heard voluminous testimony to the effect that neither service cutbacks nor fare increases were tolerable. The city administration said it had no choice but to proceed with the cutbacks and layoffs.

To its credit, the council has fast-tracked hearings on a fare increase that would allow a final vote on it Sept. 24. Unfortunately, that is a month after the strike date the drivers have set. And we still don't know whether a council majority will support a fare increase.

We're baffled about why the council thought it wise to wait to vote on this remedy until it was too late. Members have long known that bus fares must account for at least 27 percent of TheBus operating budget. They knew the farebox was falling short, and they knew the fare increase bill was needed to raise the $6.8 million needed to close that gap.

And they were well aware of the strike date.

For its part, the city administration has simply thrown up its hands and begun to prepare for a bus strike, suggesting a range of helpful but ultimately hopelessly inadequate alternatives like car-pooling and bicycle riding.

While complimenting the city on being proactive on contingency plans for a strike, the Chamber of Commerce notes that it would "place a tremendous strain on businesses, public facilities, families and individuals." It will amount to a severe economic blow to the city.

Indeed, it's more than likely the cost of the disruption of a bus strike will be far greater than the amount the city would save by cutting bus routes. Residents should be disgusted by the performance of their city government on this issue.

We suggest the state Legislature consider making bus drivers "essential workers," like police officers and firefighters, so that contracts can be reached without the possibility of a city-paralyzing strike.

As for the issue at hand, some fare increases, within reason, should be acceptable to bus users, including higher monthly and senior passes, higher fares for peak-hour and express-bus users, and other proposals.

As that won't be enough to make up the shortfall, the council should also opt to subsidize a somewhat greater portion of bus service.

A viable bus service in a city the size of Honolulu is not optional. A bus strike caused by the city's failure to make up its mind is irresponsible.