US mass transit systems cut services due to Covid-19's socio-economic consequences
Dec 7, 2020, 2:47 am
#1
Suspended
Original Poster
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
US mass transit systems cut services due to Covid-19's socio-economic consequences
The impact of the Covid-19 situation in the US has hit the ridership on some mass transit systems so hard in the US that in parts we are seeing such big drops in demand that the hit is worse than happened even during the Great Depression.
Given a lot of these mass transit systems don't live on just federal and state/local subsidies, the fare revenue from system users is critical for the mass transit systems' budgets to provide all the services they've been providing pre-Covid-19. But with ridership down substantially, service cutbacks follow the financial pressure of reduced fare revenue. Those follow-on service cutbacks in turn may reduce customer demand even further and thereby risk putting some of these systems into a downward spiral of sort, a downward spiral of sort that hits hardest those who most rely upon or otherwise prefer mass transit to get around. And given (a) there has been a big move out of the biggest cities and into the suburbs/exburbs, smaller cities and even beyond this year and (b) remote working will be at least somewhat sticky for the year/years ahead following even vaccinations for Covid-19, it seems like mass transit systems are in for some hard times in the years ahead and the remaining mass transit system users will pay the price for it in one more forms.
For someone like me who likes using mass transit systems even to get to/from airports -- often also on weekends or at the end of a work day -- these kind of service cutbacks are going to have an impact and make it more likely that I will have to deal with a taxi/taxi-substitute.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/public-...ow-11606582853
Given a lot of these mass transit systems don't live on just federal and state/local subsidies, the fare revenue from system users is critical for the mass transit systems' budgets to provide all the services they've been providing pre-Covid-19. But with ridership down substantially, service cutbacks follow the financial pressure of reduced fare revenue. Those follow-on service cutbacks in turn may reduce customer demand even further and thereby risk putting some of these systems into a downward spiral of sort, a downward spiral of sort that hits hardest those who most rely upon or otherwise prefer mass transit to get around. And given (a) there has been a big move out of the biggest cities and into the suburbs/exburbs, smaller cities and even beyond this year and (b) remote working will be at least somewhat sticky for the year/years ahead following even vaccinations for Covid-19, it seems like mass transit systems are in for some hard times in the years ahead and the remaining mass transit system users will pay the price for it in one more forms.
For someone like me who likes using mass transit systems even to get to/from airports -- often also on weekends or at the end of a work day -- these kind of service cutbacks are going to have an impact and make it more likely that I will have to deal with a taxi/taxi-substitute.
Originally Posted by WSJ
Public transit agencies across the U.S. are cutting service and reducing their workforces as they face a cash crunch that is worsening along with the coronavirus pandemic.
Ridership is stuck at historically low levels and the current Covid-19 surge has further dimmed odds that large numbers of riders will return to buses, subways and commuter railroads soon, officials say. Federal funding that agencies received from the spring’s relief package is starting to run out, and local tax revenues that support many transit systems have shriveled.
....
In Washington, D.C., the Metro system’s weekday rail ridership is about 88% lower than normal, agency figures show, with many people working from home and few tourists in town. Bus ridership is down nearly 60%, and the system isn’t charging bus riders because passengers board at the back to reduce the spread of the virus.
The agency expects $182 million in revenue this fiscal year, down from $825 million a year before the pandemic, said Paul Wiedefeld, general manager and CEO of the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority. Metro will offer retirement incentives, with a goal of cutting 1,400 of the agency’s 12,000 positions. If too few employees retire, the agency will have to resort to layoffs, he said.
Ridership is stuck at historically low levels and the current Covid-19 surge has further dimmed odds that large numbers of riders will return to buses, subways and commuter railroads soon, officials say. Federal funding that agencies received from the spring’s relief package is starting to run out, and local tax revenues that support many transit systems have shriveled.
....
In Washington, D.C., the Metro system’s weekday rail ridership is about 88% lower than normal, agency figures show, with many people working from home and few tourists in town. Bus ridership is down nearly 60%, and the system isn’t charging bus riders because passengers board at the back to reduce the spread of the virus.
The agency expects $182 million in revenue this fiscal year, down from $825 million a year before the pandemic, said Paul Wiedefeld, general manager and CEO of the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority. Metro will offer retirement incentives, with a goal of cutting 1,400 of the agency’s 12,000 positions. If too few employees retire, the agency will have to resort to layoffs, he said.
Dec 7, 2020, 10:34 am
#2
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: MCI
Programs: AA Gold 1MM, AS MVP, UA Silver, WN A-List, Marriott LT Titanium, HH Diamond
Posts: 52,554
Oh, to live in a city that actually *has* a good transit system...
I read an article that suggested ridership on transit is low enough that your odds of getting sick on a train are lower than they are getting into an Uber. (I'm not sure how this was calculated and I would think it assumes everyone is wearing a mask and santizing their hands after using either one.) But on the surface it kinda makes sense, at least for above-ground transit. It's probably not hard to board a train car and stay farther away from people than you would be from an Uber driver. The main advantage the Uber would have is being able to roll down the window...not usually something you can control on a train.
I read an article that suggested ridership on transit is low enough that your odds of getting sick on a train are lower than they are getting into an Uber. (I'm not sure how this was calculated and I would think it assumes everyone is wearing a mask and santizing their hands after using either one.) But on the surface it kinda makes sense, at least for above-ground transit. It's probably not hard to board a train car and stay farther away from people than you would be from an Uber driver. The main advantage the Uber would have is being able to roll down the window...not usually something you can control on a train.
Dec 7, 2020, 8:24 pm
#3
Suspended
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: PDX
Programs: AS DL
Posts: 9,038
Many US transit systems get only 20% or so of their revenue from fares. They should not be complaining because even if ridership is half the usual, they are experiencing just a 10% cut, which is less than many ordinary people are suffering. There are exceptions. NYC gets more money from fares, about 40%, so they are suffering.
Part of the problem of US transit systems is that local governments have required low density, which is a poor basis to have an extensive public transit system. Many cities ban everything except single family homes with large side and front lawns. If there are only 12 house per block, so few people cannot support a bus route even if they are constantly riding from home to work then back home for lunch. San Francisco's density (no side yards or front yards) are a start. Amsterdam (slightly taller and narrow houses) are even better. So local governments share most of the blame.
Part of the problem of US transit systems is that local governments have required low density, which is a poor basis to have an extensive public transit system. Many cities ban everything except single family homes with large side and front lawns. If there are only 12 house per block, so few people cannot support a bus route even if they are constantly riding from home to work then back home for lunch. San Francisco's density (no side yards or front yards) are a start. Amsterdam (slightly taller and narrow houses) are even better. So local governments share most of the blame.
Dec 8, 2020, 8:42 am
#4
Suspended
Original Poster
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
With state and local governments having taken a huge hit to their revenues/revenue base, the mass transit systems' funds from those sources is also under severe downward pressure. In other words, these mass transit systems are facing financial hits from reduced fare revenue and reduced government support.
About blaming the lack of housing density on the reason why mass transit systems are facing extraordinarily more pressure now than pre-Covid-19, the biggest hits to these systems are coming more so where housing density has been way higher than average for quite some time and then some. And who is going to pay the biggest price on a day to day basis for the mass transit system cutbacks? Those in relatively higher density areas than average who have been hit hardest by this pandemic depression already and are yet among the most dependent upon mass transit system services.
Even in places where local and regional planning deliberately forces mixed housing stock and does other things to drive up housing density so as to try to make it more economical to provide public transit (and other) services, mass transit services are on the cutting block too due to the socio-economic changes coming from this pandemic. And once such public transit system services become weaker, people who can avoid public transit tend to gravitate toward private vehicle use and ultimately become less likely to use and otherwise support public transit system services.
Mass transit systems are in for some hard times ahead, and even a record low interest rate environment may not be enough to save them via undertaking additional debt/debt-refinancing.
Mass transit systems are a part of the global travel and tourism picture, even as they are way more than just that. When these transport services face cutbacks, how to play tourist changes too.
About blaming the lack of housing density on the reason why mass transit systems are facing extraordinarily more pressure now than pre-Covid-19, the biggest hits to these systems are coming more so where housing density has been way higher than average for quite some time and then some. And who is going to pay the biggest price on a day to day basis for the mass transit system cutbacks? Those in relatively higher density areas than average who have been hit hardest by this pandemic depression already and are yet among the most dependent upon mass transit system services.
Even in places where local and regional planning deliberately forces mixed housing stock and does other things to drive up housing density so as to try to make it more economical to provide public transit (and other) services, mass transit services are on the cutting block too due to the socio-economic changes coming from this pandemic. And once such public transit system services become weaker, people who can avoid public transit tend to gravitate toward private vehicle use and ultimately become less likely to use and otherwise support public transit system services.
Mass transit systems are in for some hard times ahead, and even a record low interest rate environment may not be enough to save them via undertaking additional debt/debt-refinancing.
Mass transit systems are a part of the global travel and tourism picture, even as they are way more than just that. When these transport services face cutbacks, how to play tourist changes too.
Last edited by GUWonder; Dec 9, 2020 at 2:45 am
Dec 8, 2020, 8:58 am
#5
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Minneapolis: DL DM charter 2.3MM
Programs: A3*Gold, SPG Plat, HyattDiamond, MarriottPP, LHW exAccess, ICI, Raffles Amb, NW PE MM, TWA Gold MM
Posts: 100,369
When frequency is reduced, mass transit becomes less convenient and more people will avoid it.
With Uber/Lyft/taxi, you only know that the driver wears a mask during your ride. He/she might have spent the last three hours in the vehicle maskless with all windows closed and no ventilation system running.
With Uber/Lyft/taxi, you only know that the driver wears a mask during your ride. He/she might have spent the last three hours in the vehicle maskless with all windows closed and no ventilation system running.
Dec 10, 2020, 4:44 am
#7
Suspended
Original Poster
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
When frequency is reduced, mass transit becomes less convenient and more people will avoid it.
With Uber/Lyft/taxi, you only know that the driver wears a mask during your ride. He/she might have spent the last three hours in the vehicle maskless with all windows closed and no ventilation system running.
With Uber/Lyft/taxi, you only know that the driver wears a mask during your ride. He/she might have spent the last three hours in the vehicle maskless with all windows closed and no ventilation system running.
I'm having to drive or be driven in private vehicles more now in parts of Europe too because of mass transit service frequency cuts -- even in a country like Sweden where things have been open way more than is common in the US -- because of this pandemic. Actually, it's mass transit service frequency cuts in Sweden, elsewhere in Europe, and in parts of Asia this year that had me get interested in this issue and prompted me to start this thread.
If anything, I'm less dependent on public mass transit systems in the US than I am on them when outside of the US.
Dec 10, 2020, 12:58 pm
#8
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: WAS
Programs: enjoyed being warm spit for a few years on CO/UA but now nothing :(
Posts: 2,504
An additional is and significant cost driver in out years is going to be maintenance that gets delayed in favor of spending on current operations. That maintenance will be much more expensive later on....
Dec 31, 2020, 8:44 pm
#9
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: PHL
Programs: AA, SPG
Posts: 27
Transit Funding
Many US transit systems get only 20% or so of their revenue from fares. They should not be complaining because even if ridership is half the usual, they are experiencing just a 10% cut, which is less than many ordinary people are suffering. There are exceptions. NYC gets more money from fares, about 40%, so they are suffering.
What is the source of this information? Philly, Chicago and New York's are close to 50%.
What is the source of this information? Philly, Chicago and New York's are close to 50%.