This site is closed to new comments and posts.

Notice: This site uses cookies to function.
If you are not comfortable with cookies then please don't browse this website.

Citibike's expansion into Crown Heights might happen afterall - Page 2 — Brooklynian

Citibike's expansion into Crown Heights might happen afterall

2

Comments

  • MasTacos
    MasTacos
    I hope that clears the way for an expansion into crown heights. 

    On a somewhat related note, car share service car2go went live in brooklyn this weekend. I already spotted a few of their smart cars in crown heights.
  • mike dunlap
    mike dunlap
    edited October 2014
    NYT report on the deal today.

    6,000 to 12,000 bikes phased in over 2015-2017.  Stations up from 330 to 700.

    Annual fee going from $95 to $149 with new monthly and seasonal pass options.

    Crown Heights not mentioned among the new coverage areas:  

    "Starting next year, the 12,000 bikes will be at more than 700 stations, including Astoria and Sunnyside, Queens; Red Hook, Park Slope and Greenpoint, Brooklyn; and the Upper East Side, Upper West Side and Harlem."

    A Citi Bike e-mail sent out today says the first spots to get the next wave of bikes will be northern Williamsburg, Greenpoint, Long Island City and further into Bed-Stuy (all of which were planned to be covered at launch, until Sandy changed that).
  • mcpoet
    mcpoet
    Re: Car2Go.  I signed up, as it's a one time application fee of $35 and the fee is currently waived with the Brooklyn specific coupon code you can enter.  It seems like a good option as a DIY cab, as it's best for short, one way trips.  If you need a car for a longer period of time, or to run errands, you're better off going with Enterprise Carshare or Zipcar.  Either way, it's nice to have other transportation options, even if we are going to have to wait a bit longer for Citibikes.  I should point out that the home area for Car2go stops at Eastern Parkway, so those of us who live in Southern Crown Heights either have to walk North of the Parkway, or advocate that they expand their home area.  Looking at the map, it pretty much perfectly mirrors the gentrification line.  I'd be curious to see how they ended up settling on that particular home area.   

    https://www.car2go.com/common/data/locations/usa/newyork/Brooklyn_HomeArea.pdf
  • whynot_31
    whynot_31
    I've looked into short term (ie hourly) rent a cars for local trips in which I need to haul crap that is too large for the subway (Home Deport, Lowe's, IKEA, etc). However, I still find it cheaper to go to the location and then take a cab home.

    If it were a nice day out and Citibike ever expands to Crown Heights, I might ride Citibike from Crown Heights to a big box store, leave at a nearby dock, and then take a cab with my purchases home.

  • Vanderbilly
    Vanderbilly
    From DNA's article (PH,CH get a mention)
    "A host of Brooklyn neighborhoods are also getting the bike share, including Greenpoint, Williamsburg, Bushwick, Prospect Heights, Crown Heights, Park Slope, Carroll Gardens, Boerum Hill, Cobble Hill, Red Hook, Gowanus and more of Bedford-Stuyvesant, according to the Department of Transportation."

    On Car2go, I'm a member and I find it awesome.   There are certain scenarios that can't be beat with a cab.  Like say shopping trips under an hr (14 bucks).  Or say picking up a lady and taking her to the date destination  (priceless) Or that random trip somewhere last minute.  The magic is, no monthly fees ever.  So put in the discount code BKYLN and your risk is zero if it turns out you have no use for it.  But even walking down the street, seeing one of these things and knowing you can jump in and go offers its own sort of power.  I find the app/car interface pretty fun too.



  • whynot_31
    whynot_31
    This about to-be-printed article in Crain's about Citibike makes it sound as if it is presently struggling for survival;   I am not betting on it coming to Crown Heights anytime soon.

    http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article/20150426/TRANSPORTATION/150429891
  • mike dunlap
    mike dunlap
    This about to-be-printed article in Crain's about Citibike makes it sound as if it is presently struggling for survival
    Huh?

    From the article:

    * Membership is down 12% year-to-date, but that is after a 50% price hike; that is actually pretty good retention

    * Citigroup just contributed another $110 million

    * March revenues were only down 4% despite it being significantly colder this March than in 2014

    * Maintenance issues in March were cut in half compared to 2014

    It may not be in Crown Heights any time soon, but it certainly isn't "struggling for survival" either.
  • whynot_31
    whynot_31
    I thought the article was overly harsh.   My experiences with Citibike have not been as bad as the article would lead one to believe.
  • ehgee
    ehgee
    edited April 2015
    I hope the dock upgrades work. They are a pain in the ass on a regular basis, when I often need to try to dock 5+ times because I repeatedly get a yellow light instead of green, or a dock that won't take a bike.

    That said, the bike maintenance situation seems improved— I regularly get bikes with brakes sufficiently strong that I can do sick skidzzz.
  • whynot_31
    whynot_31
    edited May 2015
    If I was the new head of Citibike, I would want an article that focused on how bad the situation was when I took office. Ideally, the article would focus on things I had some control over. I would be ok with the article being overly harsh.

    Then, a few years later, I would create a press release that said the problems have been addressed and look good in comparison to the prior head. I would receive accolades from all.
  • eastbloc
    eastbloc
    The dock upgrades have made the docks much faster.  I have not yet had a chance to assess their reliability.
  • whynot_31
    whynot_31
    It seems to me that the main business of Citibike is its avertising, as opposed to the bikes or the docks.

    I wonder if the advertisers would pay for Citibike to continue to exist if it didn't manage to grow its riderships and membership at all.

    http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article/20150508/BLOGS04/150509866
  • pragmaticguy
    pragmaticguy
    Heard a report on CBS radio today that the New York Citibike workers were the first bike share workers to unionize. They are represented by the TWU. According to the report, they got raises.
  • southeast
    southeast
    Heard a report on CBS radio today that the New York Citibike workers were the first bike share workers to unionize. They are represented by the TWU. According to the report, they got raises.
    Isn't Citibike struggling?
  • pragmaticguy
    pragmaticguy
    The original company that owned it sold it but I forgot to whom. And yes, they're not making oodles of money but I guess paying a little more in wages is better than not having anyone to work for them at all. Citibank was just the lead sponsor.
  • southeast
    southeast
    I doubt they wouldn't have anyone working for them.  There are always people looking for work.  Citibike can hire unionized employees and live with a big blow up rat in front of their headquarters.

    Looking at it another way, these employees seem to be willing to saddle a struggling company with even more expenses, thereby risking their own jobs.
  • newguy88
    newguy88
    I doubt they wouldn't have anyone working for them.  There are always people looking for work.  Citibike can hire unionized employees and live with a big blow up rat in front of their headquarters.

    Looking at it another way, these employees seem to be willing to saddle a struggling company with even more expenses, thereby risking their own jobs.
    Or one could view it as workers who are putting in a massive amount of work to keep citibike a float are demanding fair compensation for their effort.
  • eastbloc
    eastbloc
    More accurately, they are demanding more compensation for their effort.

    Whether or not their compensation was fair prior to unionizing is debatable.
  • eastbloc
    eastbloc
    edited July 2015

  • whynot_31
    whynot_31
    edited July 2015
    The definition of "fair" does seem to always be elusive, but here's some details on what they received:


    "Under the agreement, workers will immediately earn at least $1.50 more an hour, bringing the wage for a bike mechanic to $18.41, from $16.91. The union said it hoped to use the agreement as a template in other cities like Boston and Chicago where it represents bike-share workers.

    Citi Bike workers joined the union, which represents thousands of subway and bus workers in New York, in September. The agreement includes additional wage increases over the course of the contract and other benefits, including eight weeks of paid parental leave."

    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/10/nyregion/citi-bike-workers-in-new-york-get-union-contract.html

    So, about $37k a year, with benefits. That seems about right for a moderately skilled labor position in NYC.
  • southeast
    southeast
    edited July 2015
    Fair compensation in my mind is determined by supply and demand.  Basically, replacement value.  Nothing more, nothing less.  

    If one doesn't feel like they are getting what they deserve, they are more than welcome to find someone who will pay them what they feel they deserve.  The door is always open.  At some point, an equilibrium will be set.

    I, personally, struggle with the whole concept of unions in this day and age.  Some sectors (i.e., public) may have more of a need for it, but many others are simply ruining their own companies.
  • whynot_31
    whynot_31
    I am ok with gov and unions setting a minimum wage, the present minimum wages in effect (coupled with the level of enforcement) don't really bother me.

    I object to union contracts that make the position so high paying that the employee feels like they have won the lottery, and the the employer has to pay wages far beyond market rate.

    ....these wages seem in line with market. I don't think they will result in 10,000s of people applying for dozens of jobs.

  • southeast
    southeast
    I don't know about Citibike's particular facts and what was negotiated.  I'm talking more in the general sense.  But I'd like to add that this is just the start; they are now through the door.
  • whynot_31
    whynot_31
    edited July 2015
    I have been a managerial level staff person at a few places in NY that had unions, and have to say I never found them to be very intimidating.

    http://www.dc1707.net/

    http://www.1199seiu.org/#sthash.DBj0p7sD.dpbs

    The workers received about the compensation what they would have otherwise, and the process of disciplining employees was not much different than the standard set by a normal HR dept.

    As a result, management didn't mind the unions but many of the employees wish they didn't have to pay the fee (about 1% of their paychecks) to work in a closed shop that they did not perceive as different than a nonunionized work place.

  • pragmaticguy
    pragmaticguy
    I'm neither for nor against unions but the people who appear to be against them seem to be the ones that make a lot more than minimum wage or even a paycheck to paycheck wage. I would add that I know a few car cleaners that work for the MTA that make near $60,000/yr and frankly that seems way too much but if the MTA thinks it's ok and they can get commuters to pay the increased fares then who am I to argue.
  • whynot_31
    whynot_31
    The MTA's positions don't pay so much that their HR dept can sit idle:

    http://www.glassdoor.com/Job/mta-metropolitan-transportation-authority-jobs-SRCH_KE0,41.htm

    Their employees must have other opportunities that are about as good.
  • southeast
    southeast
    I'm neither for nor against unions but the people who appear to be against them seem to be the ones that make a lot more than minimum wage or even a paycheck to paycheck wage. I would add that I know a few car cleaners that work for the MTA that make near $60,000/yr and frankly that seems way too much but if the MTA thinks it's ok and they can get commuters to pay the increased fares then who am I to argue.
    If they are unionized, I'm not sure the MTA has a choice.  So I wouldn't say "if the MTA thinks its okay."  And passing the buck on to the commuters is not fair.  MTA should have a fiduciary duty to serve the citizens of New York by providing them with a safe, comfortable, and cost efficient commute.  They kind of have a monopoly to some extent; it's not like we have a choice as to whether to use MTA or not.  The next option is significantly more expensive.

    Any other for profit company, I would say what you said - that if they think it's okay and can pass the expense over to the customers..."  But that is just the point, supply and demand and the efficient markets will not allow that company survive.  Someone else will do it more economically, sell the product/service for less, and put them out of business.
  • ehgee
    ehgee
    Fair compensation in my mind is determined by supply and demand.  Basically, replacement value.  Nothing more, nothing less.  

    If one doesn't feel like they are getting what they deserve, they are more than welcome to find someone who will pay them what they feel they deserve.  The door is always open.  At some point, an equilibrium will be set.

    I, personally, struggle with the whole concept of unions in this day and age.  Some sectors (i.e., public) may have more of a need for it, but many others are simply ruining their own companies.
    Most wages are set by unions of capitalists, which is to say, corporations.
  • Brooklyneya
    Brooklyneya
    An important question is how many years have those making 60k been car cleaners? As a UFT member myself, I think one important difference between union and non union jobs is the consistent salary increase that goes with union jobs the longer you work. The starting salary may not be great, but sticking around pays off. There are teachers making 120k, but it took them 30 years to get there.
  • whynot_31
    whynot_31
    edited July 2015
    For better or worse, charter schools ensure that few of their teachers ever make $120k.

    They have no unions. Turnover is expected, and even rewarded. ...they have a constant supply of new, young graduates to fill the vacancies.

    The face of the threat to UFT is often Teach For America.

Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In

Categories