If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Boston Herald)   Remember that 2009 story about free tolls for life for Massachusetts Turnpike workers? Probably not, which is why state officials forgot about their promise to end it   (bostonherald.com) divider line 61
    More: Followup, Massachusetts Turnpike, toll booths, Massachusetts Department of Transportation, cigarette tax, vacation time, workers  
•       •       •

4693 clicks; posted to Main » on 12 Nov 2013 at 10:39 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



61 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-11-12 09:46:15 AM  
Is this just Herald outrage at the state for doing something or is this a legit gripe people have?
 
2013-11-12 10:40:54 AM  
Are these the same tolls that weren't supposed to be permanent any way?
 
2013-11-12 10:43:43 AM  
Perpetual outrage machine.

IDGAF
 
2013-11-12 10:43:46 AM  

somedude210: Is this just Herald outrage at the state for doing something or is this a legit gripe people have?


OMG, it cost the state $69,000 a year in total (not per employee) to offer this as a perk to its transportation employees. Its not like its transportation employees, could benefit from it and its a relatively cheap as far as state budgets do.
 
2013-11-12 10:47:33 AM  
Note to public employees: There is no benefit, no matter how small, that someone, somehwere won't feel is inappropriate and clearly intended to rob the taxpayers blind.  Given their way all public service jobs should be temporary minimum wage jobs (or better yet done for "free" by volunteers) with absolutely no benefits of any kind.

We had one local genius here suggest that teachers should get no more than 3 sick days during the year because they already have the summers off....
 
2013-11-12 10:49:52 AM  

MindStalker: OMG, it cost the state $69,000 a year in total (not per employee) to offer this as a perk to its transportation employees. Its not like its transportation employees, could benefit from it and its a relatively cheap as far as state budgets do.


And no, it actually didn't cost anyone anything. They just supposedly didn't collect that much in tolls. There's no theft here.
 
GBB
2013-11-12 10:50:01 AM  

MindStalker: somedude210: Is this just Herald outrage at the state for doing something or is this a legit gripe people have?

OMG, it cost the state $69,000 a year in total (not per employee) to offer this as a perk to its transportation employees. Its not like its transportation employees, could benefit from it and its a relatively cheap as far as state budgets do.


That's a potential $69,000 in revenue lost if those same people were regularly paying tolls for all that travel.  Actual costs involved would be much less since there is a profit motive involved.

If they ended the program, how much revenue increase due to these people actually taking tolls as opposed to non-tolled routes?

I'm going to go on a limb and guess people are just whinny because they don't get the perks from jobs they would never do.
 
2013-11-12 10:52:24 AM  
Toll takers have  pretty good compensation for a job that takes virtually no skill whatsoever.  Not that I'd want to inhale exhaust fumes all day.
 
2013-11-12 10:52:28 AM  

logieal: MindStalker: OMG, it cost the state $69,000 a year in total (not per employee) to offer this as a perk to its transportation employees. Its not like its transportation employees, could benefit from it and its a relatively cheap as far as state budgets do.

And no, it actually didn't cost anyone anything. They just supposedly didn't collect that much in tolls. There's no theft here.


Exactly. It's just revenue they didn't collect, which in Massachusetts is a frigging MIRACLE.
 
2013-11-12 10:53:25 AM  
And?
 
2013-11-12 10:54:24 AM  

MindStalker: somedude210: Is this just Herald outrage at the state for doing something or is this a legit gripe people have?

OMG, it cost the state $69,000 a year in total (not per employee) to offer this as a perk to its transportation employees. Its not like its transportation employees, could benefit from it and its a relatively cheap as far as state budgets do.


$69k for six months...$140k a year...waste is waste. I agree there are bigger fish to fry, but curbing small things add up to big things.

They also said they would end the program in 2009 and instead and issued another 1000 transponders.
 
2013-11-12 10:55:45 AM  

somedude210: Is this just Herald outrage at the state for doing something or is this a legit gripe people have?


This is a gripe people have, because they feel cheated over the tolls in the first place. The tolls were supposed to be temporary, but now they're permanent and re-expanded in the western part of the state. Everyone should have to pay the tolls, including state employees if they're in their personal vehicles.

/not my gripe, but I've heard the arguments before
 
2013-11-12 10:56:21 AM  

MindStalker: somedude210: Is this just Herald outrage at the state for doing something or is this a legit gripe people have?

OMG, it cost the state $69,000 a year in total (not per employee) to offer this as a perk to its transportation employees. Its not like its transportation employees, could benefit from it and its a relatively cheap as far as state budgets do.


$140,000 per year against a state budget in the tens of billions, versus, say, the $15 million of fraud in welfare, or more relevantly the huge costs in transportation (other Mass Highway or MBTA costs) there are easily bigger fish to fry here.  The Herald just isn't good at doing research and scaling the relevance of costs.  Led by Howie Carr, they just want to outrage their readership, which by my estimate consists of republicans with a high school education or less, who rely on public assistance, and hate minorities.
 
2013-11-12 10:56:31 AM  

WhyKnot: MindStalker: somedude210: Is this just Herald outrage at the state for doing something or is this a legit gripe people have?

OMG, it cost the state $69,000 a year in total (not per employee) to offer this as a perk to its transportation employees. Its not like its transportation employees, could benefit from it and its a relatively cheap as far as state budgets do.

$69k for six months...$140k a year...waste is waste. I agree there are bigger fish to fry, but curbing small things add up to big things.

They also said they would end the program in 2009 and instead and issued another 1000 transponders.



Are you implying that there's a discrepancy between what politicians say and what they actually do?!
 
2013-11-12 10:58:57 AM  
I really dont have a problem with it and a few years back I had no issue here when one of the local news stations broke a story about how retired metro workers in DC got free rides for life.
 
2013-11-12 11:01:46 AM  

MindStalker: somedude210: Is this just Herald outrage at the state for doing something or is this a legit gripe people have?

OMG, it cost the state $69,000 a year in total (not per employee) to offer this as a perk to its transportation employees. Its not like its transportation employees, could benefit from it and its a relatively cheap as far as state budgets do.


These aren't employees, they're ex-employees. Still sucking at the government teet.
 
2013-11-12 11:03:50 AM  
Any benefit that can be offered for "free" is a no-brainer. Every little bit helps employee retention and to compete for the best workers. If you can offer a benefit that makes thousands of prospective employees go "hm!" in exchange for $69,000 of wholesale "product", you're doing something right. This is a benefit that no other employer can provide at this cost.
 
2013-11-12 11:05:00 AM  
I wouldn't have a problem with it if it was one of their benefits that just carried over, but that doesn't appear to be the case here.

From TFA:  "toll collectors also are issued "non-revenue" transponders to report to work without paying tolls, but they may not use the device for personal trips or after they leave their position, Verseckes said."

Further:  "MassDOT officials acknowledged 776 current state employees and 263 retirees - all former Pike employees - have "non-revenue" transponders, which allow them to drive through state toll booths free of charge"

Unless those 263 retirees are still doing the job, then it sounds like fraud
 
2013-11-12 11:05:21 AM  

Nana's Vibrator: MindStalker: somedude210: Is this just Herald outrage at the state for doing something or is this a legit gripe people have?

OMG, it cost the state $69,000 a year in total (not per employee) to offer this as a perk to its transportation employees. Its not like its transportation employees, could benefit from it and its a relatively cheap as far as state budgets do.

$140,000 per year against a state budget in the tens of billions, versus, say, the $15 million of fraud in welfare, or more relevantly the huge costs in transportation (other Mass Highway or MBTA costs) there are easily bigger fish to fry here.  The Herald just isn't good at doing research and scaling the relevance of costs.  Led by Howie Carr, they just want to outrage their readership, which by my estimate consists of republicans with a high school education or less, who rely on public assistance, and hate minorities.


The only place your wrong is the "rely on public assistance." A lot of the white working class in the central part of the state have that mentality, because they think lazy minorities on public assistance take all their tax money, and that state government is made up of a bunch of Democrats who try to steal from taxpayers any way they can. This is one of those ways the slimy state workers bilk the hardworking residents of the Commonwealth out of their hard-earned tax dollars.
 
2013-11-12 11:05:38 AM  

WhyKnot: MindStalker: somedude210: Is this just Herald outrage at the state for doing something or is this a legit gripe people have?

OMG, it cost the state $69,000 a year in total (not per employee) to offer this as a perk to its transportation employees. Its not like its transportation employees, could benefit from it and its a relatively cheap as far as state budgets do.

$69k for six months...$140k a year...waste is waste. I agree there are bigger fish to fry, but curbing small things add up to big things.

They also said they would end the program in 2009 and instead and issued another 1000 transponders.


Ok, if we're going to play "math" then it's only $33.33 per year per transponder.  No one is going to write sensationalist articles about it if each employee received a $33.33/year (or about 2 cents an hour) raise. And I hope no one would automatically assume it was "waste."
 
2013-11-12 11:06:29 AM  
I farking hate toll roads...  I cant understand why anyone would willingly vote for them or use them...
 
2013-11-12 11:09:11 AM  

WhyKnot: MindStalker: somedude210: Is this just Herald outrage at the state for doing something or is this a legit gripe people have?

OMG, it cost the state $69,000 a year in total (not per employee) to offer this as a perk to its transportation employees. Its not like its transportation employees, could benefit from it and its a relatively cheap as far as state budgets do.

$69k for six months...$140k a year...waste is waste. I agree there are bigger fish to fry, but curbing small things add up to big things.


Except that it doesn't actually cost the state any money at all. These are just tolls not collected, not a payout.


They also said they would end the program in 2009 and instead .

The Herald claims they would end the program but I would take that claim with a grain of salt.  Besides, TFA also says the transponders were grandfathered in, so that kinda implies they would still be around.  The Herald is famous for telling half truths.  For all we know these no toll transponders may be part of some contractual agreement and can't be unilaterally ended.


and issued another 1000 transponders

TFA: "Verseckes said that number, which includes emergency response vehicles, tow trucks and MBTA buses, increased due to the rise in fleet vehicles inherited from MassDOT's takeover of other agencies."  Ambulances and state buses don't pay the toll?  OMG, what an outrage!
 
2013-11-12 11:13:59 AM  
Since this is the Herald, there's a portion of this story that was made up for the sole purpose of pissing off the five paleo-conservatives in the state.
 
2013-11-12 11:14:17 AM  

mccallcl: Any benefit that can be offered for "free" is a no-brainer. Every little bit helps employee retention and to compete for the best workers. If you can offer a benefit that makes thousands of prospective employees go "hm!" in exchange for $69,000 of wholesale "product", you're doing something right. This is a benefit that no other employer can provide at this cost.


"employee retention"

i2.kym-cdn.com
 
2013-11-12 11:20:36 AM  

Persnickety: WhyKnot: MindStalker: somedude210: Is this just Herald outrage at the state for doing something or is this a legit gripe people have?

OMG, it cost the state $69,000 a year in total (not per employee) to offer this as a perk to its transportation employees. Its not like its transportation employees, could benefit from it and its a relatively cheap as far as state budgets do.

$69k for six months...$140k a year...waste is waste. I agree there are bigger fish to fry, but curbing small things add up to big things.

Except that it doesn't actually cost the state any money at all. These are just tolls not collected, not a payout.


They also said they would end the program in 2009 and instead .

The Herald claims they would end the program but I would take that claim with a grain of salt.  Besides, TFA also says the transponders were grandfathered in, so that kinda implies they would still be around.  The Herald is famous for telling half truths.  For all we know these no toll transponders may be part of some contractual agreement and can't be unilaterally ended.


and issued another 1000 transponders

TFA: "Verseckes said that number, which includes emergency response vehicles, tow trucks and MBTA buses, increased due to the rise in fleet vehicles inherited from MassDOT's takeover of other agencies."  Ambulances and state buses don't pay the toll?  OMG, what an outrage!


So if there were no tolls collected from anyone it would be Ok because that wouldn't cost the state anything?
 
2013-11-12 11:23:26 AM  

pantojar: WhyKnot: MindStalker: somedude210: Is this just Herald outrage at the state for doing something or is this a legit gripe people have?

OMG, it cost the state $69,000 a year in total (not per employee) to offer this as a perk to its transportation employees. Its not like its transportation employees, could benefit from it and its a relatively cheap as far as state budgets do.

$69k for six months...$140k a year...waste is waste. I agree there are bigger fish to fry, but curbing small things add up to big things.

They also said they would end the program in 2009 and instead and issued another 1000 transponders.

Ok, if we're going to play "math" then it's only $33.33 per year per transponder.  No one is going to write sensationalist articles about it if each employee received a $33.33/year (or about 2 cents an hour) raise. And I hope no one would automatically assume it was "waste."


I understand it isn't a large number...but in times of busted budgets and belt tightening, it is unnecessary. Additionally they said they were doing away with it and they didn't.

Yes, I also saw that emergency vehicles had them.
 
2013-11-12 11:26:41 AM  

Persnickety: WhyKnot: MindStalker: somedude210: Is this just Herald outrage at the state for doing something or is this a legit gripe people have?

OMG, it cost the state $69,000 a year in total (not per employee) to offer this as a perk to its transportation employees. Its not like its transportation employees, could benefit from it and its a relatively cheap as far as state budgets do.

$69k for six months...$140k a year...waste is waste. I agree there are bigger fish to fry, but curbing small things add up to big things.

Except that it doesn't actually cost the state any money at all. These are just tolls not collected, not a payout.


They also said they would end the program in 2009 and instead .

The Herald claims they would end the program but I would take that claim with a grain of salt.  Besides, TFA also says the transponders were grandfathered in, so that kinda implies they would still be around.  The Herald is famous for telling half truths.  For all we know these no toll transponders may be part of some contractual agreement and can't be unilaterally ended.


and issued another 1000 transponders

TFA: "Verseckes said that number, which includes emergency response vehicles, tow trucks and MBTA buses, increased due to the rise in fleet vehicles inherited from MassDOT's takeover of other agencies."  Ambulances and state buses don't pay the toll?  OMG, what an outrage!


Correct, it isn't a "payout", but these are dollars that the state isn't seeing...so it does have a budget impact.
 
2013-11-12 11:28:56 AM  
I work for a hotel chain.  One of the benefits they give is that, for up to 25 nights a year, I can stay at some of the best hotels in the world for about a fifth of what it would cost you.

Every job has perks, and I won't begrudge transportation workers this one.
 
2013-11-12 11:30:05 AM  

EvilEgg: Toll takers have  pretty good compensation for a job that takes virtually no skill whatsoever.  Not that I'd want to inhale exhaust fumes all day.


Pretty much this.  If your job can be replaced by a plastic bucket nailed to a post, you might need to find another skill set.
 
2013-11-12 11:30:05 AM  

labman: I wouldn't have a problem with it if it was one of their benefits that just carried over, but that doesn't appear to be the case here.

From TFA:  "toll collectors also are issued "non-revenue" transponders to report to work without paying tolls, but they may not use the device for personal trips or after they leave their position, Verseckes said."


Makes sense however - and this is something conservatives fail to understand - the cost to monitor and audit every single employee use of a state issued transponder undoubtedly would exceed the money collected.  Most businesses that issue company cars to employees have similar rules on the books but in actuality don't bother with fussy and costly auditing of every mile and leave all the record keeping up to the employee.   I would imagine the majority use of toll collectors' transponders is legitimate.  They use it to get up and back to work.   Is it really cost effective to go after the small amount that isn't?


Further:  "MassDOT officials acknowledged 776 current state employees and 263 retirees - all former Pike employees - have "non-revenue" transponders, which allow them to drive through state toll booths free of charge"

Unless those 263 retirees are still doing the job, then it sounds like fraud


It's only fraud if it's willful, but yes, the state should have collected those 263 transponders from retiring employees.  That's assuming the transponder was not part of their retirement package or a contractual agreement, which it may very well have been.  Seems to me the easiest fix here is to deactivate them.  Each one has a unique ID so send a letter to each former employee telling them that in the near future the system will no longer recognize their transponder.
 
2013-11-12 11:33:38 AM  

Have_Brain: Persnickety: WhyKnot: MindStalker: somedude210: Is this just Herald outrage at the state for doing something or is this a legit gripe people have?

OMG, it cost the state $69,000 a year in total (not per employee) to offer this as a perk to its transportation employees. Its not like its transportation employees, could benefit from it and its a relatively cheap as far as state budgets do.

$69k for six months...$140k a year...waste is waste. I agree there are bigger fish to fry, but curbing small things add up to big things.

Except that it doesn't actually cost the state any money at all. These are just tolls not collected, not a payout.


They also said they would end the program in 2009 and instead .

The Herald claims they would end the program but I would take that claim with a grain of salt.  Besides, TFA also says the transponders were grandfathered in, so that kinda implies they would still be around.  The Herald is famous for telling half truths.  For all we know these no toll transponders may be part of some contractual agreement and can't be unilaterally ended.


and issued another 1000 transponders

TFA: "Verseckes said that number, which includes emergency response vehicles, tow trucks and MBTA buses, increased due to the rise in fleet vehicles inherited from MassDOT's takeover of other agencies."  Ambulances and state buses don't pay the toll?  OMG, what an outrage!

So if there were no tolls collected from anyone it would be Ok because that wouldn't cost the state anything?


Yes.  I hate tolls.  They are antiquated and a form of double taxation.  As long as there is a gas tax, you are paying for the road.  Why should some roads have a special extra cost that does nothing but require an unnecessary bureaucracy to collect that cost?  The state also taxes electricity so we're covered for when and if electric cars ever become popular.
 
2013-11-12 11:39:49 AM  

ohsoferrety: This is a gripe people have, because they feel cheated over the tolls in the first place. The tolls were supposed to be temporary, but now they're permanent and re-expanded in the western part of the state. Everyone should have to pay the tolls, including state employees if they're in their personal vehicles.


the far greater gripe to me is that i have to pay it, but my fellow commuters on 495, 95, 93, etc etc don't. How come only those of us who commute west/east get stuck paying an extra tax that ultimately goes to pay for north/south commuters?

Either toll all the major commuter roles, or don't toll any of them, but its crap that only one of the major roads into town is expected to pay for everyone.
 
2013-11-12 11:47:45 AM  

logieal: MindStalker: OMG, it cost the state $69,000 a year in total (not per employee) to offer this as a perk to its transportation employees. Its not like its transportation employees, could benefit from it and its a relatively cheap as far as state budgets do.

And no, it actually didn't cost anyone anything. They just supposedly didn't collect that much in tolls. There's no theft here.


Right. It's exactly the same as lowering taxes. It isn't costing anything, just collecting as much.
 
2013-11-12 11:49:08 AM  

Vitamin Pb: logieal: MindStalker: OMG, it cost the state $69,000 a year in total (not per employee) to offer this as a perk to its transportation employees. Its not like its transportation employees, could benefit from it and its a relatively cheap as far as state budgets do.

And no, it actually didn't cost anyone anything. They just supposedly didn't collect that much in tolls. There's no theft here.

Right. It's exactly the same as lowering taxes. It isn't costing anything, just collecting as much.


Not. 'just not collecting as much"
 
2013-11-12 11:52:06 AM  

tlchwi02: the far greater gripe to me is that i have to pay it, but my fellow commuters on 495, 95, 93, etc etc don't. How come only those of us who commute west/east get stuck paying an extra tax that ultimately goes to pay for north/south commuters?

Either toll all the major commuter roles, or don't toll any of them, but its crap that only one of the major roads into town is expected to pay for everyone.


Hey!  Don't give them any ideas!  Just take 20 and be done with it!  Once these transponders or some other technology becomes so efficient that it can identify cars exceedingly quickly, we're all getting hit.
 
2013-11-12 11:58:42 AM  

Persnickety: Yes. I hate tolls. They are antiquated and a form of double taxation. As long as there is a gas tax, you are paying for the road. Why should some roads have a special extra cost that does nothing but require an unnecessary bureaucracy to collect that cost? The state also taxes electricity so we're covered for when and if electric cars ever become popular.


In many cases its because the state couldn't afford to build the road, so either some company built it and they are collecting tolls, or state had to take out a loan which the tolls go to pay back. In either case in the vast majority of state, the gas tax is at a historical low (most gas taxes are a per gallon, not percent basis and haven't kept up with inflation because rising them is politically difficult). I've never seen a state that had a revenue positive transportation budget.
 
2013-11-12 11:58:50 AM  
Dick MacGyver from The Big Mattress is keepin' his friggin' transpondah.
/Bucha' bastids.
 
2013-11-12 12:10:44 PM  

ohsoferrety: The only place your wrong is the "rely on public assistance." A lot of the white working class in the central part of the state have that mentality, because they think lazy minorities on public assistance take all their tax money, and that state government is made up of a bunch of Democrats who try to steal from taxpayers any way they can. This is one of those ways the slimy state workers bilk the hardworking residents of the Commonwealth out of their hard-earned tax dollars.


I don't claim to know everyone, but the biggest complainers /Herald readers I am familiar with live off of or flirt in and out of unemployment.  It's the accepting of unemployment while having a problem with taxes that makes me chuckle.  The folks I do know fall under a couple of categories - Having a construction or landscaping job and collecting in the winter - or being simply unemployable.  I'm sure there are also people who were just snakebitten with the most recent economic downturn.
It would be nice if there wasn't the aforementioned abuses of our welfare system to the tune of (I think I read it was) $15 million - you can legitimately hire an office full of people to track that down and eliminate it and it would pay for itself.  $140,000 in toll abuse, not so much.

/Unrelated but usually in the same conversation - People who smoke and drink and don't understand why they can't support their family then think tax-sucking minorities are accountable for this is stupefying.
 
2013-11-12 12:11:49 PM  
I thought the dick licking bastards paid a dollar twenty-five pal
 
2013-11-12 12:18:01 PM  
Who cares.

Of all the things that are "wasting money" this isn't even in the top 100. How about you start with things that will make a real difference and mop up the little stuff later? This is a waste of outrage.

/I feel as if I wasted time even reading the story.
 
2013-11-12 12:37:32 PM  
Oh noes! $0.36 a day in potential revenue collection lost per employee.  Quick!  To the news room!
 
2013-11-12 12:38:01 PM  
Well, technically is *does* cost something -- their cars are causing the road to need repairs sooner, so that costs money.  but it's not $69,000 a year.
 
2013-11-12 12:40:46 PM  
Simple solution:

Ban toll roads.

Preferably at the federal level.  Make it illegal for any city, state, or private entity to charge a fee for the use of a road, bridge, or parking space.

Raise taxes on the top income tax bracket to cover the difference, or create a new top bracket and raise that.  Or perhaps create a new tax, the wealth tax, that is charged on anyone with a large net worth.

But stop rationing roads based on how much money you have.  Ration them based on availability.
 
2013-11-12 12:44:43 PM  

HungryHungryHippo: mccallcl: Any benefit that can be offered for "free" is a no-brainer. Every little bit helps employee retention and to compete for the best workers. If you can offer a benefit that makes thousands of prospective employees go "hm!" in exchange for $69,000 of wholesale "product", you're doing something right. This is a benefit that no other employer can provide at this cost.

"employee retention"

[i2.kym-cdn.com image 363x310]


American workers are responsible for far more resources per person than workers in much of the world, as a result of automation. It's not uncommon for an American worker to have a work truck loaded with $150,000 worth of tools and computer equipment. Even being in charge of the interior of a toll booth is a non-trivial amount of responsibility. Makes sense to have the best possible employees to pick from.

Why throw away a low-cost benefit just because you can?
 
2013-11-12 12:47:45 PM  

mccallcl: HungryHungryHippo: mccallcl: Any benefit that can be offered for "free" is a no-brainer. Every little bit helps employee retention and to compete for the best workers. If you can offer a benefit that makes thousands of prospective employees go "hm!" in exchange for $69,000 of wholesale "product", you're doing something right. This is a benefit that no other employer can provide at this cost.

"employee retention"

[i2.kym-cdn.com image 363x310]

American workers are responsible for far more resources per person than workers in much of the world, as a result of automation. It's not uncommon for an American worker to have a work truck loaded with $150,000 worth of tools and computer equipment. Even being in charge of the interior of a toll booth is a non-trivial amount of responsibility. Makes sense to have the best possible employees to pick from.

Why throw away a low-cost benefit just because you can?


Because to the uninformed, saving $1 today at a cost of $1.25 tomorrow looks great on paper.
 
2013-11-12 01:10:59 PM  

mccallcl: HungryHungryHippo: mccallcl: Any benefit that can be offered for "free" is a no-brainer. Every little bit helps employee retention and to compete for the best workers. If you can offer a benefit that makes thousands of prospective employees go "hm!" in exchange for $69,000 of wholesale "product", you're doing something right. This is a benefit that no other employer can provide at this cost.

"employee retention"

[i2.kym-cdn.com image 363x310]

American workers are responsible for far more resources per person than workers in much of the world, as a result of automation. It's not uncommon for an American worker to have a work truck loaded with $150,000 worth of tools and computer equipment. Even being in charge of the interior of a toll booth is a non-trivial amount of responsibility. Makes sense to have the best possible employees to pick from.

Why throw away a low-cost benefit just because you can?


I agree with the sentiment of your original post - however, in this particular instance, we are talking about the Massachusetts Turnpike workers. In order to obtain one of these jobs, you need to be politically connected. Every politician's moron nephew/cousin/campaign worker not smart enough to work for the T can find themselves working at the Pike.

The Pike does NOT have an 'employment retention' problem. Their problem is the opposite - how do we get rid of these politically connected morons.
 
2013-11-12 01:12:50 PM  

diabloninja: mccallcl: HungryHungryHippo: mccallcl: Any benefit that can be offered for "free" is a no-brainer. Every little bit helps employee retention and to compete for the best workers. If you can offer a benefit that makes thousands of prospective employees go "hm!" in exchange for $69,000 of wholesale "product", you're doing something right. This is a benefit that no other employer can provide at this cost.

"employee retention"

[i2.kym-cdn.com image 363x310]

American workers are responsible for far more resources per person than workers in much of the world, as a result of automation. It's not uncommon for an American worker to have a work truck loaded with $150,000 worth of tools and computer equipment. Even being in charge of the interior of a toll booth is a non-trivial amount of responsibility. Makes sense to have the best possible employees to pick from.

Why throw away a low-cost benefit just because you can?

Because to the uninformed, saving $1 today at a cost of $1.25 tomorrow looks great on paper.


Get informed and see my post above.
 
2013-11-12 01:19:00 PM  

HungryHungryHippo: diabloninja: mccallcl: HungryHungryHippo: mccallcl: Any benefit that can be offered for "free" is a no-brainer. Every little bit helps employee retention and to compete for the best workers. If you can offer a benefit that makes thousands of prospective employees go "hm!" in exchange for $69,000 of wholesale "product", you're doing something right. This is a benefit that no other employer can provide at this cost.

"employee retention"

[i2.kym-cdn.com image 363x310]

American workers are responsible for far more resources per person than workers in much of the world, as a result of automation. It's not uncommon for an American worker to have a work truck loaded with $150,000 worth of tools and computer equipment. Even being in charge of the interior of a toll booth is a non-trivial amount of responsibility. Makes sense to have the best possible employees to pick from.

Why throw away a low-cost benefit just because you can?

Because to the uninformed, saving $1 today at a cost of $1.25 tomorrow looks great on paper.

Get informed and see my post above.


I don't see any information up there, just conjecture and opinions.
 
2013-11-12 01:30:06 PM  

diabloninja: HungryHungryHippo: diabloninja: mccallcl: HungryHungryHippo: mccallcl: Any benefit that can be offered for "free" is a no-brainer. Every little bit helps employee retention and to compete for the best workers. If you can offer a benefit that makes thousands of prospective employees go "hm!" in exchange for $69,000 of wholesale "product", you're doing something right. This is a benefit that no other employer can provide at this cost.

"employee retention"

[i2.kym-cdn.com image 363x310]

American workers are responsible for far more resources per person than workers in much of the world, as a result of automation. It's not uncommon for an American worker to have a work truck loaded with $150,000 worth of tools and computer equipment. Even being in charge of the interior of a toll booth is a non-trivial amount of responsibility. Makes sense to have the best possible employees to pick from.

Why throw away a low-cost benefit just because you can?

Because to the uninformed, saving $1 today at a cost of $1.25 tomorrow looks great on paper.

Get informed and see my post above.

I don't see any information up there, just conjecture and opinions.


You certainly don't have to listen to me but I still encourage you learn more about the Pike's history and past hiring practices so you can appropriately evaluate whether or not they have an "employee retention" issue.
 
2013-11-12 01:30:28 PM  

Maul555: I farking hate toll roads...  I cant understand why anyone would willingly vote for them or use them...


Here they built a road MD 200 to link up two highways I-270 and I-95 without people having to go close to DC or use backroads. A few months before the first part was complete they annouce it will be a toll road. It's done now and I drive by it most days and it is a ghost town.
 
Displayed 50 of 61 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report