|
Post by Low Light Mike on May 16, 2007 15:31:29 GMT -8
(this thread is a spin-off from the 2007 service notice thread entry from Today, re the appointment of former NDP Premier Dan Miller to the BCFS Board: ============================ To the interested readers out there, who have read about the new board-member: What do you think? A former NDP-Premier (albiet short-term, but an NDP Premier nonetheless) is on the Board of our quasi-private Ferry Corp. Ironic? A shrewd move? Or just the appointment of a good man for the job? Does anyone know the procedure for appointing a board member? is it done by the Ferry Commissioner? Is the BC Gov't involved in the decision? just curious....I think it's a rather interesting news item. ====================== a bit of Googling gave me my answer (research items are in bold-italics): www.bcferryauthority.com/In April 2003, the Province of British Columbia established the B.C. Ferry Authority, an independent, no-share capital corporation that holds the single issued voting share of the new British Columbia Ferry Services Inc., which was also established in April to reform the delivery of ferry transportation services in B.C.
The purpose of the Authority is to govern British Columbia Ferry Services Inc. and to appoint its Board of Directors. By its structure, the Authority ensures the operations of BC Ferries are independent from the provincial government. ---------------------------------- ok, so if the Authority appoints the BCFS board, then who governs the Authority?? Well, the below link shows the Board for the Authority, and it looks like the exact same people as the BCFS Board. www.bcferryauthority.com/board_of_directors.html....ok, so the Authority appoints the BCFS Board. And the Authority itself is goverened by a board, and that Board appoints it's same people as the BCFS board. So, who appoints the Authority's Board? I suppose the answer to that is in the Coast Ferry Act. Here is what it says (I've edited this down, to the essentual items: www.qp.gov.bc.ca/statreg/stat/C/03014_01.htm#section5 (it's clauses #4-7 in the Act, if you want to see the whole thing) ============== Subsequent directors
7 (1) For the purposes of appointing directors
(a) an appointment area is to provide to the directors of the Authority a list of at least 3 and not more than 5 nominees who are qualified individuals, and
(b) the trade union representing the employees of British Columbia Ferry Corporation is to provide to the directors of the Authority a list of at least 3 and not more than 5 nominees who are qualified individuals.
(2) After receiving the lists of nominees provided under subsection (1), the directors of the Authority whose terms of office do not expire must appoint as directors one of the nominees from each of the submitted lists.
---------------------------
(3) On or before the expiry of the term of each director appointed under section 5 (3) (c), the Lieutenant Governor in Council is to appoint a qualified individual as a replacement director and must promptly notify the directors of the Authority of that appointment.
(4) On or before the expiry of the term of each director appointed under section 5 (3) (d), the directors of the Authority are to appoint a qualified individual as a replacement director.
---------------------- ok, so the Board has 9 persons on it: - 4 are appointed from various areas (there are 4 areas representing 4 coastal-regions that are served by ferries, and there is to be 1 Director from each of these 3 areas/regions.) - 1 is appointed by the Union representing the BCFS employees. - 2 are appointed by the Lt. Governor - 2 are appointed by "qualified individuals", presumably appointed by the existing board. I guess that's the way to ensure that there is some diversity of apppointment. But it does seem compicated. Or is it so confusing, that no one cares? (T-Terminal, that's your cue to jump-in.......)
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on May 16, 2007 15:52:52 GMT -8
re the above: does anyone know what area of appointment Mr. Dan Miller fell into?
ie. was he an Area appointment, a Union appointment, a Lt.Gov. appointment, or and other-appointment?
I suppose that this is public knowledge, and I would be interested to know which "quota spot" Mr. Miller has filled.
|
|
|
Post by Queen of Nanaimo Teen on May 16, 2007 17:21:04 GMT -8
I suppose this new guy could do some good for BC Ferries. The fact that he was around when BC Ferries was doing well could be a good sign. He may be able to contribute some great idea's. I try and keep my self out of discussion of a board. Makes me..... angry and somewhat disgusted... oh well. I guess there will always be someone a little bit higher than everyone else, but I imagine when we get to the top of things, the Board "chair" would be the person that has some decision in who to appoint to the board....
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on May 16, 2007 17:24:00 GMT -8
I believe that for those positions which are chosen by the Board, the entire existing board votes....so the majority of the Board rules.
|
|
|
Post by Scott on May 16, 2007 17:59:29 GMT -8
Wasn't he once a minsiter responsible for BC Ferries - before he became premier?
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on May 16, 2007 18:08:15 GMT -8
Wasn't he once a minsiter responsible for BC Ferries - before he became premier? Yes, he was Minister responsible for BCF, in the late 1990's....which was the era of the fast-cat project, amongst other things. Here's a transcript of a year-2000 speech ....read the 3rd Paragraph.....www.commonwealthnorth.org/transcripts/miller.html
|
|
WettCoast
Voyager
Posts: 7,454
Member is Online
|
Post by WettCoast on May 16, 2007 18:21:59 GMT -8
I believe that it was Dan Miller who was largely responsible for the fact that a ferry is named the Skeena Queen. Nevermind the irony that it serves Salt Spring Island.
It would be interesting to know how he feels about the recent history of BCF's, in particular since 2003, and also about the new Pride of the North ;D, the Northern Adventure.
|
|
|
Post by Hardy on May 16, 2007 18:35:36 GMT -8
Well, well, well. All the former vultures coming home to nest again. Seeing the Fa$t-cat$ were on hi$ watch, what do we expect thi$ time around? I'll keep an open mind on thi$. Hopefully, with $ome previou$ background, he will have $ome relevant in$ight into the board that he join$ a$ a member, and not ju$t be another $tuffed $hirt collecting hi$ $alary. For those of you who don't want to link to Mr. Horn's post above to find the 3rd paragraph.... --- cut & paste of 3rd paragraph from Mr. Horn's post.... --- I wasn't going to talk, James, about ferries although I think let me just make this reference. I think there's significant opportunity for even more cooperation, working together in the Alaska Marine Highway System and BC ferries. I venture to say if they were both private sector companies they'd be looking at merging, which is a significant trend in business these days, but there are lots of opportunities. I brought with me on the plane a map that accompanied a letter I received just this past week from someone who's been involved in transportation planning, and their argument, the map and accompanying letters argued that we ought to be working even more closely together to promote this marine highway because of the significant opportunities. --- cut & paste of 3rd paragraph from Mr. Horn's post.... --- So what did this mean at the time, and moreover, what will this mean now? Probably nothing now, but at the time, it sure would have been interesting to see some kind of a "code-share" and mutual agreement between BCFS and AMHS. There are still some decent possibilities out there, however, the current condition of BCFS makes it not a prime target or proponent of _ANYTHING_ these days .... <sigh>
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Aug 2, 2007 18:39:24 GMT -8
www.nanaimobulletin.com/portals-code/list.cgi?paper=51&cat=48&id=1037385&more=0======================== Ferries aren’t independent Aug 02 2007 B.C. Ferries operates independent from the provincial government until public safety is at stake. That became apparent this week, when the public learned Transportation Minister Kevin Falcon wants to beef up security around the publicly owned ferry fleet. The news came out after Saturday’s bomb threat that crippled transportation at the Tsawwassen ferry terminal. A spokesman says it’s not new – the minister has been looking into the issue for about a year. Not to say he shouldn’t get involved in public safety. But it does appear the provincial government speaks out of both sides of its mouth when it comes to control of B.C. Ferries. When the Liberals formed government, they reorganized Ferries, putting it at arm’s length to avoid another Fastcat ferry fiasco. But this proves it’s not possible for government to completely distance itself from the Crown corporation. Nor should it be. Falcon has asked for safety reviews of the publicly-owned system and plans to travel to England to look at how the British public is protected from threats on its ferries and subway systems. That’s a proactive approach British Columbians should welcome. But again, it seems to prove the province can’t really own a public asset and truly expect it to operate completely independent from government. No one wants a return to the level of government interference that allowed the Fastcats to be built, but when the public owns assets worth billions of dollars, and which play such a vital role, accountability is needed – and expected. Mr. Falcon, please do ensure the ferry system is safe and secure. But let’s not pretend the ferries are completely removed from government control. =======================
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Aug 2, 2007 18:41:25 GMT -8
www.canada.com:80/victoriatimescolonist/news/story.html?id=44345010-28fd-41d7-b614-11c53f3ba245Competition not in the cards for B.C. Ferries Judith Lavoie, Times Colonist Published: Thursday, August 02, 2007 ================ The province's ferry watchdog wants B.C. Ferries to face more competition, but private operators are not lining up to take over routes or provide competing services. Ferry service in B.C. is stable and reliable, although considerably more expensive than it was, said the B.C. Ferry Commission annual report, released this week. "A question mark remains, however, concerning efficiency," it says. Competition drives efficiency and innovation, which are key to keeping down fares and subsidies in the future, Ferries Commissioner Martin Crilly said in an interview. But B.C. Ferries essentially has a licensed monopoly and there is little prospect of serious competition, he said. Crilly, who believes the commission's job is to look at ferry service from a customer's viewpoint, wants to ensure the corporation does not become "too complacent and easy-going on itself." "Unless the customer has alternatives, it's hard to know if a better job could be done." In 2003, when B.C. Ferry Services was born, the plan envisioned 13 per cent of routes run by private operators, but, four year later, the only routes with possible alternatives are the Mill Bay, Denman and Hornby routes -- less than two per cent. A decision is expected on Mill Bay by the end of the year, said B.C. Ferries spokeswoman Deborah Marshall. A pilot project is under consideration for the Denman and Hornby routes. Plans to put the northern routes out for tender have been on hold since the sinking of the Queen of the North, Marshall said. The commission also expects ferry fares to rise on major routes over the next few years at twice the rate of general inflation and on smaller routes at up to three times the rate of inflation, the report states. Behind the hikes are fuel costs, accelerated renewal of ships and terminals and government contributions that are not keeping pace with revenue needs. © Times Colonist (Victoria) 2007
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Aug 2, 2007 18:43:01 GMT -8
www.canada.com/components/print.aspx?id=e83f0cd6-90af-4725-9a9b-29f45cb5e4b8BC Ferries set for fare hikes of at least 9.4 % Derrick Penner Vancouver Sun Wednesday, August 01, 2007 It is almost certain that BC Ferries will be allowed to raise fares as much as two times the rate of inflation, the British Columbia Ferry Commission said in its annual report. Ferry commissioner Martin Crilly said government has decided not to increase its $150-million subsidy to the service, so its preliminary ruling on fare increases will likely stand. That allows for fares on the main Vancouver to Vancouver Island runs to increase by a minimum 9.4 per cent. Fares to outlying islands can rise by at least 14 per cent, plus an inflation factor, by 2012. The commission will make its final ruling Sept. 30. Crilly said BC Ferries is still in a "catch-up phase," and has to cope with an accelerated replacement of vessels and ferry-terminal improvements on top of general inflation and high fuel costs not fully recovered by fuel surcharges. He added that government subsidies for less-travelled routes have "not increased as fast as BC Ferries' revenue needs." However, Crilly also called on BC Ferries to increase its efficiency by one per cent per year up to 2012 to mitigate fare increases. Kim Benson, chairwoman of the Islands Trust, which represents Gulf Islands communities, said fare increases will hurt the viability of ferry-dependent communities, and won't necessarily raise revenue if higher fares deter people from visiting the islands. Ferry routes shouldn't have to cover all of their costs through fares, she said, "any more than a bus route or road should do that." depenner@png.canwest.com © The Vancouver Sun 2007
|
|
|
Post by Political Incorrectness on Aug 2, 2007 18:47:34 GMT -8
This is getting ridiculous. This is going to push everyone to the breaking point. The oil companies don't help much either and the government has turned the cold shoulder to them. I see this as a tough point BCFS is at. Currently, Washington State Ferries has frozen the fares for 2 years. Fares are not going to go up for the next two years. What I wonder is how much government is necessary and how much they are paid? If they did not deserve the money that they are paid for and are not doing there jobs, would it be better spent on BC Ferries or something else?
|
|
|
Post by Scott on Aug 2, 2007 22:45:44 GMT -8
I don't see how letting a private company take over a minor route does anything to increase competition.
|
|
|
Post by Political Incorrectness on Aug 2, 2007 22:50:10 GMT -8
Isn't it obvious that there is a huge flaw within the provincial government's logistical thinking sector? Focusing on the area of mass transportation specifically.
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Aug 3, 2007 18:15:37 GMT -8
Here's some more on the same story re alternative providers: =============== www.comoxvalleyrecord.com:80/portals-code/list.cgi?paper=8&cat=23&id=1037841&more=0By Colleen Dane Record Staff Aug 03 2007 Hornby and Denman Islanders may be relying on the unknown to provide their ferry service in coming years. According to BC Ferry Commissioner Martin Crilly’s annual report, “BC Ferries is ... working with a potential alternative service provider on a possible pilot project for two routes (Hornby and Denman Islands) which were not part of the original plan.” That plan is a clause included in the coast ferries act directing them to use subcontractors for six routes — 13 per cent of the cost base for core services. That’s gone slowly though, said Crilly. Only one competitive tender request has been sent out and it was for the Mill Bay-Brentwood Bay route. The Hornby-Denman discussion wasn’t planned. Information about the possible pilot project is scarce because of a confidentiality agreement between BC Ferries and the contractor. That lack of information is a little disconcerting to ferry advisory commission members on the Islands. “We’re kind of in the dark,” said Denman Island rep Louise Bell. “Islanders are worried because it’s kind of an unknown.” She said there’s immediate questions raised about maintaining schedules, potential impacts on fares and more. Tony Law, Hornby’s representative and chair of the ferry advisory committee for the islands, said he hesitated to comment until he saw what was actually brought forward. “I think we have to wait and see what actually is being proposed,” he said. Nonetheless, he understands islanders’ concerns. “It’s hard for us to see how something more effective could be put in place.” • • • News of a possible alternative service provider wasn’t the only news to concern the island’s ferry advisory committee reps. Word that Crilly’s preliminary fare caps wouldn’t be changed from the quickly-increasing standards laid out in March disappointed Bell and Law. “It’s got a huge impact on the people who live here,” said Bell, who explained that not only does it make everything on the islands cost more, but it also makes it more difficult for residents there to access Vancouver Island. Law pointed to the same concerns — but said he’s not finished fighting against the proposed increases. He’s working currently to set up consultation with the Ministry of Transporation, and hopes to also plan a meeting with the Minister of Tourism, MLA Stan Hagen, to talk about the impacts this has on travel to the coastal communities. reporter@comoxvalleyrecord.com
|
|
|
Post by Retrovision on Aug 3, 2007 19:15:32 GMT -8
Thanks for the news and analysis, Mr. Horn. Or just the appointment of a good man for the job? From my experience, this is far more often than not the case. Though some consideration might be given to political ballance when trying to pull-off such a quasi-private endeavour, in the end it's almost always the case that a person is hired for such a job because of their skills and experience related to the appointment.
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,150
|
Post by Neil on Aug 3, 2007 21:41:23 GMT -8
The Denman and Hornby thing is really baffling. Who on earth would want to take on services which could not possibly make money, and which are already feeling the effects of the huge fare increases? Obviously, there would be a substantial subsidy, and how could taxpayers possibly benefit?
I'm totally against privatization, but I have to admit, this is really intriguing, and I'd love to know who's interested and what the proposal is.
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Aug 7, 2007 19:52:03 GMT -8
I've been re-using this existing thread, for news stories related to BCFS's Public Relations machine, and general corporate news. ================================= www.nanaimobulletin.com:80/portals-code/list.cgi?paper=51&cat=48&id=1039339&more=0Ferries survey reflection of real lifeBy Darrell Bellaart Reporter Aug 07 2007 My Calgary friends are surprised when I say I seldom use the ferries. Most everything I need is on Vancouver Island. So I was pleasantly surprised this summer, traveling aboard B.C. Ferries. The staff seemed friendlier, the ships seemed cleaner, and we had little trouble finding a seat. Those little surprises reflect what other users are finding, as reflected in the latest customer satisfaction survey from B.C. Ferries. When I saw the announcement, issued on June 29, I have to admit I scoffed at it as so much public relations bunk. But I’ve since come to realize the survey is an accurate reflection of how the ferry company is improving since the province changed it from a Crown corporation to what it calls an “independent regulated company.” B.C. Ferries is getting better, the survey says. But there is still room for improvement, and the transportation company is having a hard time convincing riders it’s good value. That’s close to what I found this summer. B.C. Ferries is required to do customer surveys each year under the B.C. Coastal Ferry Act. The surveys are quite detailed, and the results, if you take the time to study them, can provide some useful information on where the company is headed. Customers are asked to rate such things as cleanliness of the washrooms and the clarity of the public address system. They’re asked about the loading procedure, what the terminal was like and how they would rate the overall travel experience, among other things. The 2006 survey was compiled from 14,148 user interviews, and another 5,625 questionnaires. Those surveyed were asked questions rating 18 different areas of service, on a scale of one to five. A five means the customer is very satisfied with the service; a three is neutral and a one means very dissatisfied. The good news is that B.C. Ferries is improving, which is likely what most riders want to hear, given the rising fares – especially since they added those cursed fuel surcharges. The survey results indicate higher levels of customer satisfaction for each of the past four years. Last year more customers than ever reported they were very satisfied with their overall experience, at 25 per cent. Eighty-nine per cent were satisfied to some degree, also an increase, while the number of dissatisfied customers fell to nine per cent. Still, a nine per cent dissatisfaction rating means nearly one in 10 riders is unhappy, and that should be an incentive to keep trying. Any customer satisfaction survey is about finding ways to improve. Businesses need to know both where they’re succeeding and where they’re failing and the survey provides some useful information in both departments. As mentioned, my family’s experience aboard B.C Ferries earlier this month closely matched the survey results, proving to me the accuracy of the survey. Once aboard a ferry, the experience was generally enjoyable. But the higher fares caused some sticker shock. And, my wife’s attempts to book a reservation to the Island on her cell phone were a waste of time. She was put on hold, and then she was told no reservations were available. The operator couldn’t even tell us which ferry terminal would get us home quicker. These experiences closely reflect what the 2006 survey revealed – those surveyed questioned value for money, and said the telephone reservation system needs improvement. It will be interesting to see how B.C. Ferries uses the latest survey information. The value for money could be its toughest challenge, as it faces a rising debt load for new vessels, and no end in sight on high fuel costs. But the realization came to me; waiting out two sailings at the Tsawwassen terminal, that B.C. Ferries has one big advantage over other industries. No direct competition. =======================
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Sept 26, 2007 17:34:34 GMT -8
"Labour guy" appointed to Boards: ================== www.bcferries.com/news/files/07-065newboardappointmentglarkin.pdfNEW BOARD APPOINTMENT British Columbia Ferry Services Inc. VICTORIA – British Columbia Ferry Services Inc. is pleased to announce that Gordon R. Larkin has been appointed to its Board of Directors effective October 1, 2007. Mr. Larkin, former representative of the Pacific Region of the Canadian Labour Congress, has extensive expertise in labour negotiations, collective agreements and community relations. Mr. Larkin replaces the late Ray Whitehead as the nominee of the BC Ferry and Marine Workers’ Union on the BC Ferries’ Board of Directors. Mr. Whitehead was a long-time member of the BC Ferries’ Board of Directors, serving from June 24, 1998 until his passing on June 11, 2007. In making the announcement, Elizabeth J. Harrison, Q.C., Chair, acknowledged Mr. Whitehead’s extensive service and contribution to BC Ferries as he represented the interests of ferry workers, the company and the travelling public alike. ==============
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Apr 13, 2008 7:11:40 GMT -8
2 recent items of news for this topic: ================== 1) new board members announced: www.bcferries.com/news/files/08-024newboardappointmentsfinal.pdfPeople familiar with Vancouver Island forestry players will recognize the name "Don Hayes". ------------------------- 2) Pay increase for being a Director......and it's not just a small stipend either ! www.canada.com:80/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=752aacf5-3214-47e7-8a3c-374ac73a2fa0Call me naive, but I thought that the board positions were of more modest stipends than this. I mean, with such a large fleet of VP's (really count them all....) and the President/CEO, wouldn't that group of mgmt be enough re the high-pay individuals? And the bonus of $1,500 for showing-up at a meeting is an eye-catcher too. I won't call these items "unusual", because it's likely that all big companies do this with their boards. But I had thought that a more-modest stipend, along with a directors'-liability insurance policy, and travel costs paid for out-of-town meetings was what they would be doing. I see the need for strong board governance, but does the board chair really need $140,000 per year, plus a $1,500 incentive to show-up at a meeting? Why do any of them need the $1,500 per meeting? Isn't their other base director compensation (ranging from $48,000 to $140,000) enough?? Again, I was assuming that this is a hands-off board that participates as governors, not as managers. There are 19 manager members of the Executive mgmt team (Hahn and company...). It is things like this that are turning my white collar blue....... Someone please enlighten me. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Northern Exploration on Apr 13, 2008 8:00:26 GMT -8
I won't comment on how appropriate this is for BCFC or the individuals named because I simply don't know enough. My impression was that they weren't a rubber stamp board but I could be wrong. The people I deal with in my professional life are all very influenced by their board and I often get involved in presentations to their boards. In general, often a corporate board will have subcommittees and portfolios. For example a finance committee, marketing committee etc. Individuals are chosen due to their experience, influence and expertise to fit the need. Former Prime Ministers (other senior politicos) for example often have a law background but are chosen for prestige and also influence and access. The subcommittee or portfolio will determine the workload of the individual. Some may do very little actual work but play a role like providing access or prestige and to us that looks like a cushy do nothing job for wonderful money. However, this can come into play when you are offering stocks and or bond offerings. If you are going to invest, loan money, or become financially involved with a company one of the key places you look is the board of directors. Some boards function as a very active group of advisors and have a substantial amount of influence. This can be good or bad. There is a fine line between oversight and advising and back seat driving that can cause problems. Getting good board members who know the difference between sitting and doing nothing, advising and oversight, and meddling is very valuable. A good board has job descriptions for everyone, expectations on attendance, and performance measurement. If a board member is dead weight on boards like that, they don't last long unless they are just there for their name. Sometimes board members are there in case of emergency and don't really play an active role. For example a board member may have a background in litigation and you hope you don't need their experience. I have no clue with BC Ferries but having a lawyer on your board who is versed in how to deal with situations like the QoftN sinking would be valuable for example. He/she could help you choose which law firm to hire quickly, help guide actions and review public statements prior to release and be a second set of eyes. In a publically traded company or one with investors, a board position is often a requirement. Jimmy Pattison is known for investing or outright buying companies and exercising control of boards. Buy 10% of a company and get a seat on the board. Buy additional stock and get additional seats and gradually take control with influence and $ to protect and expand your investment. Some of the people named and who already sit as Directors of BCFC,are board members for a fair number of charities that are volunteer positions. The word honorary as well usually implies recongnition for long service with no or little compensation. Some of the best people for boards are in high demand. A top individual will get numerous offers to sit on boards. Beyond their current employment (if they aren't retired) people may have time to sit on one corporate board and perhaps a volunteer organization. People who are very good get to pick and choose and frequently are in demand. Others make an envious living semi-retired or retired from their profession but sit on a number of boards. Again this is just background about governance. I don't know enough about the BCFC situation to comment on that directly. I do know however I am available to sit on a board for a reduced rate !!
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Apr 13, 2008 8:06:57 GMT -8
Just so no one misinterprets what I was saying:
I have no issues with the quality of the board members, their commitment or the level / intensity of their governance of BCFS.
I was simply reacting to the price.
I expect a board for BCFS to be dilligent, commited, competant, diverse and to have a good back-and-forth communication with the CEO and VP's. Ie to be involved, at the board-room level.
If the BCFS recently-announced-compensation is the market price for this sort of thing, then you can reinterpret my comments as being a general corporate lament about why the market price is so high.
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Apr 15, 2008 18:05:31 GMT -8
www.canada.com:80/theprovince/news/editorial/story.html?id=cc3e397a-2606-488a-bc82-da0b7d1bd164Here's a newspaper commentary, written by The Province editors.......so read and see ferry, see ferry run. ================== Hikes for ferry directors send wrong message The Province Tuesday, April 15, 2008 Being a good leader means setting a good example. That is why we view with concern the whopping raises being handed the leaders of B.C. Ferries. As reported in yesterday's Province, the pay of the corporation's directors has just been ramped up from $30,000 to $48,000 a year -- an increase of 60 per cent. Board chairwoman Elizabeth Harrison sees her annual stipend soar from $105,000 to $140,000. Now there are those will argue that the board's total remuneration still remains a small portion of the company's overall budget. But it comes as B.C. Ferries has imposed a 7.3-per-cent fare increase on its major routes -- with further hikes expected next April. For Ferries' directors to be raising fares for regular customers while boosting their own reward for part-time work sends the wrong message about the direction of this monopoly company. What do you think? Leave a brief comment, name and town at: 604-605-2029, fax: 604-605-2099 or e-mail: provletters@png.canwest.com © The Vancouver Province 2008 ==========================
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,150
|
Post by Neil on Apr 15, 2008 18:43:49 GMT -8
Typical of the Province; they want readers' reactions, as opposed to their thoughts. And in order to provoke a reaction, they give a few provocative sounding factoids, without context.
How do these numbers stack up to other remunerations in the corporate sector, given the profile of the company, and the work involved? Is this what you have to provide in order to attract and keep qualified people? I don't know; I'm just asking. The numbers, on their own, might sound extravagant, but our reaction is meaningless if we don't have a comparison.
|
|
|
Post by Hardy on Apr 15, 2008 21:11:10 GMT -8
It's not all just about numbers and context though, it is the overall message ... fare increases coupled with large corporate wage increases just tends to leave a bad taste in the general public's mind. Don't have to justify it or correlate it to a sector-like industry - just the mere fact that the two get press close together is enough to make a negative association.
While I agree that BCFS needs to pay market level compensation to it's executives and board members etc, there is also a responsibility to be accountable to it's clients (pax). I would have said to the public, but it is a pseudo-private corporation which is only really accountable to it's shareholders. That does not diminish it's need to be responsible to it's clients though.
|
|