|
Post by Low Light Mike on Dec 28, 2009 9:26:48 GMT -8
I think that is pretty stupid actually! It is the Christmas season and people are travelling and to have BC Ferries on reduced passenger license on that route is pretty unacceptable to me! I would be pissed off too! They know the holiday season is a busy time so why by on a reduced license? That makes no sense. Typical BC Ferries! Are you saying that the Burnaby should have been on an A-License for all of December 27th's sailings? They hardly ever use an A-license anymore, and it would have required 6 more crew. Do you think that they had enough casuals trained and available to add 6 to the 2 crews for the day (12 extra people in total)?
|
|
Koastal Karl
Voyager
Been on every BC Ferry now!!!!!
Posts: 7,747
|
Post by Koastal Karl on Dec 28, 2009 10:16:49 GMT -8
So you wouldent be pissed off if you found out there was space available and they left people behind?? Yeah they should have enough people trained and available! It's the holidays! It's not like the regular weekend or anything! There is more traffic expected over the holidays so unless they are gonna provide additional sailings they should have more crew! Not for the whole day but maybe for peak sailing times! Yeah lets make passengers cranky and have to wait cause they are too lazy to get more crew or run a A License so they can make people happy and get them to where they are going rather then doing what they are good at doind which is making people wait and crappy customer service! Sorry it just really pisses me off stuff like this! I mean they could aviod this but they never do but I also dont know if she was running full capacity if there still would of been waits!
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Dec 28, 2009 10:28:23 GMT -8
So you wouldent be pissed off if you found out there was space available and they left people behind?? No, because I understand the licensing and I think that the crew level required for an A-license is unrealistic. I expect that they would rarely or never use an A-license, because the numbers and costs don't make sense. Like Curtis said yesterday, they need to modify the license to allow for something half-way between an A & B license. Maybe 3 extra crew to allow for a total passenger load of say 650? - So who can modify the license? I guess I should read the beginning of this thread to find out. I think it is Transport Canada's call. So in the case of the Queen of Burnaby and the BCFS's reluctance to use the A-license, I think that it's unfair to blame the Dec.27th 2nd-round-trip Powell River situation on BC Ferries. =========== Of course the problem with yesterday's 1st round-trip was that BCF was using a Class-C license, instead of a B. The difference in crew-size is only 1, so Yes I would have been upset (not pissed off in a postal way, but unhappy in a cool way ;D), if I was left behind because they sailed with a C-license instead of a "B". I think they should have used a B-license for the entire day on Dec.27th.
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,171
|
Post by Neil on Dec 28, 2009 11:58:25 GMT -8
Karl's exclamation marks aside, route 17 has one of the lowest capacity utilizations in the system, and that is probably a percentage of the licensed capacity, which is considerably less than what the boat is designed to carry. Last year, less than 1% of sailings was overloaded- the lowest anywhere. Maybe people who are going to yell about staffing should be prepared to give us some figures about how much it might cost to have that extra staff available to cover the tiny number of sailings where they're needed.
On the other hand, you can understand the public's anger. It's a long wait between the second and third sailing from Powell River. Considerations about 'a' and 'b' licenses are only of interest to Transport Canada, BC Ferries, and ferry fans. All the stranded public cares about is that the boat has left partially empty and they're sitting there for five hours. The southern routes occasionally get manager's discretion sailings, but I guess route 17 is just not a priority for higher staffing given its low average passenger totals.
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Dec 28, 2009 19:46:46 GMT -8
From Northern Sunshine Coast ferry advisory committee minutes from June 19, 2009:
|
|
|
Post by Scott on Dec 28, 2009 22:09:06 GMT -8
It may be out of the question to have 6-12 casuals on-call in Comox, but they probably have a fairly large pool of them down in the Nanaimo area which is less than a 2 hour drive away. Why couldn't they call up some from there for one or two days?
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,171
|
Post by Neil on Dec 28, 2009 23:52:14 GMT -8
It may be out of the question to have 6-12 casuals on-call in Comox, but they probably have a fairly large pool of them down in the Nanaimo area which is less than a 2 hour drive away. Why couldn't they call up some from there for one or two days? Probably because overloads are so rare that even a two day increase in crewing is hard to justify. Their figures show that 99.1% of sailings on route 17 accommodate everyone. Chances are that most of the few overloads that there are, occur in the peak season. It's understandable that when people are used to always being able to show up fifteen minutes before a sailing and be pretty much guaranteed boarding, they're going to be mighty ticked when they have to wait. Several times a year I leave from Tsawwassen for Duke Point, and then on to Hornby. If I was told that I didn't need reservations, and had a better than 99% chance of getting right on a boat at Tsawwassen and connecting promptly from Buckley Bay and Denman, I would be delighted with those odds. I understand that route 17 customers have a four hour wait if they miss a boat, but cumulatively, regular customers on the main crossings and 'minor' island routes probably spend many hours a year waiting, so maybe once in a while, route 17 folks just have to 'share our pain'.
|
|
|
Post by NMcKay on Dec 29, 2009 0:00:33 GMT -8
Getting on the reservation bandwagon, would BCF not be smart to move, lets say for the benefit of an argument, a 100% Reservation Option, where you can call them, let them know your coming, and hey... they can arrange crewing accordingly, make a 24 hour cut off, and then the massive line-ups, and all that BS could be Done Away with... turn it more similarly into an airline style setup.. what do you guys think?
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Jan 14, 2010 21:53:41 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by northwesterner on Jan 15, 2010 11:52:04 GMT -8
I think its insane that a ship that was designed to carry over a thousand passengers is restricted to max out at 879 on an A-license, and that it regularly sails with a license to 284! Not sure if the lifesaving equipment on the Burnaby was designed to max out at 879 because that route never sees more passengers than that and she rarely sails elsewhere, or if its just over-cautious regulation drastically reducing capacity.
Obviously, though, the fact she's sailing with a license for 284 regularly says something about the loads carried on that route in the winter.
|
|
|
Post by Dane on Jan 16, 2010 11:56:41 GMT -8
Using the ship as the yard measure to traffic in this case is backwards - BC Ferries has been pretty open in the past about saying they feel the Queen of Burnaby is too much ship for the crossing.
|
|
|
Post by northwesterner on Jan 16, 2010 21:53:02 GMT -8
I'm assuming the financial picture is pretty sick for this route with the big, old, Queen of Burnaby making crossings with such light loads. I wonder how much money in operating expenses could have been saved over the last ten years if they'd built a similar sized ferry to replace the Queen of Sydney.
|
|