Liveblog continues

Scroll down the page to keep following our liveblog of City council, now entering Hour Ten.

UPDATE: Come back here tomorrow morning at 11 a.m. for continued coverage of council's closed-door -- and even more importantly, open-door -- proceedings.

Cracks in city council's position of solidarity

As we wait for the Jan. 14, 2009 City Council meeting to complete their in-camera session--going on seven-and-a-half hours now--here is a briefing of the recent developments within council, which they will have spent at least some of this marathon in-camera session discussing.

The first sign of stresses within City Council's solidarity came after union members voted 75 per cent against the city's most recent offer, after which Transit Committee Chair and Bay Ward Councillor Alex Cullen suggested that the city may need to "reassess" their position on the strike. From a report in the Ottawa Sun:

"This will be Day 36 and we need to reassess how we are handling the strike," said Cullen. "We are not at the table and there is no end in sight. We want the strike to end.

[...]

"It [the City's strategy] has to be discussed," he said. "It's been a contest between two players (O'Brien and union president Andre Cornellier) and this is not conducive to settling a strike. I don't want to undermine the mayor but we have to reassess what works and what doesn't work."

In the same Sun story, Capital Councillor Clive Doucet had some harsher words for Mayor Larry O'Brien and his tactics:

"I want him out of there. I have been betrayed by his leadership," said Doucet.

Doucet is also calling for new city negotiators."We have negotiators that are out of touch and it's not something you joke around with."

Doucet was also quoted by the Ottawa Citizen in saying he and the rest of council were "misled" by O'Brien, and had some even more pointed comments on CBC.ca:

"He comes out of the private sector, he's never worked in a unionized environment before, he's never worked in the public sector environment before," he said. "We've got someone who not only is a politician but clearly maladapted to the situation he finds himself in."

There were rumours of potential legal action against Doucet for, according to Orléans Councillor Bob Monette, weakening the city's bargaining position, but--pending the outcome of the current ongoing in-camera session--there has been nothing pursued against the councillor. According to CBC.ca, however, Doucet may face sanctions from some of his council colleagues:

"City council went behind closed doors shortly before noon to discuss possible sanctions against Capital Ward Coun. Clive Doucet and other matters related to the transit strike. By late afternoon, councillors had still not emerged."

And that's about where we sit right now, waiting for council to exit their in-camera session so we can find out what they may have been talking about, and what they may have decided or be deciding publicly.

Council has been in-camera for ... some time

If you've been following our liveblog of City council proceedings today, then you will know that councillors entered an in-camera session at about 11:30 a.m. and, as of 5:40 p.m., are still in that session.

According to Klaus Beltzner, a Manotick resident who is commenting regularly on our blog, e-mailed Bay Ward councillor Alex Cullen asking how much longer council would stay in-camera. In a 5:16 p.m. e-mail that Public Transit in Ottawa obtained, Cullen responded:

"A few hours yet."

Well, hold still. It could be a long night.

Live-blogging City council on the transit strike

I will be live-blogging the City council's debate on the transit strike today as it happens. Please come back to the site often for updates.

Public reaction after the strike: Revisited

This blog has touched on anxiety related to treatment of OC Transpo bus drivers after the strike, now in its 35th day, eventually comes to an end.

On that note, a couple of concerning stories have appeared in local media over the past few days. The first example is a Jan. 12 piece in the Ottawa Citizen, and the second can be found on today's Ottawa Sun comment page (right-side column).

The Citizen story, entitled "A very different strike in 1919", compared the current strike to a labour stoppage 90 years ago that involved a few hundred striking members of Local 279 of the Amalgamated Association of Street and Electrical Railway Employees of America (now known as the Amalgamated Transit Union).

As the title suggests, the article looks at some significant differences between the two strikes, and it includes the conduct of both drivers and passengers as service resumed. Below are the closing paragraphs (emphasis ours):

On July 18, union members voted 309 to 138 to accept the deal. "The sentiment was freely expressed among the strikers," the Citizen reported, "that it was better to admit defeat and preserve the street railwayman's organization than to fight on hopelessly and smash the union."

Service resumed July 19, on Peace Day, a public holiday. By 9 a.m., service was "as near normal as possible," according to the Citizen. The public mood was upbeat. "The average man stepped onto the street with a jaunty air again," the newspaper reported.

There was little ill-will toward the strikers, who received nods and smiles from their customers. "And nods and smiles were returned," the Citizen said.

We'll have to see if that proves to be yet another difference between the current walkout and the strike of 1919.

Now, on to the next story. The Sun ran an op-ed written by Algonquin College journalism student Andrew Sztein, entitled "Open minds will get buses moving".

Sztein rants for several hundred words in a half-sarcastic tone, but he included the following passage (again, emphasis ours):

Give the drivers their scheduling demands, but institute automated punch clocks on the buses. It's simple, if the bus isn't in motion for more than a designated time (say five minutes), the system automatically punches the driver out and their shift continues upon restart of the engine. (Let me be clear -- I'm not suggesting the driver be physically punched out, despite the wishes of several Ottawa residents.)

Neither of these stories incites any kind of violence, of course, but the above-quoted passages don't contribute much to any debate. The former quotation is speculative and baseless, while the second is -- in this writer's opinion, anyway -- flippant, given the very real potential for violence, even in isolated cases, after the strike.

This kind of writing isn't necessarily irresponsible, but neither is it very constructive.

What do readers think?

Ottawa Transit Strike: Day 34

Late last week, as reported by CBC, the city of Ottawa announced that they will be temporarily laying off or re-assigning 40-60 members of the Amalgamated Transit Union (ATU) Local 1760, representing OC Transpo administrative staff. The ATU 1760 is the much smaller sister-union of the striking ATU 279, the latter representing OC Transpo mechanics and operators. According to Mayor Larry O'Brien, the decision came in light of the ATU 279's voting against accepting an offer from the city and therefore prolonging the transit strike.

It was also announced that at some point today, according to reports in the Ottawa Citizen, both the city and the ATU 279 will be meeting with a federal mediator to try and reach some resolution to the ongoing strike. Apparently the city is now willing to negotiate scheduling concessions, as long as the bottom line is the same cost-savings and safety and reliability improvements, according to city manager Kent Kirkpatrick. In the Citizen story, Kirkpatrick was quoted as saying, "As long as it’s the same total financial cost, it doesn’t have to come out of scheduling."

According to a report on CBC, researchers have determined that the strike is costing the city millions of dollars, including about $4M to the local economy every week in "increased commuting costs alone." The article goes on to explain that the results of increased expenditures on commuting mean that people have less to pay for other local or value-added goods and services, reducing overall output and therefore negatively affecting overall productivity.

Finally, in the first publicized violent expression of frustration with the transit strike, an Ottawa driver has been charged with dangerous operation of a motor vehicle when he hit and dragged a woman walking the ATU 279 picket line on Jan. 7, according to the Ottawa Sun. The woman was thankfully not injured.

How far is too far with advertising content?

Photo from The Guardian, used without permission
A few months ago, I wrote an article about the form advertising takes in public spaces (particularly public trasit spaces), and posed the question of how far is too far with advertising media. A similar controversy has come up recently in England, except it's not the form of public-transit advertising that is at issue: It's the content.

It's called the Atheist Bus Campaign, and it started when Ariane Sherine mentioned, almost in passing, her consternation with a London-based JesusSaid.org-sponsored bus poster campaign that had Biblical quotations such as "When the son of man comes, will he find faith on the earth?" in a blog post on The Guardian's web site. Sherine wrote a convincing argument (check it out, I recommend reading her post), and the gist is largely summed up in the following paragraph:

"Now, if I wanted to run a bus ad saying "Beware – there is a giant lion from London Zoo on the loose!" or "The 'bits' in orange juice aren't orange but plastic – don't drink them or you'll die!" I think I might be asked to show my working and back up my claims. But apparently you don't need evidence to run an ad suggesting we'll all face the ire of the son of man when he comes, then link to a website advocating endless pain for atheists."

Sherine suggested that "if there are 4,680 atheists reading this and we all contribute £5, it's possible that we can fund a much-needed atheist London bus ad with the slogan: 'There's probably no God. Now stop worrying and get on with your life.'" The response was great, including plenty of celebrity donations to the campaign, and after a London-based launch of the campaign, it moved nationwide throughout England last week. And it hasn't been without backlash; according to The Guardian, the British Advertising Standards Authority has received almost 150 complaints regarding the Atheist Bus Campaign.

Whatever your stance on the issues surrounding this particular controversy, it raises a very interesting debate about personal expression (particularly religious expression) in public spaces, and whether it has a place. OC Transpo has had some Christian advertisements, but they haven't been as aggressive as the JesusSaid.org campaign, and haven't prompted any notable public backlash.

What do you think: How far is too far with advertising content?

ADDENDUM (Jan. 17, 2009): The Atheist Bus Campaign was deemed "too far" in Rome, after receiving stron opposition from Conservative political powers, according to a report in the Globe and Mail:

ROME — Italian atheists have lost a bid to run “no God” advertisements on city buses after strong opposition from conservative political parties, a member of the group said on Saturday.

The ads reading “The bad news is that God doesn't exist. The good news is that you don't need him” were to have been put on buses in the northern city of Genoa, home to the Catholic cardinal who is head of the Italian Bishops Conference.

The mock-up was ready and the contract was sent to the group for signing but the publicity agency changed its mind and said the ad could not run it because it violated an ethics in advertising code, according to Giorgio Villella of The Italian Union of Atheists and Rationalist Agnostics (UAAR).

Talk Ottawa talks about privatizing OC Transpo

On Monday, Jan. 12, Rogers TV's Talk Ottawa program will be hosting a panel to discuss the possibility of and issues surrounding privatizing Ottawa's OC Transpo service.

On the panel will be Guy David of Gowling Lafleur Henderson Law Firm--a business lawyer who was significantly involved in the privatization of air traffic control at several Canadian airports--as well as Caroline Andrew--visiting professor at the University of Ottawa with a research interest in municipal issues and intergovernmental relations--and College ward councillor Rick Chiarelli.

The show will be at 7 p.m. on Monday evening, so tune in and feel free to call to ask your questions about the feasibility of the idea. If you miss the live broadcast, the show is syndicated several times later in the evening and the following day.

City's measures to help Ottawans inadequate: Sun

A story in this morning's Ottawa Sun is fairly harsh in its appraisal of the measures recently announced by the City to help Ottawans who have taken a hit, especially a financial one, during the current transit strike.

Joe the Commuter won't get much help in his quest to ease financial pain brought on by the lingering transit strike.

The measures announced by city officials Friday aimed at helping people cope with the 33-day-old bus strike won't apply to the majority of people affected by it.

Taxi chits? Not unless you can prove extreme need. Financial assistance? Not unless the loss drops you down into what the city considers a low-income bracket.

Several of the measures announced at a press conference at City Hall Friday have been in place for many years.

[...]

As of yesterday, staff manning the line weren't familiar with any additional measures in place. [Manager of operations and program support with the city's social services branch, Janice] Burelle said staff would likely be receiving training tomorrow as to how to deal with calls from people seeking strike-related help.

At the bottom of the story, there is a Q&A that answers questions about who is eligible to receive compensation through some or all of the City's measures.

Sarcastic column in the Ottawa Sun

At least I think it's sarcastic. Under the headline "Silver lining to strike?", Sun columnist Earl McRae interviews at great length an almost-anonymous Ottawa resident who lives right beside the Lincoln's Fields bus terminal.

And boy is he unhappy about it. Some excerpts below.

The interviewee's biggest mistake moving to his current digs?

"The (censored) transit station. If we'd known the noise was gonna be that bad, we woulda tried to get an apartment on the back side of the building. You'd hear it there, too, but, krise, it can't be as bad as where we are on the front, facing the station. I blame the building, too. The insulation stinks, everything's decaying all around the windows. You could hear a pin drop outside. You complain to the superintendant to take it up with the guy and his wife who own the building, but nuthin' gets done. I don't know if it even gets back to them. If it does, they're (censored) idiots."

He goes on:

"For one thing, you can't sleep at night with all the buses roaring up and down Carling for the station. Revving their engines, the sound of their air brakes. It's terrible. It never ends. It's like a drag race going on. The station's got all these buses coming and going or sitting there waiting and their engines idling. Me and my girlfriend haven't had a good night's sleep since we moved in. It's why I'm cranky a lot. After we moved in, somebody said 'Oh, you'll get used to it, you won't even notice it after awhile.' Bull(censored). Even if you were stone deaf, you'd hear it. Krise."

And on:

"Even socks wouldn't work. But, yeah, we did buy some of those little ear plug things. They didn't work. I've even tried putting my head under the pillow. Look, I'm telling ya, it's that bad. If you open a window to let some fresh air in, it's worse. Opening your windows on a summer night, forget it."

And on:

"All I'm saying is that it sure as hell is great with the buses gone. It's a lot quieter and we're finally getting some sleep. As far as I'm concerned, they (drivers) can't stay out long enough."

Now, I did remove some context from the quotations, so please do read the entire column. But in the end, is this a serious attempt at contributing to Ottawa's transit discourse? I imagine it is pretty annoying to live beside a transit station as large as Lincoln's Fields in such an apparently unprepared building, but why would the Sun run this guy's opinion?

Must be a joke that I cannot appreciate.