Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 14
14 Table 17 Level of Marketing Effort at Various Points in the Program Significant Moderate Minor Time Activity Activity Activity Don't Know # Programs At original implementation 65% 19% 5% 11% 37 When a new employer joins 36% 28% 17% 19% 36 Ongoing within the first year of implementation 5% 32% 46% 16% 37 Ongoing after the first year of implementation 3% 14% 61% 22% 36 Table 18 The higher education institution provides free parking, Training Required for Personnel Involved in but charges for the bus passes. Program Administration The city has the attitude that employees can use it or not use Level of Training # Programs % Programs it. They don't really care about it one way or the other. This apathy makes it difficult to promote to city employees. Extensive -- many new procedures 4 11% Moderate -- some new procedures 19 50% Current fare media technology is antiquated and fare evasion is rampant. Currently in the process of Minor 11 29% implementing smart card fare media to simply the process No additional training 4 11% and increase revenue. Total Programs 38 -- The concern by some Board members that people working for companies that provide passes may have a disparate perk over lower income/transit dependent riders who may or may not be employed. In other words, the Table 19 ones most likely to be able to afford transportation get a Role of Public Employee Unions in the Program price break. Role of the Union # Programs % Programs Not involved 14 36% SUMMARY No union to deal with 12 31% Neither supported nor opposed 6 15% A total of 28 agencies reported 40 fare programs oriented Program negotiated with unions 3 8% toward public-sector employees. A universal pass program Strong support 2 5% in which all employees of a given public employer receive a pass was the most frequently mentioned program. Programs Suggested the program 1 3% for municipal and county employees, federal employees, Opposition 0 0% multiple groups of public employees, and public university Other 5 13% employees (eligible as part of a university pass program) also Total Programs 39 -- were mentioned by at least five agencies. Eighty percent of these programs are not specific to the public sector but also Note: Multiple responses allowed; percentages do not add to 100% are open to private-sector employees. Respondents also answered an open-ended question to The primary program goals are to increase ridership and describe the major constraint affecting a given program. to build partnerships in support of transit. A program cham- Table 21 summarizes the responses. A concern about pion is usually helpful in achieving these program goals. the adequacy of existing service levels to accommodate Respondents indicate that public employee fare programs do increased demand was not included among the choices not have a "typical" champion. regarding potential constraints, but this issue was not raised by any respondent in the open-ended question. In most programs, employees have the option of paying for their share of the program with pretax payroll deduc- Respondents provide the following specific responses tions. The public employer pays the entire cost in 12 of regarding constraints: the 17 programs that do not include payroll deduction as an option. In more than one-quarter of all programs, the Local ordinances ensure that there is plenty of parking for all employees and many areas don't have traffic transit agency matches part of the cost. The most prevalent congestion. Bus service is not very frequent, hourly or fare medium is an employee ID card, followed by a mag- half hourly, so convenience is also a factor. netic strip pass.
OCR for page 14
15 Table 20 Ratings of Potential Program Constraints Major Minor Not a Potential Constraint Constraint Constraint Constraint # Programs Availability of free parking for employees 22% 57% 22% 37 Lack of attention from employer 14% 46% 41% 37 Multi-site public employers 5% 37% 57% 35 Existing fare collection technology 14% 25% 61% 36 Internal agency resistance 6% 19% 75% 36 Legal or tax issues 0% 17% 83% 36 Not the sole transit operator in the area 5% 11% 84% 37 Union resistance 0% 3% 97% 36 Note: No responses for three programs Table 21 program requires participating employees to surrender his or Major Constraints Facing Public Employee Fare her parking pass. The role of public employee unions in the Programs program is minimal. Constraint # Programs % Programs Free parking 5 24% Program benefits (primarily fare media) are distributed to employees in a variety of ways. The most frequently men- Employer issues 4 19% tioned means of distribution are at the employer's central- Farebox/fare evasion 3 15% ized location, at the employer's branch locations, and by Internal/Board issues 3 15% means of mail. Caps on program cost/voucher 2 10% Public employers are heavily involved in publicizing the value program to their employees. Transit agencies participate in Multiple transit providers/ 2 10% marketing by means of ads on vehicles and at stations and coordination by direct contact with employers and employees through Inadequate service levels, espe- 2 10% on-site presentations, transit fairs, and other means. Market- cially in suburban locations ing activity is greatest when the program is implemented. Total Programs 21 100% Marketing efforts also take place when a new employer joins Note: No responses for three of 24 programs reporting major the program. Ongoing marketing efforts are characterized as constraints minor or moderate during the first year of the program and as minor thereafter. Some additional training is required for Employers typically assume the responsibility for day-to- personnel involved in program administration, but the level day program administration (signing up employees, distrib- of training is not extensive. uting fare media, handling other financial arrangements). Employees sign up through their employers in 90% of the Constraints mentioned in a majority of programs include programs. Almost half of the programs do not have addi- the availability of free parking for employees and lack of tional eligibility requirements. Eligibility requirements are attention from the employer. the prerogative of the employer in 30% of the programs. One