Sometimes, remote just plain don't work

For as long as I've been in Boston - over fifty years now - the public transportation system, the MBTA (a.k.a., the T) has been kinda-sorta-pretty-good-okay.

Even before I came here for college, I was a bit familiar with the T (then the MTA). 

I was a fan of the Kingston Trio, and joyfully sang along to Charlie on the MTA, which chronicled the hapless Bostonian who hopped on only to find that the fare had increased while he was in transit. Lacking the nickel he needed to exit the car when he arrived at his destination, Charlie was doomed "to ride forever 'neath the streets of Boston."  

So I knew that public transportation in Boston could be kinda-sorta f'd up.

But compared to Worcester - which had buses only - living in a place with rapid transit was a dream. 

And over the years, I've used Boston's public transpo plenty.

When I was in college, I used it to get around the city, and to get over the Cambridge. There was something called "Dime Time," when you could ride (during non-rush hours) for ten cents. A pretty good deal.

After college, when I lived and worked downtown, I didn't have to rely on it, but after grad school, I worked for years on the Red Line, first in Harvard Square and later at Alewife. So I was a regular T-commuter. The system was generally reliable. Generally. My rule of thumb was that if I positively, absolutely, had to be to work at a specific time, I needed to pad my commute time. Because you never knew when there'd be a delay. Or two.

These days, I'm occasionally on rapid transit, occasionally on commuter rail. By and large, T has stood me in pretty good stead.

And, as an elder, I enjoy a geezer pass, which entitles me to ride the rapid and commuter rails, buses and ferries, for half price. Not quite Dime Time, but pretty darned good.

Still, I realize that the T has turned into something of a mess of late. 

Equipment failures. Slow downs. Schedule collapses. Passengers injured when the Green Line plays bumper car. Or when escalators flatten and send people spilling. Derailments. Fires. Lines running at a fraction of the speed they should be running at. Manufacturing delays on new cars.

A man was dragged to his death thanks to a faulty door. Another fellow was killed when a rusting staircase he was climbing collapsed. (The staircase had been quasi-fenced off, but should have been removed.) 

Some of the stations are a mess. A hazardous mess. Within the last couple of months, there was a hit and a near miss at the Harvard Square station. A ceiling panel fell, narrowly missing a passenger. Then some sort of defunct but never removed air monitor dropped onto - and injured - a woman. 

A lot of the issues that the T has been experiencing seem to cry out for hands on, in person oversight by management. 

And yet, all sorts of senior managers don't actually live in the Boston area. 

The T’s chief safety officer owns a house near Chicago, where his wife works — and employees say he spends much of his time there. His deputy lives mainly with his family in Los Angeles. The T’s chief of capital projects rarely came to Boston before he was fired last month, instead attending meetings remotely from his homes in Wisconsin, Delaware, and Hawaii. Meanwhile, last year his chief of staff bought a house in Florida, where she lives with her husband.

The MBTA is facing an unprecedented crisis of confidence in its service, punctuated by slow trains, endless delays, and gruesome accidents. Yet, many top T managers live far from the troubled system they’re trying to rescue and some are rarely seen in person by their employees. A Globe review has found that nine senior managers have a primary residence more than 100 miles from the nearest T station — and some much farther. (Source: The Boston Globe)

I'm actually a fan of remote work, with a preference for the 3-2 or 2-3 model. This gives workers the opportunity to enjoy the benefits of working from home (no commute, throwing a load of wash in...), while also ensuring that the benefits of having folks work in person aren't lost (onboarding newbies, kismet moments, seeing things up close and personal...)

But some jobs, companies, and industries are better suited to remote work than others. And I'd suggest that, in an outfit like the T, there are plenty of jobs that work better in person. And we're not just talking bus driver here.

You'd think that those in charge of systems safety would want to be on the ground when there are accidents, when hazards are discovered, and not just rely on reports from underlings Zooming info at you as you sit on your veranda in Hawaii, admiring the bougainvillea. 

Just terrible for morale. 

When the new general manager, Phillip Eng, called his first staff meeting, it was full of no shows who decided to Zoom in rather than stir their stumps to meet the new guy in person. 

Not because of this - from what I've read, Eng is a practical person and not the vindictive type - but throughout the T, the remote work policies are being reexamined. Some senior employees have already been told that they need to show up in person at least three days a week. 

In an interview with the Globe, new general manager Eng... acknowledged that remote work can be productive, but said there’s no substitute for direct contact among T leadership and hands-on management of staff.

“We’re in a business of 24/7 operations,” Eng said. “There is an importance about face-to-face discussions, meetings not only internally, but for our staff to see that we’re present as well with third parties doing work and the vendors and the manufacturers that we rely on."

The pandemic crisis has passed. The T crisis is ongoing.

Good for Eng.