TransLink board votes against bringing HandyDART service in-house

TransLink’s board has voted six in favour and three against to not move HandyDART service in-house.

This was following a four-hour public hearing on December 3, during which numerous speakers argued in favour of bringing it in-house.

The service is currently contracted out to a private company based in France.

The board resolved instead to partner with a “specialized service provider under a modernized agreement with strengthened performance and accountability standards,” in keeping with a HandyDART Customer-First Plan presented by Sarah Ross, TransLink’s vice-president of transportation planning and policy.

HandyDART is a door-to-door shared riding service launched in 1980 for people unable to use regular public transit without help.

Port Coquitlam mayor and TransLink board director Brad West voted against the resolution. He noted that while it was stated at the outset that the board has to make a decision in the best interest of TransLink, “I consider TransLink to be in the business of people and serving people and in that regard I think then the decision has to be made in the best interest of the public and the people we serve and the riders that we serve.”

“In that regard I think we heard quite clearly through the public delegation significant support from the public, from that ridership, towards moving toward a different model that would be delivered in-house,” West told his board colleagues.

He noted that the NDP on page three of its provincial election platform made a commitment “in black and white” to bring HandyDART service into government, in-house. “It could not be more clear,” West said. “I think that when an elected official makes a commitment that is very clear – and the commitment wasn’t to review the service, the commitment was to bring the service in-house – and that elected official is successful, those promises have to mean something.”

He said TransLink should instead lobby the provincial government to provide funding to bring HandyDART service in-house. “Clearly they put a lot of thought into their platform; these are not stupid people.”

Director Andrea Reimer also voted against the resolution, deeming it “not in the public interest.”

“I dispute a model of TransLink that isn’t so well aligned with the public interest that it’s not one and the same,” Reimer said. “I believe TransLink interest is the public interest.”

Outgoing board chairwoman Lorraine Cunningham – Wednesday, December 3 was her last board meeting – noted that HandyDART serves more than 32,000 riders.

“Today’s decision is not being taken lightly,” she said at the outset. “It’s clear that this is an important topic for many. In an effort to hear from everyone and ensure our decision is thoroughly informed, we’ll be allocating four hours to public delegations.”

Surrey Mayor Brenda Locke on July 8 wrote to Mike Farnworth, minister of transportation and transit, supporting in-house transit service.

She called outsourcing the HandyDART operation to a multinational company based out of France “a travesty during a time that requires Canadian solidarity.”

In the last quarter of 2023, Locke noted, 25 per cent of HandyDART service was done by taxis, “far” exceeding TransLink’s previous commitment to limit that to seven per cent.

The first of numerous speakers at the meeting was Stephan von Sychowski, president of the Vancouver and District Labour Council. He spoke to “the many failings of contracting out, both operational and moral.”

“The in-house model does much better overall, in my view,” he said. “The report explicitly proposes that a benefit of contracting out is to save money by suppressing the wages and total compensation of the workers who deliver the service.”

Next up was Joe McCann, president of the Amalgamated Transit Union 1724, representing roughly 600 HandyDART drivers, dispatchers and maintenance staff, said he was a driver for 10 years.

“I’m here to tell you respectfully, but bluntly, the report you are being asked to rubber-stamp this week is built on a foundation of half-truths, manipulated numbers and outright omissions,” he said, speaking against contracting out. “Every time a contract flips a new private company parachutes in, keeps the same people and immediately starts cutting corners to hit their profit target.

“Tightening eligibility and forcing more seniors through more hoops is not cost-effective, it is cruel,” he said. “It will simply drive vulnerable people into isolation. These ideas only look good on paper to people who have never been in a wheelchair.”

He noted at that the BC NDP promised in the last election to bring HandyDART in-house.

“Mayors representing more than 73 per cent of the region’s population, including Ken Sim and Brenda Locke – and they’re hardly friends of labour – publicly endorsed the in-house model,” McCann told the board.

Sacia Burton, speaking on behalf of the BC Poverty Reduction Coalition, also called for full public control of HandyDART. “Tens of thousands of Metro-Vancouver residents rely on HandyDART to get to medical appointments, adult daycare centres and other essential services,” she said. “Now is the time to affirm the provincial government’s commitment to align this crucial piece of our transportation system as cost-effective, reliable and a functional public good.”

The board cast its vote following the public hearing. Before the vote, Ross told the directors TransLink doesn’t have the expertise to go it alone. “Although we recognize that many stakeholders believe strongly that the service should be delivered in-house, we feel that the evidence shows that there would be no benefit to the customer experience and in fact it’s our strong assessment that bringing the service in-house would actually negatively impact service quality and hinder our ability to advance the Customer-First Plan.”

TransLink CEO Kevin Quinn echoed this. “Our evidence really suggests here is that the level of effort needed and the attention that would be needed to stand up our HandyDART business area in the TransLink organization – whether you agree on the costs or the risks – there would be a significant level of effort to really stand that up,” Quinn said.