Conference 7.286::digital

    When does dec consider the help rather than profits???????????????????????

    Now it's been a few years since I rode a van but I seem to remember
    that the driver had some form of communication with the VanPool
    administration people. I assume this is still the case. Has anyone
    asked their Van driver to either check this out or give then a name
    to contact? I didn't find a phone number for Van Pool administration
    in my phone book or I'd have called myself.
    
    Vague rumors are not enough for me to get upset about. Would someone
    check this out please? Also would the rest of you hold off on beating
    up on DEC at least until the rumor is confirmed? Thanks.
    
    			Alfred

    I'm not calling but my phone book (page 281) lists the number
    as 223-7059 (manager) or 223-7029 (information).

According to Sharon Corliss, of the Commuter Transportation Department,
the van rumor is false, and there are no plans to stop vanpools.  She said
that there has been intermittent talk of cancelling the van program over
the past few years, but it has never come to anything.  She also noted that
were such a decision made, it would still take a long time ("probably a
year") to actually can the vans.  (That is, enough time to write to your
congressperson!)

--Fern (organizer of DCV #130, the only
	Cambridge-Arlington-Mill-PKO-Hudson-DLB-(phew!) van)

    Well, the rumor wasn't really false.  The memo from Commuter
    Transportation is dated 25-May-1988.  It doesn't say when the vans
    are going, but they are.  One reason:  they aren't needed for the
    same reasons they were before.  Supposedly there is no gas shortage,
    today.  And the number of vans has gone from 85 to 25 since 1981.
    
    I think that instead of cancelling the vans, they should try to
    convince more people to ride, just as they are providing more people
    the opportunity to quit smoking.
    
    It's better for us, it's better for Digital.  Maybe we can change
    their minds.
    
    Elaine
    

    They can't convince more people to ride unless they get lots of
    people in the program.  For instance:
    
    	I like to come to work at 6:30 and leave at 4:00
    	Mike likes to come to work at 8:30 and leave at 5:30
    	Ted likes to come to work at 10:00 and leave at 7:00
    
    
    Until the van can fulfil the needs of the different people in the
    digital world, they won't be able to pick up these riders.   I used
    to ride a van, but it turned out a waste of my money.  I had to
    drive more often than not (softball games, meetings off-site, etc,
    etc).  If they were able to run them more like a public transportation
    system where there are 10 vans going from Maynard to Boston with
    stops along the way, all at different times things would be much
    better.  But it will never happen.
    
    
    -bill

       
       	Hey Bill, I HATE getting into work at 8:30!  :-)
       
       	On a serious note, I agree with Bill, It would be great if we
       	could get to-from public transportation via the Vans but in Mass,
       	public transportation virtually means "Boston"..
       
       							mike

  Gas is relatively cheap today, but that could change tomorrow. What if there
is a blockade of the Persian Gulf? Yes, we would send in the troops, but in the
meantime, gas could go up to $2 a gallon. I read recently that there is no fed-
eral contingency plan to deal with a gas shortage, as there was in 1973-4 and
1979-80. Therefore, the law of supply and demand would prevail, and that could
mean sky-high gas prices. 
  A gas shortage (actual or potential) is only one reason to have a vanpool/
carpool program. What about traffic? In some places where a high percentage of
the corporate workforce works for DEC, eliminating vanpools could have a major
effect on traffic.
  There are tens of thousands of DEC employees in New England who are NOT on
flexible time. That should be enough to keep the vanpool program going at the
present level.

    Whoever said gas was CHEAP??  When I learned to drive, I was paying
    28 cents a gallon to fill up the family Ford with regular gas, and
    I'm not all THAT old!

Has Digital made a commitment to any communities to administer a vanpool program
in order to reduce traffic caused by a local plant?
				/AHM

  Re cheap gas: Gas is not cheap compared to 15 years ago, but many people
are no longer willing to put up with inconvenience in order to reduce gas
consumption. 
  Re -.1: I don't think DEC has ever made a commitment to a town that a cer-
tain percentage of its workforce would use vanpools, but the existence of the
vanpool program is well known in any town that has a lot of DECcies, even if
the nearest DEC plant is 25 miles away. It would be reasonable for someone
who doesn't read this notesfile and is not a vanpool driver to assume that
the vanpool program will continue and will be established at new DEC plants
if the workforce is large enough. 

    Another thing about the Vanpools
    
    
    I used to ride the Boston-marlboro van when I worked in MRO3.  The
    cost was outrageous, even though we had the van overbooked most
    of the time.
    
    My father runs a Vanpool from the west side of Pittsburgh.  He drives
    about 50 miles per day, owns the van himself, charges something
    like $2.00 each day per passenger and still MAKES MONEY!  I remember
    when I was riding the Marlboro van that the fee was something like
    $48.00 per week, and this is partially subsidized by Digital?  
    Gimme a break
    
    Why is it that the vans are so expensive here?  In the long run,
    I quit riding the van because it was cheaper for me to drive.  At
    least once a week I had to drive anyway, so the $48.00 per week
    was $6.00 each way, 4 days a week.  Even with the rediculous costs
    of insurance, wear-and-tear, it's cheaper to drive my car 20 miles
    each way than pay $6.00.
    
    
    -bill
    

    re: .12
    
    If your van was $48 a WEEK, then it was expensive.  Mine is more
    like $48 a month.  That could certainly be part of the problem.
    
    Re:  The general issue
    
    For those of you who are van riders, the effort to challenge the
    cancellation is being coordinated through the van drivers.  They
    are each receiving information which they should be passing on to
    you.  If you have not seen it or heard it, ask them about it.
    
    This note is the official discussion topic for the issue.  We can
    use it as a clearing house.  A separate topic is also going on
    in the Commuting notes file, but I'll direct those people here.
    
    Elaine Kokernak
    Rider on DCV #3
    
    

    It may be nice to discuss this amoung ourselves here in the 
    Notes file.....but, it is not enough.  We need good volunteers
    for the task force that Andrea is putting together, and feedback
    from all VAN riders and potential riders so that all groups are
    well represented on the committee.  

    Rumors have been circulating for a while, but they were always
    strongly denied by those in the vanpool program.
    
    It is unfortunate that the wording in Andrea's memo leaves the
    reader feeling that the company is doing this because we no
    longer get the tax subsidy for it.  She goes on to state that
    the original goals of the program are no longer being met.  This
    may be true (at the moment), but what analysis has been done
    on the goals this program is currently meeting for employees?
    
    Some people who ride the vans do so for more than just the
    convenience.  Some are physically unable to drive and some
    cannot afford the cost of a vehicle reliable enough to
    withstand long commutes.
    
    Hopefully, a well thought-out plan will emerge from Andrea's
    task force which will keep the needs of the employees and the
    communities in mind and not the profitability of the program.
    
    The program should certainly be promoted.....and, perhaps, even
    restructured.........but PHASED OUT !!!!  No way.  Even in these
    times of cost constraints, priorities should be set in saving
    dollars for the corp.  It does not appear to me that the priorities
    are being set properly.  For example:  does Digital subsidize
    SOFTBALL, HOCKEY, GOLF, LACROSS, etc.?  Corp. Philosophy states:  
    "DO THE RIGHT THING".  Somehow this does not feel like the right 
    thing given the impact on employees lives, traffic, parking, air
    pollution, etc.
    
    If you will notice, the vanpool program is still being advertised
    in the DTW.  According to Sharon Corliss, this advertising will
    continue even though the decision to cancel the program is a
    definite.  This is the directive that was given to the Commuter
    Transportation Department by the powers who are making the
    decisions.  This feels like deceit to me and awakens the
    realization that DEC is changing.  We are a large Corp. in stiff
    competition, so PROFIT becomes the password rather than the HUMAN
    factor.

    re: .14
    
    Andrea asked for 5 people for her committee.  My van driver is one
    of them.  I think most of the van drivers have asked to be on the
    committee.  I am afraid that this committee is one of those to make
    the process look democratic...
    
    DEC has not stopped caring for people and their concerns.  Recently
    they have formed a child care referral service; some sites have
    terrific wellness centers; some have aerobics facilities and classes
    available.  A recent survey determined that 25% of DEC employees
    choose to smoke.  So when a dictum was handed down saying all offices
    areas will be smoke free, they also dictated that smoke free office
    areas will have special smoking rooms, specially vented to the outside,
    and those sites now offer at least 6 ways to quit smoking.
    
    DEC is not convinced that this is an important and necessary program.
    We needed to convince those in charge that it is.
    
    Talk to a van driver.  If we work with the system, we have to talk
    through the five people Andrea chooses for her committee.  I think
    the letter bombardment idea is a good one, too.
    
    Elaine
    

    This note from the COMMUTING notesfile has been moved to DIGITAL
    with permission of its author.
    
                        *************************************
    
    
    
              <<< PMRV70::SYS$SYSDEVICE:[NOTES$LIBRARY]COMMUTING.NOTE;1 >>>
                           -< Commuting Information >-
================================================================================
Note 279.26                   VANpools Cancelled!                       26 of 27
JUNIOR::JOUBERT                                      52 lines   3-JUN-1988 13:24
                          -< Now is the time to Act >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    I wasn't going to get directly involved in this due to past historical
    issues with the VanPool Administration involving myself but here
    I am.
    
    Re: David Ofsevit comments on Caravan.  A number of years ago when
    we (myself and other drivers) were having major problems with the
    then (and still) VanPool Administrator I had a rep from Caravan
    come out here on the q.t. and present their facts to us.  It was
    then a reasonable alternative to the Digital program (factoring
    in the subsidy).  However our respective pools were not interested
    in seeing their rates increased to make the switch.
    
    	Some of the benefits to going to Caravan would be the ability
    	pick up other companies employees.  From what I have learned
    	from one of their drivers the communication is MUCH better than
    	what we have here at Digital.  You don't have to be quiet in
    	your ridership drives (after all the name is plastered on the
    	side of the van).  
    
    
    To those who are new or relatively so to this program you are likely
    surprised at how this is happening.  For those who have been in
    the program a LONG time it is nothing new.  Ever since the current
    administrator came on board the program has been allowed to falter,
    stumble and bump along.  There have been a few talented people come
    and then leave the group because of inept management in part.  Since
    she has been there, there has been NO, repeat NO effective promotion
    of the program.  And I for one do not consider the DTW as effective
    promotion of a product.  She is the one who stopped the semi-annual
    and then annual drivers meetings.  In the time I had the misfortune
    of dealing with her, she on the one hand acted as a dictator in
    some cases with various drivers and on the other hand she blew in
    the wind as a fluttering piece of fluff.
    
    There are many alumini out here in the company who should be attempted
    to be contacted, many of whom have moved on into management.  Most
    if not all would, I am sure, lend their strong support to seeing
    this very valuable program continued and ENHANCED.  Their support
    would be a strong boost for all.
    
    
    I have spoken with at least three of you regarding this matter.
    To you I have indicated a strong willingness to work with and assist
    you in putting together a strategy to insure that this attempt to
    waste the Digital VanPool Program is quickly and permenantly deflated.
    If you are interested please feel free to contact me.
    
    
    Jim Joubert
    Former Driver
    of DCV1/95
    

  I am interested in "moving to the country" and then would be interested in
  starting/joining a van pool.  I can not get information about the pool.
  All I can get is applications to start one.  I am interested in:

  	Is there a minimum mileage requirement?  Mine would be about 25 miles.
  	Do the people get picked up at their door or at a meeting place?
  	Minimum passengers required.
  	Who owns/buys/maintains the van?
  	What age is the van retired?
  	How is the cost/person figured?
  	Any other questions that I may not have asked that you think should be
  		answered.

dls

I think this whole business with Digital cancelling the vans
to commuters is totally unrational.  I can't believe they are
doing this.  First they take the smoking away from us, now
they are taking the vans away from us, WHAT's NEXT?

What about those people who have taken jobs at different sites
based on the fact that they could join a vanpool and commute
to that new site?

What about those people who do not have a second car to
commute to and from work and took a job at DEC because they
knew they could commute on the van?

What about all the traffic that is already overburdening these
towns/cities that Digital has moved into?

What about the obvious parking problems that the Maynard Mill
already faces?

If all of those people who ride on vans start driving their
own cars, which is basically what Digital is telling us to do
by cancelling the vanpools, we're not helping the traffic or
parking situations AT ALL.  Anyone who works in the Maynard
area already knows how awful it is.

From:	HAVOC::MCCONNELL    "CHICK"  6-JUN-1988 14:44
To:	HAVOC::WILLIAMS,MCCONNELL   
Subj:	CJ, MY THOUGHTS, AND FEEL FREE TO SHARE WITH NOTES FILE. CHICK.

CJ, THE PEOPLE ON MY VAN #133 WERE DISCUSSING THE VAN PROBLEM, AND CAME UP
WITH A SUGGESTION.  IT IS THAT ALL THE VAN DRIVERS, AND PASSENGERS, COME
UP WITH A PETITION, STATING WHY THE VANS SHOULD NOT BE DISCONTINUED, AND
EITHER PRESENT IT IN PERSON, OR MAIL IT TO ALL MEMBERS OF PMC, COPYING
KEN OLSON, DICK FARRAHAR, AND JOHN MURPHY.  

THE PETITION SHOULD CONTAIN ALL THE SUGGESTIONS PUT FORTH IN THE NOTES FILE SO
FAR, PLUS STATE THE INDIVIDUAL HARDSHIPS INVOLVED FOR THOSE PRESENTLY RIDING
THE VANS TO WORK. 

THE PETITION SHOULD BE FOR THE PURPOSE OF KEEPING THE VANS GOING - NOT FOR 
THE PURPOSE OF FINDING ALTERNATIVE WAYS FOR PEOPLE TO COME IN TO WORK (BUY
A NEW CAR OR JOIN AN UNDEPENDABLE CAR POOL - IF YOU CAN FIND ONE).

HERE ARE MY THOUGHTS ON THE MATTER.

AFTER READING THE MEMO FROM ANDREA DERMARDEROSIAN (AND AFTER THE ANGER
SUBSIDED) I HAVE THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS.

"AFTER SEVERAL MONTHS OF IN-DEPTH ANALYSIS AND REVIEW" - WHO'S SUGGESTION WAS
IT THAT THIS BE ANALYZED?  WHO WAS CONSULTED IN THE ANALYSIS?  WHAT WERE THE
SPECIFIC RESULTS OF THIS ANALYSIS?  DID ANYONE CONSULT ANY OF THE VAN DRIVERS
OR THE PASSENGERS?  

"I WANT .... TO ASK FOR YOUR PARTICIPATION IN RESOLVING THE ISSUES RAISED
BY THE PHASE OUT."  -  ISN'T THIS PUTTING THE CART BEFORE THE HORSE?  THE TIME
FOR ASKING FOR OUR INPUT WAS BEFORE THE DECISION WAS MADE TO DISCONTINUE THE
VAN SERVICE.  

"DIGITAL HAS CONTINUED FINANCIAL SUBSIDY OF THE PROGRAM, EVEN THOUGH THE
FEDERAL TAX SUBSIDY GIVEN FOR SUCH PROGRAMS WAS REPEALED IN 1986."  - HEREIN
LIES THE RUB!!!!!! AND, AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED, THE IMPETUS BEHIND THE FINAL
DECISION TO DISCONTINUE THE VAN SERVICE.  I HOPE I'M WRONG, BECAUSE EVERYTHING
THAT I'VE LEARNED ABOUT THE DEC CULTURE IN THE NINE YEARS I'VE WORKED FOR DEC
TELLS ME THAT KEN CARES ABOUT HIS EMPLOYEES - AND THE HARDSHIPS INCURRED UPON
THEM, IN THE INTEREST OF SAVING WHAT TO DEC AMOUNTS TO A DROP IN THE BUCKET,
ARE NOT BEING CONSIDERED BY THE PEOPLE BEHIND THE DECISION TO DISCONTINUE THE
VAN SERVICE. 

"IN RECENT YEARS, THE NUMBER OF RIDERS HAS DECREASED DRAMATICALLY FROM
85 VANS IN 1981 TO 25 AT PRESENT . . .THE PROGRAM NO LONGER SERVES THE ORIGINAL
PROGRAM GOALS."  -  WHAT WERE THE ORIGINAL PROGRAM GOALS?  TO SAVE ON FUEL?
TO KEEP COMMUTING COSTS DOWN FOR RIDERS?  TO KEEP MORE VEHICLES OFF THE ROADS?
TO CUT DOWN ON THE AMOUNT OF PARKING SPACES REQUIRED AT DEC?  TO PROVIDE
DEPENDABLE TRANSPORTATION TO THOSE EMPLOYEES WHO FIND IT ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE TO
GET TO WORK WITHOUT INVESTING IN A $10,000 TO $14,000 CAR, BECAUSE BUS 
TRANSPORTATION IS ALMOST NIL?   I STILL SEE THOSE GOALS AS NEEDING TO BE MET - 
IF NOT BY THE ORIGINAL 85 VANS - AT LEAST BY THE 25 PRESENT VANS AND THE
AVERAGE 15 RIDERS PER VAN - TOTALING ABOUT 400 PASSENGERS!  AND SPEAKING OF 
THOSE REMAINING VANS, DOESN'T IT STAND TO REASON THAT THOSE REMAINING 
PASSENGERS ARE, BY PROCESS OF ELIMINATION, THOSE MOST IN NEED OF TRANSPORTATION?

"DIGITAL RECOGNIZES THAT THE IMPACT OF THIS DECISION ON YOU WILL RANGE FROM
INCONVENIENCE TO A SERIOUS TRANSPORTATION DIFFICULTY" -  THEN WHY, PRAY TELL,
WAS THIS DECISION MADE IN THE FIRST PLACE????  IF IT WAS DUE TO THE 
DISCONTINUANCE OF THE TAX BREAK - THEN SHAME ON DEC!!

"A COMMITTEE IS BEING FORMED OF VANPOOL PARTICIPANTS . . TO IDENTIFY AND DEVELOP
A REASONABLE PHASE-0UT STRATEGY."    -    AGAIN, WHY WAS THE DECISION TO
DISCONTINUE MADE BEFORE INPUT WAS OBTAINED FROM THE VAN MEMBERS THEMSELVES?

"THE COMMITTEE WILL RESEARCH AND PRESENT ALTERNATIVE METHODS OF COMMUTING" - 
HAS ANYONE WHO WAS INVOLVED IN THE "DECISION" TRIED TO JOIN A CARPOOL?  TRIED
TO ARRANGE TO TAKE A TRAIN/PLANE/BUS/SCOOTER TO WORK?  BOUGHT A SECOND-HAND CAR
FOR TRANSPORTATION, ONLY TO END UP WITH A PILE OF REPAIR BILLS?  BOUGHT A NEW
CAR, ONLY TO END UP WITH A BIGGER PILE OF CAR PAYMENTS?  A LOT OF DECCIES MADE
DECISIONS TO ACCEPT JOBS IN OTHER SITES BASED ON THE FACT THAT THEY COULD GET
THERE IN A DEC VAN CURRENTLY OPERATING.  WHAT DO THEY DO NOW?  PUNT?

NO, THE ONLY OTHER "ALTERNATIVE METHOD OF COMMUTING" THAT WOULD BE BENEFICIAL
FOR ALL WOULD BE A DEC VAN, OR A DEC MINI-VAN.  

IF THE INFORMATION IS ACCURATE THAT THE PMC MADE THIS DECISION, THEN ALL CURRENT
MEMBERS OF THE VANPOOLS NEED TO ADDRESS THE PMC IN THE FORM OF A PETITION, 
ASKING THEM TO CONSIDER KEEPING THE VAN POOL OPERATING - IF FOR NO OTHER 
REASON THAN THAT THOSE DIGITAL EMPLOYEES WHO USE IT, REALLY NEED IT!!!  AND
DIGITAL CAN CERTAINLY ABSORB THE COST A LOT EASIER THAN THE INDIVIDUAL RIDERS
CAN.  IF THE PMC TAKETH AWAY, THE PMC CAN GIVETH BACK.  

THERE'S A PRINCIPLE INVOLVED HERE.  EITHER DIGITAL IS GOING TO BE COMPANY
THAT CARES FOR ITS EMPLOYEES (AND I BELIEVE MR. OLSON FEELS THAT WAY) OR DIGITAL
IS GOING TO GO THE WAY OF OTHER COMPANIES WHO HAVE LOST TOUCH WITH THE NEEDS
OF THEIR EMPLOYEES, AND HAND DOWN EDICTS FROM SOME "CLOUD IN THE SKY CONFERENCE
ROOM" WITHOUT REGARD TO THE SUFFERING INVOLVED BY THOSE EMPLOYEES ON THE
RECEIVING END OF THEIR DECISIONS.  LET'S HOPE THAT DAY HASN'T COME TO DEC.

CJ, IF THERE IS ANYTHING I CAN DO TO HELP KEEP THE VANPOOL GOING, I AM AT 
YOUR SERVICE.  SINCE ONE OF MY VANBUDDIES, TOM MARTIN, WILL BE A MEMBER OF THAT
COMMITTEE TO LOOK INTO ALTERNATIVE METHODS OF COMMUTING, I WILL BE GIVING HIM
MY INPUT TO TAKE TO THE MEETINGS, BUT WE NEED TO KEEP IN MIND THAT SINCE A 
DECISON WAS ALREADY MADE TO DISCONTINUE THE VANPOOL, WE NEED TO WORK ON
HELPING THE PMC TO UNDERSTAND WHAT A HARDSHIP THAT DECISION PLACES ON THE
RIDERS,  AND TO RECONSIDER IT. 

LET ME KNOW WHAT YOU WANT TO DO REGARDING THE PETITION.  MY THOUGHTS WERE TO
EITHER ELECTRONICALLY CONTACT THE VAN DRIVERS AND HAVE THEM HAVE A PETITION
SIGNED ON EACH OF THEIR VANS AND TURN THEM IN OR MAKE UP A PETITION, SEEKING
INPUT FROM THE NOTES FILE CONTRIBUTORS, AND HAVE THE VANS ALL MEET FOR TEN
MINUTES IN LOWER THOMPSON TO SIGN IT. 

ANYWAY, LET ME KNOW WHAT YOU THINK.  CHICK.  (I DON'T THUMB, AND I NEED A RIDE!)

       
       
       	If you DO take the suggestions from the notesfiles then PLEASE
       get permission from the authors of the replies if you plan
       on just copying the replies into your petition.  If you plan
       on re-wording the suggestions and/or take out the reference to
       the notesfile then that should be ok..  It's not a requirement that
       you ask the authors permission but if you're sending something to
       that level of management, it's good policy to ask..
       
       Thanks,
       
       							mike

          <<< HUMAN::DISK$HUMAN_WRKD:[NOTES$LIBRARY]DIGITAL.NOTE;1 >>>
                          -< The DEC way of working >-
================================================================================
Note XXX.0                    VANpools Cancelled!                        1 reply
CSSE::BEY                                            28 lines   6-JUN-1988 15:33
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    "Unhappy & Upset at the Phasing Out of the Vanpool Program"
    
    I understand this will take place at year-end (calendar or fiscal,
    I'm not sure).  Also this involves some 500 people-none of whom
    were approached even though the CC Mgr. of Commuter Transporation
    says and "in-depth analysis and review" was made.
    
    I for one would like to know why Digital is taking away this benefit
    from us...when I was hired I was told this was one of the benefits.
     Lets face it, Digital builds their facilities in outlying areas
    where there is no public transportation so one must depend on a
    vanpool, or their own means of transportation.  Some of us may be
    a one car family, or perhaps not have a vehicle that would be
    dependable enough to put in 250 miles+ each and every week, let
    alone the stress of driving on Rte 117 with the bottleneck of traffic.
    
    Also, why weren't the passengers/drivers approached to see if they
    would be interested in subsidizing the 25% that DEC now pays?  Alot
    of un-answered questions and a great deal of stress just thinking
    about whats coming down the pike!
    
    Would be curious to hear if vanpools are being phased out in other
    Dec facilities throughout the country.
    
    
    Lily Bey                                     CSSE::BEY
    
    
================================================================================
Note XXX.1                    VANpools Cancelled!                         1 of 1
CSOA1::ROTH "East Central Area Networks"              0 lines   6-JUN-1988 17:26
                      -< Doesn't this belong to 522.x ?? >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Flame on (well mildly)
    
    Why is it that Digital should continue to subsidize a small number
    of employees who participate in the Digital Van Pool program while
    others who can't take advantage of the program still have to own
    cars, or find other ways to work?
    
    If this poses a real problem to those who participate, then find
    a way to solve the problem.  For instance, about 8 years ago, my
    father found that the bus service that he used to go to work was
    going out of business.  Instead of complaining to the state that
    the bus service was a necessity to all who used it (no kidding!)
    he did something about it.  He went out, bought a used 15 passenger
    van  and started his own Van pool.  He charged enough to cover his
    costs and enough to put a little aside for when things broke or
    he needed a new van.  Every two or so years, he has bought another
    used van (New ones are so expensive, so is leasing) when the mileage
    on the van got over about 60K miles.
    
    Now, with the savings that he has, if anything goes wrong with the
    van, he can get it fixed, or if he needs a new van, he can get one.
    
    
    
    Why can't someone who is being so inconvenienced by the cancellation
    take a little initiative and do it themselves.  It really isn't
    all that hard.
    
    
    -bill

re: cost of gas

Those that think that the cost of gas is the ONLY parameter that effects the
cost of commuting, think again.  What about wear and tear on the vehicle?

I commuted from Boxboro to Merrimack for around 5 years and although at one 
point I was paying $80 a month, I still felt it was around 1/2 the cost of
running my car and wearing it out.

-mark

Re .22:

>    Why is it that Digital should continue to subsidize a small number
>    of employees who participate in the Digital Van Pool program while
>    others who can't take advantage of the program still have to own
>    cars, or find other ways to work?

	Why?  Because Digital benefits from the existence of the pool.  It
reduces the amount of parking required at each plant, increases the number of
good employees available (means higher productivity) and is good public
relations with the local traffic authority (means lower property taxes by some
very small amount).  (There are probably other benefits as well.) 

	A valid question is how much are these benefits worth to DEC.  It may 
be that it is not worth the $72,000/year in direct costs.  More likely, the 
problem is the administrative costs, not the direct costs.

[Calculation of cost - Cost to riders = 75% of cost/rider/month = $48 (from
other notes in this discussion); cost/rider/month = 64$; Cost to
DEC/rider/month = 16$; 15/riders per van (from other notes in this
discussion); DEC Cost/Van/Month = $240; 25 Vans (from other notes in this
discussion); Total DEC Cost/Month = $6,000/month = $72,000/year] 

	Note: I do not use the van pool.  I am not even sure that one is 
available here in Georgia.

    Why should DEC run a vanpool for a tiny minority of employees?
    If you think they should why shouldn't they pay me some of the costs
    of running my car to go too or from work? DEC is not a care provider,
    it is a business that aims to make profits.
    
    If it makes good business sense for DEC to run a vanpool then fine
    they should run it. Part of good business sense is keeping its
    employees happy. If you want to keep your vanpool at DEC's expense
    you have to convince DEC the corporation that it makes business
    sense to them. It's no good crying that they should do it solely
    for a few employees benefit.
    
    If you really want them to consider keeping your vanpool you need
    to show them cost benefit analysis, nothing less.
    
    Dave

re .25:

>    If you think they should why shouldn't they pay me some of the costs
>    of running my car to go too or from work? 

From next week, your car parking space at work will be rented to you at
$30 a week.

Dave ;^)

Re .25:

>    Why should DEC run a vanpool for a tiny minority of employees?

	Because it needs to be centrally coordinated?  (There is a difference 
between running and paying for the pool.)  One of the complaints about the 
current pool administration is that it has acted to reduce the number of
employees using it, rather than making it as widely available and useful as 
possible.

>    If you think they should why shouldn't they pay me some of the costs
>    of running my car to go too or from work? DEC is not a care provider,
>    it is a business that aims to make profits.

	Please note the difference between running and paying for the van 
pool.  DEC does underwrite some of the cost of employees owning cars.  All 
that land those cars are parked on during the day is not free!  And DEC is a 
'care provider' in a limited sense.  They can not ignore the welfare of the 
people while they are working; there is a large body of law on that subject 
and the DEC philosophy of 'do what's right' also applies.
    
.
.
.
    
>    If you really want them to consider keeping your vanpool you need
>    to show them cost benefit analysis, nothing less.

	And where are the people in the van pool to get the data for the 
analysis?  Financial data like this is fairly tightly held (for fairly good 
reasons) and is not freely available, so the people with the data have to be 
trusted to do the analysis.  One of the implicit complaints in an earlier
entry was that the analysis used to justify discontinuing the van pools was
not available for review. 

    Parking space here at MR3, and I think at MR2 as well, is at a premium.
    Get here at 9, and you may have to hoof it in from Southboro.  At
    10, it's not unusual to see maybe 15 cars parked illegally.
    
    Last time I was at the Mill, it appeared to be even worse:  even
    across the street from St. Bridget's, open spaces seemed nigh on
    impossible to find.
    
    I don't know about the Mill, but I've heard that when they built
    MR3, they put in 4 parking spaces for every 5 people expected to
    be in the building;  the story was that this was due to a state
    law or regulation which was meant to coerce people into using
    carpools or vanpools.  Don't know how much truth there is to it,
    though.
    
    Dick

        Re: .28 -- I beg to differ with your analysis, Dick.  What's
        at a premium is *convenient* parking.  I used to work in MRO2,
        and later in MRO3.  There was always enough parking, but not
        always parking in the lots immediately adjacent to the closest
        door.  As for MRO2, there's LOTS of parking up "behind" the
        building (by the tennis courts), but it's a long walk from
        the lots to the building, and it's incredibly inconvenient
        to get to that lot from the lot in front of the building (the
        one between MRO2 and MRO3).  The MRO3 lot farthest down the
        hill was rarely full while I was working in MRO3.
        
        Tom

    RE: .28
    
    I also disagree with your analysis of parking at MRO3 (and the Mill
    on most days)  The parking that is in great shortage is the parking
    that is close to the doors.  I worked in MRO3 for 2 years and NEVER
    saw the lower lot filled to capacity.  Of course, the upper lots
    had illegal parkers everywhere.  
    
    Same for the Mill.  On most days, you CAN find parking places out
    towards the end of the Lower Thompson lot, or at St. Bridgetts.
    The lazy people park their cars on ends of rows, but what's amazing
    is that they start doing it before the 5th or 6th row even fills
    up.  (I get here before 7:00 and usually fine at least a few illegally
    parked cars at that time)
    
    
    RE: ?  (DEC now charges for parking)
    
    
    That makes good business sense?  Maybe for hte short term, the profits
    (from parking) would go up, but how many of the quality people who
    work here would up and quit and find new jobs?  Digital has chosen
    to provide parking for its employees because providing parking makes
    good business sense.  If they didn't provide it, people wouldn't
    work here.  Now, assuming that the number of vans is now 25, and
    the number of peole signed up to ride those vans are 20 (which isn't
    uncommon for a 15 passenger van), that only means about 500 employees
    in the Greater Maynard Area.  There's a hell of a lot more employees
    around here, so if they discontinued supporting the vanpool program,
    the number of employees who would leave would be a small percentage.
    
    Again, as I stated before.  If the vanpool is so important to you,
    start your own.  You may even find it's CHEAPER to do so because
    you don't have to use new vans.    But then, it's much easier to
    stand up and complain that "Digital isn't taking care of me..."
    than it is to take some action and do someting about it.
    
    
    -bill

       I think the issues are getting watered down here with emotions.
    I don't think we want to settle this argument in a square circle
    (boxing ring). I think one of the assets of Digital as a corporation
    is the fact that its plant structure is diversified. This boils
    down to the fact that no matter where you go inside 495 and in 
    sothern N.H, you trip over a DEC sight. Now, if once you got an
    office, you could be guarenteed that your location would not change,
    then you would find a house near the plant in which you were employed,
    and the world would be rosey.
        Unfortunately, we know that is not the case. People and offices
    are constantly being moved from plant to plant as the company continues
    to grow and prosper and find offices for all its employees (thank
    goodness we are having this problem). Now my office will be moving
    from the Mill to Westford some time this summer. Being  current
    van rider, I looked forward to jumping from one van to another and
    riding a van to my new office in Westford. I therefore didn't think
    much about the fact that my office was moving because I could find
    (or start a van and the move would have little or no impact on my
    life. 
        If the vans are going bye-bye, then my initial assumption are
    all hogwash. I would also have a difficult time believing that I
    am the only one in this situation.
    
        Of an other concern, given my previous assertion that we are
    a greatly diversified company, what will we do if the price of gas
    goes way up again, or even worse, we are faced with another oil
    embargo? I lived (and suffered) through the last one. It was NO
    picnic.
        I truly believe that the ending of the van program is a short
    sighted decision that should be re-evaluated. Even more
    importantly, when you look at the impact that companies like ours
    are having on the small towns in which we build plants
    (Acton, Westford, Maynard, Hudson....) and the effects we have on
    traffic, parking et al would at leat appear to warrant a greater
    use of vans by as many employees as possible. (If 12 fit in a van
    thats a 12:1 reduction in the number of parking places required
    along with a reduceds amount of gas consumed.).
    
       Before working at the Mill I worked at LKG, right after it opened.
    The architects planned for 3 parking spaces for every 4 offices.
    It was a fiasco (people don't drive to meetings??). LKG finally
    had people parking at a local Nursery and using shuttle vans to
    get to the building (this help productivity??)
    
    
       ---------end of breain dump-------------- 
    
    
    
    jeffrey z.wolf

    .29, .30:
    
    Well, maybe I was a bit obscure.  The farthest lot at MR3 often
    has room, but the walk is a bit long, particularly if you work on
    the other side of the building.  And it seems, at least, that you
    can see the Southboro town line from the parking lot.
    
    Last time I had to go to the Mill, I spent about 20 minutes looking
    for a space, but I suppose that since I eventually found one without
    going to Parker Street, or joining the numerous people who parked
    illegally, there isn't REALLY a problem.
    
    Dick

    re: .30
    
    If you ask any business person, they would say that losing 500
    trained and experienced employees because of a change in benefits
    they receive would be a significant loss to the company.
    
    Also, your argument that only a minority uses the service is a weak
    one.  There are many services that employees use as benefits that
    are not used by all.  For example, the company doesn't have to provide
    any kind of child care referral.  I don't have kids, so I don't
    care if they do.  But the people who do care (elsewhere in this
    notes file) get very upset when no service is provided.
    
    There are other cases, too.  Please consider that other people have
    needs, some are served by the van pool program.  Leave sour grapes
    out of this.
    
    Elaine

    re .33: 500
    
    Yes, 500 would be a significant number to lose but would all 500
    riders quit if the van pool is really terminated?
    
    What is the average number of riders per day?
    How many would actually be SEVERLY impacted because they can't afford
     another vehicle or are handicapped?
    
    If the van pool were terminated and there was a fuel embargo it
    seems to me that it should not take all that long to restart it
    again.

  Re state laws on corporate parking: There is a note in this file written
a year or two ago that says there was a federal or state 'ruling' in effect
when MRO3 was built which limited the amount of parking. It was part of a pro-
gram to reduce air pollution and included all towns on and inside I-495. It
was assumed that enough people would ride vanpools and carpools to prevent a
parking shortage. I don't think this ruling was in effect when LKG was built,
so I don't know why there was a parking shortage for a year ot two.
  If all the DEC commuter traffic were eliminated, dozens of towns would see an
amazing reduction in traffic. DEC plants are beneficial to town governments 
because they pay taxes, and they are beneficial to local people who get jobs,
but there are thousands of people who have to live with the traffic and get
hardly any benefit. 

    
    	I would love to be in a van pool, but from my point of view
    	it would be impractical.  My experience has convinced me that
    	working in this type of environment -- with varying start and
    	stop times, unscheduled overtime, "comp" time to make up for
    	unscheduled overtime, travel, off-site meetings, etc. -- does
    	not lend itself to the inflexibility of a van pool.  Even car
    	pools are the exception around here.  We do not work rigid shifts
    	like we would in a blue collar environment.  If we did then
    	van pools would be possible and valuable.  Kudos to those of
    	you who have made your van pools work.
    
    	Joe Oppelt

Re .34:
    
>    Yes, 500 would be a significant number to lose but would all 500
>    riders quit if the van pool is really terminated?

	It's a good bet that they would not, but it is also a good bet that 
they would be less happy and productive as a result of shutting down the vans.
    
>    If the van pool were terminated and there was a fuel embargo it
>    seems to me that it should not take all that long to restart it
>    again.

	How long did it take to start up the first time?  Just getting the 
administrative people in place and locating new vans would take some time.  
The first few weeks of any such crisis would be the worst, and having a core 
to start from would provided a much quicker startup than starting from 
scratch.

	However, a potential fuel crisis has little to do with the basic 
problem.  It seems that the person in charge of the van pool has gotten tired 
of all the hassle and decided to shut it down.  To do this, she apparently has
cobbled together a bunch of figures showing how much it costs and left out 
all the more nebulous benefits to the company.  The drivers and riders have 
been presented with an accomplished fact with no say in the matter.  This is 
galling in a company that prides itself on its human relations.

	The suggestion that people start a van pool on their own is 
reasonable until it is compared with what they are loosing.  Some of their 
losses are higher costs, loss of privacy (you would not be able to discuss 
your favorite project with your buddy because of the IBMer in the next seat), 
and a longer walk to where the van is parked.  The drivers loose their 
parking spaces and gain a lot of hassle with taxes, insurance, business 
licenses and maintaining a spare vehicle and who knows what else.

    RE: .37
    
    Oh, so you couldn't talk about your favorite project along the way,
    does that mean that DEC should now open restaurants in Maynard,
    Marlboro, and the like so that employees who can't keep their mouths
    shut can talk about sensitive things? 
    
    And oh, it would be so, so tough for the driver to lose their parking
    spaces.  They'd have to behave like all of the rest of the people
    who drive to work.  They'd have to walk across the parking lot
    occasionally.   
    
    Also, what insurcnace hassles.  You sign up, you pay the premium
    and don't do much more unless you crash.  What licenses?  and why
    a spare vehicle?  My father doesn't maintain a spare vehicle for
    his van service.  When the van is broken, the people on the van
    have to find another way to work.  It happened once last year. 
    Big deal.
    
    
    -bill

        Bill, lighten up.  You and I may not benefit from the van pools,
        but at least some of our fellow employees do.  I'm sure you and I
        benefit from other things that others don't get.
        
        I think the comparison to the child care referral program is a
        good one.  I don't know about you, Bill, but I don't have kids,
        and I don't plan to have kids, so I don't benefit from a child
        care referral service.  But it doesn't bother me that Digital is
        offering such a service to those employees who can benefit from
        it.  Why are you so upset that Digital has been offering support
        for van pooling to those employees who can benefit from it?
        
        Consider, as well, the SAVE plan.  Right now, I'm not allowed to
        contribute to the plan because Federal regulations have changed.
        That doesn't mean I'm going to get upset with Digital or with the
        people who administer the plan, because the problems and their
        resolution have been WELL COMMUNICATED. 
        
        The important point is that the shut-down seems to have happened
        in a way that has not been well-communicated to the people it
        impacts, and that there's a lot of suspicion that the things that
        are being stated openly as the reasons aren't the real underlying
        reasons.  People seem to feel that their trust has been violated.
        
        Tom

    Vanpools are but one method to make the workplace accessible to
    those who don't drive themselves.
    
    Car and van pools don't accomodate flexible hours, which limits
    their effectiveness.  But NOT EVERYONE DRIVES A CAR!  For various
    reasons (health, car on the fritz, no parking at home, etc.), some
    people need some method to get to work other than the All American
    One Driver Car!
    
    Now it strikes me that DEC locations are for the most part NOT
    accessible to public transit.  But there are railheads at various
    Greater Maynard sites, so if vans were run that met trains and
    connected to different sites, they would at least provide a modicum
    of non-car access.
    
    But for now, we just don't employ a lot of non-drivers.  The find
    it infinitely easier to work in the Boston - Cambridge area.

        Ah, and how do people get to the train at the other end?  Not
        that I think you've got a bad idea -- it's really a good idea,
        but it's a problem that's lots bigger than DEC.
        
        Tom

>        Ah, and how do people get to the train at the other end?  Not

  They live within walking distance of a train station, or live where they can
take a bus from home to the station, or drive a short distance to the station
in a car that is unfit for long commuting. Of course, only a small minority of
DEC employees live in such a place, and not many would be willing to move at
their own expense to a place where they can take public transit to work.
  The idea of running vans from commuter train stations to DEC plants is a good
one, but it isn't a substitute for the existing vanpool program.

================================================================================
Note 522.38                  Van pools to disappear?                    38 of 42
PRAVDA::JACKSON "Every day is Halloween"             21 lines  13-JUN-1988 12:17
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
^^^^^^  Interesting node name - did you chose it?
    
>    Oh, so you couldn't talk about your favorite project along the way,
>    does that mean that DEC should now open restaurants in Maynard,
>    Marlboro, and the like so that employees who can't keep their mouths
>    shut can talk about sensitive things? 

	You know what?  DEC DOES have restaurants in Maynard and Marlboro and 
one of the reasons (but not the only one to be sure) is so employees can talk
about their projects at lunch!
    
>    And oh, it would be so, so tough for the driver to lose their parking
>    spaces.  They'd have to behave like all of the rest of the people
>    who drive to work.  They'd have to walk across the parking lot
>    occasionally.

	It is tough since they are doing a service to the company and the 
other employees.  They probably get up earlier in the morning than most 
people.  If they did not have the van to drive, they would have the choice of 
the better parking spots.  As it is, they get in late and without reserved 
spaces for vans, would be left with the dreck when it comes to parking 
spaces.  (I'll bet you don't like reserved handicapped parking either.)
    
>    Also, what insurcnace [sic] hassles.  You sign up, you pay the premium
>    and don't do much more unless you crash.  What licenses?  and why
>    a spare vehicle?  My father doesn't maintain a spare vehicle for
>    his van service.  When the van is broken, the people on the van
>    have to find another way to work.  It happened once last year. 
>    Big deal.

	Your old man is running a small business (essentially a taxi service) 
and most states require a business to be licensed and pay special taxes. 
Not living in Taxachusits, I am not familiar with the local details, but it
may be that he is setting himself up for trouble.  Also, for a small time
operation, a spare van would not be worth while, but it costs the users of
the service in inconvenience. 

    	Another major benefit *to Digital* of van pools is that they
    reduce the cost to the company of moving people to new plants. 
    It can easily cost Digital over $20K to relocate a single person
    (moving expenses, selling a house, and other expenses; see P&P 5.05);
    in comparison, Digital's cost for a year for a van pool is about
    $3K.  How much did Digital save when it originally moved several
    hundred people to ZK, and several van pools sprang up?  If a half
    dozen people didn't relocate on account of those van pools, Digital
    saved $120K or more.  Invest that $120K at 10%/year, and you get
    $12K/year income--more than enough to subsidize 3 van pools!
    
    		David

    I find it difficult to believe that DEC would lose 500 people if
    the VanPool program was eliminated.  For a program to be viable
    and cost effective for DEC to sponsor and support, it must/should
    have wide-appeal to a large segment of the employee population.
    I do not have sufficient facts (ie:  membership, usage, cost, etc.,)
    to make a decision regarding the viability of continuing the program,
    however, there are professionals who have that responsibility, the
    facts and overall understanding to make that decision for the benefit
    of Digital.  Let's let them...
    
    Jay
    

    RE: .39
    
    Tom, I agree with you.  I don't care that Digital runs a Van pool
    program, that's well and fine, but if Digital decides that it doesn't
    want to run the program anymore, why does everyone sit around and
    bitch-and-moan about it instead of doing something?  (likewise,
    if they didn't have the child care referral system, that'd be fine
    with me, and if I had kids, I'd find another way to get by)
    
    My major complaint about this whole note is the "You're taking
    a RIGHT away from me" instead of "you're deciding to discontinue
    an added benefit".  DEC has made a decision to cancel the van pool,
    why can't anyone live with it?
    
    
    (and yes, I *DID* chose the name of my workstation)
    
    -bill

   >     My major complaint about this whole note is the "You're taking
   > a RIGHT away from me" instead of "you're deciding to discontinue
   > an added benefit".  DEC has made a decision to cancel the van pool,
   > why can't anyone live with it?
    
    Question:  can you live with it when DEC makes the decision to
               cancel "an added benefit" that you find most valuable...
               one that really impacts your life or that of your family,
               ie. SAVE, Medical, Dental, Life ins.??
    
    I personally find it difficult to make a judgement until I have
    walked in the shoes of those being affected.
    
    And, please remember.......It is not only WHAT was done....but
    the WAY it was done.                 

    It appears that some people (VanPool advocates) have misunderstood
    the intent of DEC's support of the VanPool Program.  It is neither
    a right or a benefit; it is simply a program to provide an alternative
    method of transportation to it's employees.  When this program or
    any other program experiences a reduction of usage and/or it no
    longer is cost-effective (from the company's perspective), than
    it should be cancelled.  No-one is taking away a benefit, because
    the program is voluntary.  Besides, I don't remember seeing VanPool
    as a "benefit" in the publication "your Benefits Booklet", so it
    does not fall into the same category as other benefits.
    
    Jay
    

        Clearly, the VanPool program is a benefit in the eyes of at least
        some participants.  It's not clear that the program has
        experienced a reduction in usage because of a lack of interest, or
        because of a lack of promotion.  It's not clear whether it's
        cost-effective or not, since no one seems to have been keeping
        track of the benefits to Digital.
        
        It's obvious that the planned cancellation of the program has been
        poorly received by at least some of the people who it will
        directly impact.  It's not terribly productive for people who
        aren't impacted by the cancellation to criticize those who are. 
        
        Perhaps we can focus further contributions to this topic on
        either sharing additional FACTS about the program, or on some
        positive suggestions about how to survive the cancellation.
        
        Tom (with co-moderator hat on)

         When I accepted my current position at MKO in New Hampshire I
         was also under consideration for several DEC jobs that were
         much closer to home.  I believe that my choice has turned out
         to be the best one, for both myself and Digital, but I based
         my decision on the availability of the Digital Commuter Van.

         The cancellation of the vanpool program would not cause me to
         leave the Company, but it would stimulate my interest in any
         job openings closer to home.

         While employee satisfaction may be insufficient justification
         for a vanpool program; "Doing the Right Thing" as a corporate
         citizen is.  

         In today's Boston Globe there is a front-page article about
         how the "high price of progress and prosperity" is choking
         our highways with commuter traffic.

         While companies such as GTE, Polaroid and Hewlett-Packard are
         cited as working to find solutions to their employees'
         commuting problem, Digital "Has It Now".  We should be
         touting our program as a solution that works, not canceling
         it because we lost a tax credit.

I assume the Globe article simply omitted DEC from the list of companies making
a serious effort to reduce commuter traffic. Only the most alert readers out-
side DEC would notice that DEC is not on the list, so it looks like our image
is still OK. 
  The probable reason why vanpools are not mentioned in benefits booklets is
that they are only available in some regions and it would be too expensive to
customize the benefits booklets for a large number of small regions. The SAVE
plan and stock plan are also voluntary; does that mean they aren't benefits?

    RE: .50  "Globe story on commuter gridlock"
    
    Anyone who would like a copy of the article, please send me a MAIL
    message [please do not request via REPLY here] with your name and
    mailstop.  I will be happy to forward a hard copy for you.  Also, if
    you do not get it yourself, you may find it at your local facility
    Library.  The story is dated June 15th and it starts on page 1. 
    
    

    Re: .48:  "When this program or any other program experiences a
              reduction of usage..."   and
        .49:  "It's not clear that the program has experienced a 
              reduction in usage because of a lack of interest, or
              because of a lack of promotion...."
    
    
    Just for the record, about four months ago I had some transportation
    difficulties and tried EVERYWHERE to find an alternative.  I put
    a note into the Commuter Notes file, called the carpool people and
    called to find out about a vanpool, etc..  Not only were there no carpools
    available (Shrewsbury to Stow), but I was told there was absolutely
    no room on any van.  
    
    I'm wondering whether problems which are perceived as promotional
    or usage are merely because people are running into a brick wall
    when they inquire about vanpools (and carpools, for that matter).
    Personally, I'd like to see more vans out there and more people
    using them; I believe it's the "right thing" for DEC, the
    employees, the neighboring towns (traffic), and the ecology.
       
    As for constructive thoughts, I like the idea of a petition going
    to the PMC.  I don't think it should be restricted to van users,
    though, 'cause I sure would like to put my signature on it!  I bet
    there are a lot of other people out there who would like to get
    into vans and were turned away.  Perhaps a similar petition could
    be available on DEC sites?  Or circulated in some way?  Or re-created
    here as a "petition note" where we could all reply with our positive
    or negative vote???
    
    

>    Or re-created
>    here as a "petition note" where we could all reply with our positive
>    or negative vote???

    Please not this option. "Me too" notes have a very low information
    content and are an inconvenience to many readers. In this case,
    it is especially true for batch reader in countries and states
    far away from the NNE area who would not be served by the existing
    van pools in any case. 
    
    				Alfred

    re:  .53
    
    Send your message to the PMC.  Many others have done so, and
    if the messages continue with different perspectives, perhaps
    they will finally reconsider their decision.
    
    Also, a petition brings with it a certain negative feeling, and
    that might be all that is needed to totally turn off the PMC.

    I'm told that last evening's ABC national network news, broadcast
    on Channel 5 in the Boston area, had a special segment on the impact
    of high technology employers on commuting traffic.  They specifically
    cited the Rte. 128 area as an example and predicted that the problem
    would increase tenfold in the next decade.
    
    A continuation of this topic is scheduled for tonight's 7:00 broadcast.
    I wonder if anybody's told them about Digital Equipment Corporation's
    leadership in finding solutions to this problem.
    

    I wonder if Digital is going to continue to help solve the problem
    or compound it by duing away with the van pool progam !
    
    

re: .57.,

>    I wonder if Digital is going to continue to help solve the problem
>    or compound it by duing away with the van pool progam !
 
	Doing away with the van pool program only compounds the problem,
    however I'm not sure if it should be up to Digital to provide a
    van pool when it is unclear whether other such high tech companies
    could give a rat's ass about the problem either.

	The responsibility of commuter mass-transit has traditionally
    rested in the lap of local government.  The way I see it, the mass
    transit problems of GBA (Greater Boston Area) are not being adequately
    addressed by our local town and city governments as they should be.

	If any petitions are going to be circulated, I think they should
    be addressed to local government as opposed to placing the burden
    of mass transit on DEC.  If there were some sort of tax incentives
    provided by government to companies such as DEC for sharing the
    burden of mass transit in the form of van pools, etc., then I would
    imagine that you would see a return of the van pool program.

				    -davo

    Arguing about the role government (local/state) should take
    is more an issue for SOAPBOX then this conference.
    
    		Alfred - moderator

    Re: .58 & .59:
    
    Davo's point about the impact of government action on what Digital
    does with the van pool seems to me to have appropriate bearing on
    the topic here. Presumably it was government action in the first
    place that influenced Digital's decision to suspend van pooling.
    
    I think the point about local government taking up where Federal
    gov't left off is worth brief mention - but not lengthy discussion,
    ay?

    Tonight (7/6/88) on channel 5 at 7:30 pm, CHRONICLE will do a
    half hour program on the commuter traffic problems within the
    state of Mass.

    To those interested in saving the Commuter Van Program:
        	
    		(form a former rider/driver/coordinator)
    
    1) Question the actual figures on DEC's contribution to the program.
    	(They used to give us a quarterly cost breakdown for each pool.
         At the bottom was "Less 25% Digital contribution". When questioned
     	 closely about it, the heading suddenly changed to "Less 25%
   	 volume discount". My lasting impression was that Digital's
    	 contribution amounted to the salaries of three administration
    	 personnel, and that at least one of them was being grossly
    	 overpaid by any standards.)

    2) Explore the possibility of buying the vans outright rather than
    	leasing them, which could drastically cut costs and attract
    	new riders.

    3) Question whether the vanpool could be better promoted.
    	How many people out there know what it takes to start a pool
    	(10 people, one must drive, one must be backup driver, both
    	need clean registry records)...who can start and/or participate
    	(any DEC employee - no contracts)...what services are availble
   	to start/maintain a pool (notes conference, telephone
    	referrals, list of employees selected by residential zip codes
    	and work addresses for ridership drives)
    
    Sorry to see it go, but the best thing might be to let it fold,
    have another gas squeeze, and start fresh with new administration.
    

In Newsweek's August 29, 1988 issue, there was a section devoted to Bad Air.
It consisted of two articles:  A Long Summer of Smog -- Air that is dirty
enough to see makes breathing hazardous to your health, and Ozone Breakaway --
Will Los Angeles ever overcome its history as the air-pollution capital of the
nation?

According to the article, Ozone Breakaway, California will be imposing 126 new
regulations over the next 5 years aimed at reducing industrial emissions and 
curbing excessive use of private automobiles.  The average number of riders per
automobile in California is 1.1.

One of these regulations that may be pertinent to the van pool program at 
DIGITAL appears below:

	"Starting next January, any local company with more than 500
	workers will have to provide incentives for them to join car
	pools or ride bikes or buses to work.  By 1990, the same
	requirement will apply to firms with at least 100 employees.
	Companies that don't comply will be fined from $1,000 to
	$25,000 a day."

This regulation has not gone by unnoticed.  On a recent Chronical
program on air pollution, the Massachusetts Secretary of State, Michael Connolly
cited this regulation as a way for states to reduce their air pollution.

I feel that DIGITAL's decision to cancel the Vanpool Program is contrary to its 
philosophy of "Doing the Right Thing".  I also find it strange that the van
ridership was unaware of DIGITAL's in-depth study of the current Vanpool 
Program that was conducted over a period of several months.  Why didn't 
DIGITAL contact any van riders during this time?  
Clearly, this decision was not in keeping with DIGITAL's own philosophy of 
employee relations:  

	o  Clear and timely communication

	o  Consistent personnel policies and procedures

	o  Employee involvement

It is still not clear to me who made the decision to cancel the Vanpool Program 
nor the reasons for cancelling it.  If you look at the reasons why DIGITAL
created the Vanpool Program in the first place, the cost of gas did not play a
major role, as the cancellation memo seems to imply.  DIGITAL listed in 
order the following reasons for creating its Vanpool Program:

	o  Traffic congestion

	o  Parking space (lack of)

     	o  Air pollution

	o  Energy conservation

	o  EPA guidelines

As far as I can see, these same reasons still apply today.  By the way, I 
don't see the cost of gas listed as an issue.

Also, DIGITAL cited the loss of a Federal tax subsidy in its memo
cancelling the Vanpool program.  This tax subsidy appears to play a major 
factor.  However, the state of Massachusetts provides employers a 30% tax 
credit towards the cost of purchasing or leasing a commuter van for their 
employees to use in their daily commute.  Why didn't DIGITAL mention the 
Massachusetts tax credit?  Isn't DIGITAL taking advantage of it?

The cancellation of the Vanpool program does affect me. I accepted my present 
job at Spit Brook because a vanpool was available. If I had known that 
DIGITAL was contemplating cancelling the Vanpool Program, I would have accepted
another offer I had from DIGITAL at Marlboro.  My daily round-trip commute to 
Spit Brook is 82 miles. Most of it is along 128 and Route 3, and it takes 
aproximately 2 to 2 1/2 hours to complete.  This commute is too long, and 
taxing on me -- not to mention the wear and tear on my car, to undertake on a 
daily basis for any length of time.  

I would like DIGITAL to reconsider its original decision to cancel the Vanpool
Program and to re-evaluate its decision-making process.  I would like to see 
DIGITAL form a committee whose charter is to do this.   

Your opinion is interesting, and I am glad you have strong feelings
about this.

However, no one reading DIGITAL is going to do anything about what you've
typed. Extract .-1 and send it to someone who can DO something about
the van pool. Start with your manager. Then personnel. Ask your manager
who else should see it.

I noticed your personal name is "new noter."  I hope you're enjoying
this conference - it's one of my favorites. Thanks for contributing.

K.

    RE: .65  "Well written, but..."
    
>    no one reading DIGITAL is going to do anything about what you've typed. 

    Not true.  I've already forwarded it to all of the riders on my van. 

    I think that this topic has been dormant for a long time because we
    were told that the vanpool "phaseout" committee is working on it.  I
    think some people are not content to sit back and see a company
    resource killed off by some bean counter that never got past the
    numbers. 
    

        RE: .66 -- I think the point that .65 is making is that no one
        should have the expectation that complaining about a problem in a
        VAX Notes conference will get the problem fixed.  It might -- but
        that's more accidental than anything.  Unless the problem is
        raised to the right people (who probably do not follow any
        particular VAX Notes conference), it probably will not be
        addressed. 
        
        Specifically, are any of the riders on .66's van in a position
        to fix the problem?  Wide awareness of the problem, especially
        by those impacted by it, does not necessarily get it fixed.
        
        However, the point about the topic "lying dormant" is a valid
        one, and some things VAX Notes can do effectively are raise the
        general level of awareness of a problem, provide a forum for
        crystallizing the problem statement, and bring together people
        who are willing to work to address and perhaps solve the problem.
        
        Tom

I am writing to express my concern over the proposed cancellation of the
Digital vanpool program. I have been a van rider for several years and
believe strongly that the program has many benefits, not just for those 
of us who participate but also for the company as a whole.

First of all, I believe that commuting by some form of public transportation 
is the socially responsible thing to do, because it conserves energy, 
reduces the effects of automobile pollution, and eases traffic congestion 
and parking problems. These benefits are felt not only by vanpool passengers 
but by the entire population. By sponsoring a vanpool program and encouraging 
employees to take advantage of it, Digital demonstrates that it has a 
commitment to the environment and quality of life in the communities in 
which DEC facilities are located. This commitment undoubtedly results in 
these communities' increased good will toward the company and further enhances 
Digital's reputation as a socially conscious corporation.

Second, the availability of the van was a major factor in my decision to 
accept a job at Spit Brook, and I know this is true of most of the other 
riders in my vanpool. Because Digital's engineering facilities are frequently 
located in suburban areas where no other public transportation is available, 
I am certain that Digital would lose many talented prospective employees 
if the vanpool program were not available.

On a more personal level, a vanpool can be a very pleasant and relaxing way
to commute. I have gotten to know people who work in a variety of jobs in my 
facility, whom I would not otherwise have met, and we often share information 
about the company and its products as we travel to and from work. In many 
instances, I have been able to use these people as resources to get my own 
job done. The camaraderie of the vanpool helps to promote the corporate 
culture and family feeling that are two of Digital's greatest strengths.
In addition, I do not enjoy driving, and on those occasional days when
I have to take my car to work, I arrive feeling stressed and tired.
But when I take the van, I arrive feeling relaxed and ready to get to work.

If the vanpool program were discontinued, I would have to buy another car
and drive 74 miles a day myself. My commuting costs would obviously go up, 
and the wear and tear on my psyche would be considerable. I don't know how 
long I would be able to tolerate commuting alone, and I might eventually have 
to consider looking for a job at a DEC facility closer to my home, even 
though I am happy with my present working situation.

I am distressed by the way the program phase-out has been handled. Riders 
were not told that the company was considering discontinuing the program, 
and so we had no opportunity to express our concerns while the subject was 
under discussion. Instead, we were simply informed that a decision had 
already been made. We were never told who made this decision or how they 
arrived at it, and our concerns are still not being addressed by those 
in responsible positions. The only reason for the decision seems to be a 
financial one, namely, that Digital no longer receives a federal tax break 
for subsidizing the program. I believe it is short-sighted of Digital to 
abandon the vanpool program strictly on financial grounds when there are 
numerous long-term benefits to employees, to the company, and to society 
that cannot be measured so directly. 

I strongly encourage Digital to listen to the concerns of its employees and
reconsider the decision to abolish the vanpool program. Digital should 
continue to offer affordable vanpool transportation as a means of attracting 
and keeping employees who live far away from the facilities where they work. 
The best alternative is to maintain the vanpool program in its present form 
and to promote the program more enthusiastically throughout the company to 
increase ridership. Failing that, the company should at least continue its 
present level of support by subsidizing a privately-run program such as 
Caravan. 

        EXCELLENT letter!  I especially like the point about the value
        of pooling with fellow employees, which is a benefit that would
        be lost in using Caravan or a similar, non-Digital van pool.
        
        Please let us know what, if any, response you get.
        
        Tom

I too favor DEC continuing to support the van pools. Others
have already presented the facts and arguments more eloquently
than I could. I don't take a van, and probably couldn't given
my personal schedule requirements; however, I also feel that
van pools are a good thing for DEC to offer to its employees --
the program has benefits for the rider-participants, for all 
DEC employees (alleviates traffic jams and parking congestion),
and for society at large.

I am writing this letter in response to Digital's recent decision to phase
out the vanpool program. My initial reaction upon hearing about the decision
was one of stunning disbelief. I really didn't believe that Digital would
eliminate a program that provided a necessary service to so many of its
employees.

Furthermore, I perceived (and still do) this type of action to be totally
contrary to the corporate philosophy that has made Digital one of the most
desirable companies for which to work. However, as time went on and it became
increasingly clear that Digital had no intentions of reconsidering its
decision, the disbelief I initially experienced turned to deep disappointment. 

I, for one, will be greatly affected by the decision. In fact, a major
determinant in my decision to accept a position in Nashua was my knowledge
of a company-sponsored vanpool operating out of the Newton area (I live
in Brookline, Mass). Therefore, by having access to a vanpool, I would be
able to reduce my daily commute by 60 miles.

Another reason why I believe Digital should reconsider its decision is the
already massive congestion that occurs on Routes 128 and 3. The last thing
commuters currently travelling these roads need is more commuter traffic.
Also, in terms of public perception, I'm pretty certain that Digital does
not want to be seen as a major contributor to an already nagging problem.

Yet another, albeit slightly more selfish, reason why I don't want to see
the vanpool program phased out is because I now have the option of choosing
between driving or riding the van to work. For those who are unaware, this
flexibility becomes extremely important when there is only one automobile in
a two-driver household.  

In closing, I would like to ask once again that Digital rethink its position
on phasing out the vanpool program. There are many employees who truly enjoy
working for Digital in Nashua, but choose to remain Massachusetts residents.
Unfortunately, eliminating such a needed resource as the vanpool program would
compel many of these employees to seek (reluctantly, I'm sure) employment
opportunities elsewhere.   
  
Sincerely,
Ron Johnson

        RE: .71 -- Ron, I trust you've mailed that to someone who can do
        something about the situation, rather than just posting it in this
        conference and hoping that it will be read by someone who cares
        and can address the problem? 
        
        Tom

    	When the van is parked is it by the drivers badge number?
    
    Keith

>< Note 522.73 by BAHTAT::PATTERSON >
>
>
>    	When the van is parked is it by the drivers badge number?
>    
>    Keith


	HUH?

        Yeah, that was exactly my reaction.  On the one hand, the question
        is very clearly stated, but on the other hand, it is meaningless.
        
        At many DEC facilities that are served by commuter vans, there is
        reserved "DCV" parking.  As far as I know, it is "first come,
        first served" -- that is, whichever van driver gets done with his
        or her drop-offs gets the space closest to the building, then the
        next one the next space, and so on.  I don't believe there are
        reserved spaces for particular vans.  Perhaps one of the van
        drivers can expand on this. 
        
        Tom

Keith has a bee in his bonnet about parking assignments by badge number.  He has
brought this up repeatedly over the past two or three years, as a search of this
conference for notes written by him will show.

Ignore or humour him, as you choose.

/john

+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+
|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
| d | i | g | i | t | a | l |               INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+


TO:   Distribution                          DATE:  16-Nov-1988
                                            FROM:  Gerald Sacks
                                            DEPT:  Technical Languages
                                            EXT:   381-2085
                                            MAIL:  ZKO2-3/N30
                                            ENET:  NOTIME::SACKS


RE:   Cancellation of Vanpool Program

    As a vanpool rider, I am concerned about the announced cancellation of
    the vanpool program.  The decision was handled in a way that seems
    contrary to Digital's policies of openness and employee involvement.

    The May 25 memo announcing the cancellation stated, "After several
    months of in-depth analysis and review, Digital has decided to phase
    out the commuter van program."  Yet on May 2, the Commuter
    Transportation Department had assured one of the van drivers that
    rumors of cancellation were unfounded.  We still don't know who made
    the decision to cancel.  What happened to clear and timely communication?

    Riders were asked to volunteer for a phase-out committee only after the
    decision was made.  Their charter is restricted to options that cost
    Digital nothing.  Is this employee involvement?

    We were told that "in recent years the number of riders has decreased
    dramatically."  But so has the publicity within the company.  Have
    prospective employees been told of the availability of vanpools?  Even
    current employees who ask about vanpools in the COMMUTING notesfile
    don't get answers.

    Another reason given for the cancellation was the repeal of the Federal
    tax subsidy.  Yet there is a 30% Massachusetts tax credit available for
    *company-sponsored* vanpools.  If we use the only option that has been
    presented to us, rider-sponsored Caravan vanpools, this credit will not
    be available to us.  Without a subsidy, the cost to the riders will go
    up about 50%.  As the cost goes up, riders will drop out, and the cost
    will become even more prohibitive.

    Has the cost of the vanpools has been weighed against relocation
    expense?  How many relocations per year will negate the savings
    realized by cancelling the vanpools?

    The vanpools can be a major factor in many people's decisions to accept
    jobs with Digital.  I have an 80-mile commute on routes 128 and 3.
    Unfortunately, there are no jobs in my field at Digital facilities
    nearer my home. I can't relocate for personal reasons.  Driving 80
    miles a day on routes 128 and 3 would induce great stress.  Without the
    vanpool program, I would be forced to take a hard look at whether I can
    continue working at Digital.

    I urge Digital to "do the right thing" and reverse the decision to
    cancel the vanpool program.


    Distribution:
	Paul Cole
	Andrea DerMarderosian
	Leslie Klein
	Dick Farrahar
	Kurt Friedrich
	Doug Hammond
	Kathy Hoffhein
	Bill Keating
	Pat Loan
	Stuart Lublin
	Rod Mattson
	Dick Richard
	John Sims
	Dick Wilson

I am writing to express my concern about Digital's recent decision to
discontinue the van pool program.

The van pool program is one of the most important benefits of working for
Digital. The company's effort to provide transportation to those of
us who travel from the Boston area and to subsidize the cost of that
transportation tells me a lot. It tells me that the company values
me, recognizes the stress and the cost involved in a lengthy commute, and is
committed to do its part to lighten the burden of the commute.
The result: a great deal of energy that would be spent hassling with
traffic is freed up for more productive use, namely, work.

I understand that Digital might not want to incur the costs involved in
administering the van pool program. I believe that the company could,
however, make a gracious statement of support by continuing to subsidize van
pool transportation -- if for example,
riders decided to work with the Caravan company. 

Sincerely,

Melinda Thomas

       Sending your letters to Van Pool Admin. or some such is uselful.
       Adding it here, if it doesn't contain new/additional information,
       is just, pardon the expression, noise.

                      Alfred

    RE: .79
    
    Alfred, I think your reply is noise.  The notes that people write here,
    echoing what they've sent up the line, are being shared with many
    people who ride vans, but don't do notes.  As a van driver, I forward
    copies of all relevant notes on this subject to my passengers.  It may
    inspire them to follow suit with their own letters to management.
    If you're not interested in this discussion you can just hit NEXT
    UNSEEN, but don't tell us to stop making "noise".
    
    

To:  Distribution                                  From:  Henry Morris
                                                   Date:  November 28, 1988
                                                   DTN:   381-2427
                                                   Email: SSGBPM::MORRIS

Subject: Plan to Phase Out Vanpool Service

I am writing to protest the decision announced several months ago 
to cancel the vanpool program.  I have been a regular rider of the 
Newton to Spit Brook van for the past six years and have grown to 
depend on the van.  The following are the key reasons I rely on the 
van:

        o  Reduces stress and wear and tear on me, so that I
           can be more productive when I arrive at work.  I can also 
           take advantage of the 45 minutes each way on the van to
           catch up on reading and other work for my job.

        o  Makes a contribution to reducing the traffic congestion
           on Route 128.  Without vanpool programs, the situation
           will deteriorate that much faster.

        o  Saves wear and tear on my car.  I have had my car for
           five and a half years, and it has 69,000 miles.  If I
           had been driving to New Hampshire every day, I might
           have gone through two cars by now.  This would have meant
           a considerable additional expense.

        o  Provides valuable contacts within Digital.  The van brings
           together interesting people from diverse groups in the
           company, fostering more inter-group communication.


Because my wife works in Boston and my children are in school in 
Brookline, realistically, I cannot move to New Hampshire. And by 
remaining in Massachusetts, I have saved DEC the relocation expenses 
that I would otherwise have incurred.
	
I would hope that the decision would be reconsidered.  I don't believe 
that the true benefits of the program to Digital had been considered 
when the original decision was made.  For example, I strongly believe
that it will be more difficult for Digital to attract qualified
technical people in the future without the vanpool program.  Over the
last six years, I have been asked by Engineering management on a
number of occasions to talk to candidates who desired to remain in the
Boston area, letting them know that the vanpool makes it possible to
both work at Spit Brook and live near Boston. 

Rather than cancelling the program, Digital should be encouraging more
employees to participate. 

Sincerely,

Henry Morris
CASE Marketing

TO: DISTRIBUTION				FROM: Paul Houlihan
						DEPT: VMS Engineering
						EXT:  381-1490
						MAIL: STAR::HOULIHAN
RE: Termination of Vanpool Program

A recent decision was made to terminate the DIGITAL Vanpool program. In my six
years at DIGITAL I cannot recall a greater abuse of DIGITAL's policy of
openness, concern for employees or employee involvement.

Andrea  DerMarderosian, Vanpool Administrator, in the cancellation memo stated:
"After several months of in-depth analysis and review, DIGITAL has decided to
phase out the commuter van program". This decision was made without any input
from drivers or vanpool riders. Attempts to get the decision revisited, to make
clear who performed this analysis and to obtain the details of this analysis
have been met with stonewalling and disregard for concerns expressed.

Ms. DerMarderosian further stated that the vanpool "program no longer serves
the original program goals." The memo mentioned no specific unserved goals.
This program still saves fuel, keeps down costs for long distance commuters,
reduces traffic, exhaust pollution and the number of parking spaces that must
be provided. These are only some of the original goals still served by the
program.

Continuing efforts to initiate a discussion of which original goals are not
being served have failed. We were met only with talk of phasing out the vanpool
program. In the "Phase out" committee meeting, Dick Richard of Corporate
Personnel stated that the company doesn't want to get involved in promoting
vanpool ridership and insisted that DIGITAL doesn't want to pay a cent toward
the vanpool. Corporate Personnel has been so little concerned about this issue
that Mr. Richard didn't even attend the second "phase out" committee meeting.
Petitions and letters of protest sent to various levels within Corporate
Personnel have had little affect.

Dick Richard further claimed that the "whole corporate culture is not good for
vanpools, due to meeting schedules, flex hours, etc". Quite to the contrary,
the corporate culture encourages a vanpool. Precisely because of flex hours,
group meetings, normally scheduled between 10 am - 5 pm, fit perfectly with van
schedules. The corporate culture I have experienced at DIGITAL over the past
years, dictates a real concern for employee needs (programs to quit smoking,
day-care referrals, yoga and weight-watcher classes).  I think it rather more
likely that the termination of the vanpool will not be good for the corporate
culture.

The funding DIGITAL provides is crucial to the survival of the vanpool. Polling
of vanpool members shows that most vans have members unwilling to absorb a 50%
increase in cost. Several vans report up to 1/2 their members would quit. As
membership drops, the financial burden increases on the remaining members. If
DIGITAL withdraws it's funding, I feel most of the current vans will fold. Yet
Andrea DerMarderosian states in a recent memo: "do not focus on cost, I am
aware the increase cost is a negative to some." I would like to assure Ms.
DerMarderosian that increased cost is a concern not to some but ALL the members
of my vanpool, as the survival of the vanpool is at stake.


I now want to describe what the loss of this benefit means to me. The Vanpool
Program is among the most important benefits that DIGITAL provides me. For
personal reasons, I am required to live within the greater Boston area. I live
in Brookline Massachusetts and work at the Spitbrook facility in Nashua New
Hampshire which results in an 80 mile a day commute. Driving this distance
every day would result in enormous stress as well as a significant increase in
car expenses. Spared the grueling commute, I arrive refreshed and ready to
work, a happier and more productive employee. I accepted the job in Nashua only
after determining that there was a usable commuter van servicing the site. I
turned down the generous moving benefits since the van existed and now feel
betrayed as this benefit is being cut. 

My commute involves Route 3 and 128. In just three years of commuting to
Nashua, traffic on these roads has increased visibly. The trend over the long
term on these routes is toward strangulation as no additional roads or mass
transit is planned. On a more global scale, OPEC has recently agreed to limit
oil production. As the current period of cheap gas prices comes to an end,
shared transportation will once again become a priority. The fact that we as a
nation lack an energy policy should not lull DIGITAL into short sightedness.
Vanpools are a workable means to avoid congestion and save energy.

I urge that the decision to terminate the vanpool be reconsidered and reversed.


    Distribution:
	Teresa Beausoleil
	Tom Cafarella
	Paul Cole
	Andrea DerMarderosian
	Dick Farrahar
	Kurt Friedrich
	Doug Hammond
	Bill Keating
	Pat Loan
	Stuart Lublin
	Rod Mattson
	Mike Pennington
	Chuck Poe
	Dick Richard
	John Sims
	Rick Spitz
	Nigel Turner

	Just wondering. Has anyone sent their memos to KO? Any response?
	As long as your boss knows you're sending Ken a copy I wouldn't
	expect there to be too serious a problem with that.

			Alfred

        Alfred, that was exactly the thought that crossed my mind. I don't
        know whether it's true, but I have heard rumors that the
        resurrection of "Car Plan A" happened AFTER K.O. heard first-hand
        from the field people who were being impacted just how much
        suffering was being caused. 
        
        While perhaps fewer people are impacted by cancellation of the van
        pool program than would have been affected by the demise of "Plan
        A", the nature of the effect is much the same.
        
        Tom

    RE: .82
    
>    I accepted the job in Nashua only after determining that there was a
>    usable commuter van servicing the site. 

    I also accepted a job at MKO only after determining that there was
    a vanpool that I could ride from Boxborough, Mass.  Relocation was
    not a consideration, but if the vans go away, I'll be looking to
    relocate my job closer to home.
    
>    On a more global scale, OPEC has recently agreed to limit oil
>    production. As the current period of cheap gas prices comes to an end,
>    shared transportation will once again become a priority. 

    A more than likely prospect when you listen to the people in Washington
    who want to reduce the deficit by increasing the tax on gasoline by 10
    or 15 cents/gallon.  The demand for solutions will be reminiscient of
    the Arab oil embargo that brought about the inception of the DEC
    vanpool program, only it will be a lot harder to reinstate a
    "phased-out" program than it would be to expand an existing one. 
    
    What will we say, "Digital had it then"? 
    

    
Cancelling the Digital van pool program is "doing the wrong thing."
Digital's policy is to "do the right thing." 

The Digital commuter van pool program is a wonderful employee benefit,
but it is also a great benefit to Digital and to the towns and states
in which we live and work. The program should not be shut down.	 If
anything, it should be expanded.

This statement has been prepared by the riders of DEC Commuter Van #111, 
which has travelled daily from the Newton-Needham area in Massachusetts 
to the Spit Brook facility since the site was opened in 1980.  This 
statement is being presented to the management of Spit Brook and also 
posted in various Notes files.  In addition, we are sending the statement 
to other van riders and to the corporate personnel powers who are trying 
to shut the van pool program down. 

Before we make our case, we'd like to address the issue of the
"unpopularity" of vanpooling.  First, there are many employee benefits
that are not widely used.  Adoption is one example; long-term
disability is another.  Few employees exercise the benefit, but many
take comfort in the fact that they are available.

The van pool program has not been effectively promoted since the early days
and today employees who wish to participate are told that a "phase-out
committee" is already at work and that at best van rates will go up and van
reliability will go down.  Under these circumstances, it is hardly
surprising that van ridership is small.  What is surprising is that several
well-run vans are gaining new riders, even under adverse conditions. 

We believe the van pool program is beneficial in three ways:

    o To Digital as a company

    o To individual employees of Digital

    o To the communities where Digital employees live and work.

We'll discuss the benefits in each of these areas in the following
sections.

I.  The van pool program is a great benefit to Digital.

A.  The program makes it easy to attract a wide range of people.
Digital doesn't want to narrow its search for good people by
restricting the search to those who are willing to move to rural
environments. 

B.  The program is good for public relations and has attracted a good
press for Digital.  The program shows that Digital, one of the largest
employers in Massachusetts, is a good corporate citizen. 

C.  The van pools promote the Digital culture.  Employees don't cross
the street to gather at "the Pub" any more, but every day, hundreds of
Digital employees get together on their vans.  And, unlike woods
meetings and lunchroom gatherings, these employees are from many
different parts of the company, individual contributors and top
managers, software and hardware people, people who work on products
and people who work on administration. 

D.  The program helps attract the best recruits.  Many prospects,
whether college hires or those at other companies, come from urban
environments. If they know they have the option of still living in the
city (and being able to commute easily), they are much more likely to
consider Digital. 

F.  The program is an important money saver for Digital.

The program enables Digital to locate on inexpensive land.  Many
companies locate new facilities in places where the most people live.
These facilities, due to their prime locations, are expensive.  Digital
has chosen to build in relatively remote locations where costs are
much lower.

Groups within DEC seeking new sites will find it easier to win the
support of the affected employees if the van pool benefit can be
offered. 

DEC can save on relocation costs if employees feel less pressure to
move closer to work. 

Finally, the van pool program contributes to profitability, by reducing
the demand for parking at company facilities, which is already a big
problem at many sites.

F. The van pool program promotes a regular workday, which is desirable
in many environments. The van pool provides a reliable transportation
option which guarantees early arrival. The regular workday also
assists employees in achieving a balance between work and home life.

Despite statements that without the vans riders would work longer hours, it
is a common experience for van riders to be the first to arrive in the
morning and among the last to leave in the afternoon.  Longer workdays, for
most people, are for meeting deadlines, but not for every day.  When riders
need to work longer, they make alternate arrangements.  People who always
want to work long days don't take the van. 

And many people work from home. Surely Digital's investment in home
terminals, modems, telephone lines, and the like is much greater than the
cost of the van program. 

II.  The van pool program is a great benefit to individual employees.

A.  The van pool program is an absolute necessity for some employees. 

Some people cannot drive.  Many more people cannot afford to buy or
keep a car.  Finally, some people just don't want to drive in rush
hour in a state with the highest accident rate in the country. 

B.  Van pools help us value differences.

Van pools are clearly a specially valuable option for the handicapped,
who can't drive. 

Van pools make it easier for those who value an urban lifestyle to
work at Digital.  This adds to the quality of life and work for all
who work at Digital.

C.  The van pool program is an advantage even to those who are not
regular members. 

Commuter vans are used as a backup or part-time option for non-member
employees, such as those who need to travel to another site for a
short-term assignment.  When the shuttle program was curtailed, the
van pools were available to partly replace the shuttles.

D.  Not every Digital employee wants to live near a Digital site.

Some employees have accepted assignments that involve a long commute
because they knew they could tolerate it because the van pool was
available. 

Other employees have moved further away from work in order to get
cheaper housing.

Few co-op students live anywhere near a Digital facility.  The
availability of the van pool makes it easier for them to work at
Digital.  Most students can't purchase a car or move just for a
short-term assignment. 

E.  Finally, van riders have less stress.  They are spared a grueling
commute. 

Instead of fighting traffic, van riders are sitting in a relaxed
atmosphere, reading, talking, listening to music, or just watching the
scenery go by.  We're in well-maintained vehicles we know won't break down.
This is a particular comfort in the winter.  

III.  The van pool program is a benefit to the communities in which we live
and work.  This is why commuting programs are required by law in
California.  Digital and Massachusetts are way ahead.  Why make a
retrograde move now? 

A.  The van pool program cuts traffic congestion on major highways. This is
getting worse every year.   128 is approaching a crisis situation.  Each
van takes up to 14 cars off the road.  And no new roads or mass transit are
being planned for the 128/495 "neighborhood". 

B.  The program cuts traffic congestion in the towns with Digital
plants or large numbers of Digital employees.  Therefore, it helps
solve a community problem to which Digital contributes.

C.  The van pool program has environmental benefits by taking many cars off
the road and replacing them with a single well-maintained vehicle. The
value of this speaks for itself.   With all the environmental concerns we
now have (greenhouse effect, ozone layer depletion, poor air quality,
etc.), this is clearly "the right thing to do". 

Furthermore, while gas consumption is not an immediately pressing
problem, it could rise up again, as rapidly as it did in the 70s.

    

    Yes, I sent the following in June, 1988.  The only response
    that I received was from Rob Ayres....and that telling me
    only that a group was being formed to study the problem.
    
    I never had a response from KO or any other member of the PMC.
    ********************************************************************
    
    
              <<< PMRV70::SYS$SYSDEVICE:[NOTES$LIBRARY]COMMUTING.NOTE;1 >>>
                           -< Commuting Information >-
================================================================================
Note 279.37                   VANpools Cancelled!                       37 of 48
HAVOC::WILLIAMS                                     236 lines  13-JUN-1988 16:07
                         -< FYI - Sent in on 6/13/88 >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To:  John Sims
     John Murphy
     PMC:
         Dick Walsh
         Dick Farrahar
         Carol Burke
         Rob Ayres
     Erline Belton

cc:  Kenneth Olsen
     Maurice Vanderpot
     Mary McGuire

PROPOSAL FOR THE REVERSAL OF THE DECISION TO CANCEL THE VANPOOL PROGRAM


The decision to cancel the vanpool program made by Digital impacts 
employees who have made career changes and/or life changes based on 
the availability of commuter vans.


SIMPLICITY AND CLARITY:

"...Our decisions must always consider the impact on the people
who will be affected by them."  Pers. P&P, section 6.23, p. 3.

1.  This decision was made with absolutely no input from those people
    who will be affected by it.

2.  The memo making the announcement of this decision states:  "Digital
    recognizes that the impact of this decision on you will range from
    inconvenience to a serious transportation difficulty for some of
    you, and that it will be a financial change for all of you."  Did
    Digital recognize that some employees will actually have to leave
    their jobs because of this decision?  Did Digital realize the
    TRUE impact on employees and their families?

3.  Discontinuing the vanpool program creates a severe hardship for 
    those who are either physically or financially unable to commute 
    to the work place.

4.  Whole groups within Digital have relocated to different sites
    that may be distant from employees homes.  Employees have only
    the choice of going to the new site or finding a new job.  While
    relocation benefits may be available to some of these employees,
    the actual relocation of the employee's family may not be a viable 
    option for various personal reasons.



ENVIRONMENT:

"As good citizens, we believe we have a responsibilty to keep our
environment free of pollution and to set an example."  Pers. P&P,
section 6.23, p. 2.

1.  Discontinuing the vanpool program will add to pollution by
    increasing the number of cars on the road.  Digital should
    be in the Corporate forefront encouraging even more commuter
    transportation for employees.  A serious marketing campaign
    should be maintained to encourage use of vanpools.  This would
    allow Digital to be a major contributor to the clean-up of
    air and noise pollution in the communities where facilities
    are located.

         ex:  EPA's recent findings regarding the serious air
              pollution problem in the Nashua, NH area caused
              by overcrowding of the highways and stalled
              traffic.  Digital contributes to this as there
              are several facilities in that area.

2.  Traffic to and from Digital facilities has greatly added to the
    congestion of the highways and secondary roads.
        
         -    "Just one vanpool eliminates 500 feet of traffic.
              A full bus clears a quarter mile of highway.  If
              solo commuters just doubled up in carpools, traffic
              would be cut in half overnight.  The result would
              be a boost in mobility for everybody."  Boston
              Transportation Commissioner, Richard Dimino.

         -    A recent analysis of traffic growth along Route
              128 performed by the State's Department of Public
              Works predicts the number of vehicles traveling the
              beltway during peak rush hours will increase from
              20,000 to 50,000 by the year 1995.

3.  Parking at many Digital facilities is inadequate at present.


FIRST RULE:

"When dealing with a customer, a supplier, or an employee, do what
is 'RIGHT' to do in each situation."  Pers. P&P, section 6.23, p. 4.

1.  Employees made career decisions for advancement at distant
    sites with the understanding that Digital provided commuter 
    vanpools.  

2.  Employees moved their families to less congested and more
    affordable areas based on the fact that vanpools were available
    to commute to work.  

3.  The wording in the memo from the Administrator of the Commuter
    Transportation Department leaves the reader feeling that the 
    company is cancelling this program because the "Federal Tax
    subsidy given for such programs was repealed in 1986".  Is profit
    at the expense of employees' lives the new value at Digital?  If
    so, why do subsidies of various sports continue?




Recommendations:

NEW GOALS FOR THE COMMUTER VANPOOL PROGRAM:

1.  Aid Digital in meeting affirmative action goals in areas that
    have a low Protected Class population and where relocation may
    not be feasible to either the Corporation and/or the employee.

2.  Relieve employee stress caused by long-distance commuting and thus 
    add to their productivity.

3.  Help alleviate hazardous, traffic-congested streets in the 
    communities where Digital Facilities are located.

4.  Avoid the cost of providing more parking at Digital Facilities
    which are presently inadequate.

5.  Aid in the clean-up of air and noise pollution in the communities
    affected by Digital Facilities.

6.  Encourage management hiring of the best possible candidate for
    available positions without having to pay expensive relocation
    costs.  Commuter mobility programs are inexpensive fringe benefits
    which give employers an edge in recruiting and retaining excellent
    workers in the competitive labor market.

7.  Encourage career development of employees by allowing the employee
    to seek positions outside of their immediate geographic locations.

8.  Conserve energy.  (The need still exists.)

9.  Increase productivity by cutting down on employee absenteeism,
    especially during winter months, and tardiness.

10. Allow the Corporation to build facilities in outlying areas
    where the purchase of land may be less expensive than in
    urban areas.

11. Maintain good Public and Employee Relations.




STRATEGY TO RESTRUCTURE THE VANPOOL PROGRAM

1.  Actively promote and market the Commuting Program. (The
    current program has not been actively promoted for the
    past several years.)

    o  Provide literature to the Personnel and Employment
       departments to be given to employees and recruits.

    o  Posters displayed in high traffic areas within
       facilities.

    o  DTW, Livewire, etc.

    o  Active moderation of the COMMUTING Notes File.

2.  Improved administration of the Commuting Program.
  
    o  Provide courteous, timely assistance to those who would 
       like to start a vanpool.

    o  Improved system to match employees in need of commuter
       transportation to other employees with the same need 
       and/or vans available.
    
3.  Cost cutting measures to consider:

    o  Use of mini-vans for routes that do not have a large
       number of riders.  These smaller, seven passenger vehicles
       are ideally suited to situations in which a carpool may be 
       too small and the usual 15 passenger vans may be too large 
       to be practical solutions to commute logistics.

    o  Obtain more economical vans.  Current vans get 10 MPG and
       have 2-3 years life expectancy.  Look into DIESEL vans
       that give greater MPG and require less maintenance.

    o  Seek out quality maintenance services or consider self
       maintenance program.
   
    o  Incentives to drivers to purchase less expensive fuel.
       Current cost to driver is .97 regardless of price
       paid.

    o  Cut the amount of subsidy provided by Digital.

    o  Consolidate the administration of the program with 
       Fleet Administration.

    o  Study the possibility of utilizing an outside vendor to
       administer the commuter mobility services similar to the
       way cafeteria and cleaning services are provided to the
       Corporation.

    o  Initiate a lobbying effort by Corporations with the Federal
       Government to reinstate Corporate Tax benefits for those
       companies who encourage and subsidize commuter transportation.

    o  Save on relocation costs and/or re-training expenses for those
       employees whose group is relocated to a distant facility.









In summary, there is corporate responsibility to communities and
employees to consider and address this decision and the implications
for employee relations.  Today, attracting talent means providing a 
working atmosphere which promotes productivity and creativity and 
allows for individual employee needs.  Farsighted businesses are 
installing transportation management systems which offer commuters
greater freedom and mobility in their daily work trip.


Author:  CJ Williams
         09 June 1988

    I previously entered a note in this file representing the views of our
    entire van.  This note is limited to what riding the van means to me
    personally.  I'm also circulating it to a mailing list of interested
    parties.

    I have lived in West Newton, Mass. since 1968 and I intend to stay
    there.  I rode the van to Nashua (ZK) from its inception through 1985,
    took a break for three years while I worked in Kendall Square, and
    returned to DEC and ZK and the van in 1988.  The availability of the
    van was a *major* element in my decision to return.

    I don't like it all that DEC has made a unilateral decision to kill the
    van program off and is apparently sticking to that decision despite a
    lot of pseudo-democratic dust puffed up by various functionaries from
    the personnel department who *invariably* say that they don't agree
    with the decision but that they're not the one making it. 
    
    1) I wouldn't live in New Hampshire if you paid me.

    Last night I went to Kenmore Square to see a show that didn't let out
    until 1:10 AM.  By 1:40 AM, I was home and in bed.  And it was a band
    that will *never* play New Hampshire.  Last Saturday I ran into
    Cambridge at 5:10 PM to pick up a book I had just developed a burning
    desire to own.  I doubt if you could find that book in a *library* in
    New Hampshire, much less in a book store.  I'm a city-dweller at heart,
    but I love working for DEC.  Someone once told me that living in New
    Hampshire was the equivalent of an 8 per cent raise.  I answered that I
    could make that up on cheaper books and records alone.  But even if I
    couldn't, I have to live where there are newsstands and other
    manifestations of civilization.  I vacation in the "real" New
    Hampshire, in the White Mountains, but I really don't want to live in
    Nashua or any of the DEC suburbs.  Thousands do and welcome to it, but
    it would be fine with me if my group moved to Newton. 
    
    2) Routes 128 and 3 make a boring, car-killing commute.

    Traveling from Newton to Nashua is almost completely without intrinsic
    interest.  I have tried it both in car and on a motorcycle, but there's
    no fun in it.  It's just a mechanical task that has to be performed.
    I'd much (much) rather be sitting in a van.  I've seen drivers of cars
    reading, putting on makeup, and drowsing off.  I feel much safer in the
    van.  It's visible, it's large, it's driven conservatively by someone I
    know and trust.  I have the option of reading, talking, sleeping,
    listening to tapes, debating software, spreading news, discussing word
    origins (a particular passion of my van), or watching the uninteresting
    scenery roll by. 

    3) I like being in at a quarter after 8 before anyone else is around.

    I like a time in the morning to read my mail and check the notes files
    before the hecticity of the day sets in.  This note was written at 8:30
    am.

    4) I like walking out of meetings at 5 minutes to 5 with a clear
    conscience.

    I've never missed out on anything by leaving a meeting before it was
    over and I've been a pretty deeply involved contributor in every
    project I've worked on.  The van imperative enforces a kind of
    discipline on meetings.  And I don't buy the myth that without the van
    I'd be here grinding away for hours of uncompensated overtime.  Nobody
    else does.  If I'm on a deadline, I'll stay as long as I have to, but
    if I'm not on a deadline, it makes more sense for me to work a regular,
    civilized schedule. 

    5) So, it's the van for me. 

    The van makes it possible for me to live in Newton rather than New
    Hampshire and it gives me a pleasant reliable way to get from one to
    the other. 

    Thanks for the van so far, and let's keep it up.

    Tom Parmenter    

    My personal opinion is that the vanpool provides a valuable service
    and its' cancellation will have as much impact on the riders as
    the cancellation of Car Plan A would have had on a lot of us in
    the field.  I suspect that since a much smaller portion of the employee
    population is affected by the van pool decision than was affected
    by the Car Plan A decision, the van pool riders objections are below
    the corporate 'noise' threshold and are being ignored.
    
    Good luck,
    
    Bob

From:	DSSDEV::GOHN "Don 381-2255  31-Mar-1989 0916" 31-MAR-1989 09:22
To:	@V:DRIVERS
CC:	GOHN
Subj:	Vanpool program

Van driver,

In case you haven't heard:  Personnel has decided to retain the current vanpool
program.  There may be some changes, but it will be a goal to keep costs low.
Dick Richard will send out a message shortly clarifying this.

Feel free to pass this information on to your riders.

Don Gohn (Vanpool Committee)

        Keeping costs low is a reasonable goal.  Cancelling the program
        altogether wasn't a reasonable way to contain costs.  Please
        keep all of us informed about the status of the program.
        
        Tom

From:   POWDML::DERMARDER     5-JUN-1989 11:05:31.82
To:     JOULE::RYDER, HPSCAD::MAYER, ZONULE::PERINI, XCUSME::PACELLI, POOL::CAFA
RELLA, DSSDEV::GOHN, THOTH::BAGLEY, CSS::DGILBERT, ASGMKA::DEROCHE, BETHE::LICEA
_KANE, MRED::CAPOLONGO, TOPDOC::AHERN, APOLLO::YEE, SEMI::NAGLE, STRSHP::REISS,
STEM::BARKER, MEMCL1::BACKUS, VSMFG::JROEHM,DERMARDER
CC:
Subj:   COMMUTER VAN PROGRAM

CC:  VANPOOL PASSENGERS


        ******  THE FOLLOWING MESSAGE IS FROM DICK RICHARD  ******


During the past 10 months a Committee of employees and managers has worked
to understand Digital's current and future transportation requirements.
Communication between members was open and frank, allowing a wide range
of issues to be discussed, understood and evaluated.

At this time, the concluding recommendation is that the Vanpool program will
continue in its present form.  This recommendation has been accepted by the
Personnel Management Committee and Corporate Administration.  Administrative
costs will be absorbed as a resuilt of productivity improvements.

In Digital's open communication atmosphere, many letters were written by
employees supporting the program.  Each was read and all points were thoroughly
discussed.  At times this method of communication seemed long and of dubious
value.  However, the result of that open process has been rewarding.

Congrats to the van poolers in their success and to Digital for doing the right
thing.

Bob

    The COMMUTING notesfile has been restarted.  The original conference
    (what was salvaged, anyway) has been archived as POWDML::COMMUTING_OLD. 
    If you have COMMUTING in your notebook already, do the following:
    
    	Notes> MODIFY ENTRY COMMUTING/FILE=POWDML::COMMUTING_OLD
    
    If you do not have COMMUTING in your notebook, do:
    
    	Notes> ADD ENTRY ZONULE::COMMUTING
    
    or press KP7.
    
    
            <<< POWDML::$2$DUA23:[NOTES$LIBRARY]COMMUTING.NOTE;1 >>>
                           -< Commuting Notes File >-
================================================================================
Note 1.0                          Introduction                         2 replies
TOPDOC::AHERN "Dennis the Menace"                    17 lines  19-SEP-1990 14:43
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Welcome to the DEC Commuting Conference.
    
    The Commuting Conference purpose is to give DEC employees an 
    opportunity to coordinate rides to and from work.
    
    Notes entered should include:
    
     	o Where the employee lives,
     	o Where the employee works, and 
    	o The hours normally worked during the day.
    
    Employees should freely use the conference to organize new carpools
    and vanpools, to find employees willing to join existing pools,
    or to satisfy the need for a one time ride.
    
    Please read all the replies to this note before writing or replying to
    this conference.