Safety and maintenance are the concerns expressed by the Department of Education as the reasons for terminating the bus contract with Takhini Transport.
Think about this:
What bus driver of sound mind would risk driving a bus full of students in an unsafe and inadequately maintained school bus? You’ve got to be kidding me.
In this day and age of legalese and liability, what bus company would risk this negligent action? Seriously? So what is the real reason for contract termination? What is the Department of Education hiding behind as the safety and maintenance card is thrown onto the table?
In this convoluted and messy game of bus contracts I am certain of this: bus schedules are made by the Department of Education, and delivered to the contracted bus company, which in turn hands schedules to the school bus drivers, who are expected to follow regardless of how nonsensical the schedules may be.
Parental complaints or concerns regarding scheduling are in turn directed to the bus company not to the Department of Education, who initiated the mess in the first place.
Now the pundits say it is safety and maintenance? Really now, who is hiding behind whom?
There is something going on and someone is not playing an honest game. Good luck, Takhini Transport.