Priller
Well-known member
Having worked directly for both Toronto and Markham on the infrastructure side, I can say that Markham has to deal with a lot less aging infrastructure, and a density level that makes maintenance work much simpler. Both are far from perfect, but there's no significant difference in efficiency between one city and the other except for the fact that one's infrastructure is typically 100+ years older and 10x more difficult to repair. And the less said about York the better. That region is... let's say complicated. I certainly wouldn't hold it up as a beacon of efficiency and effective spending. Yes, Toronto has a lot of bureaucracy and paperwork, more than most. But some of that is there for a reason, as taking a lane to do work downtown has a much bigger impact than it does in a sleepy subdivision in Markham.
The TTC, on the other hand, is a total catastrophe of over-management and horrible efficiency. It pains me to say it, as they are still massively underfunded, but they're also their own worst enemy. Getting simple things done around their assets can be a Kafkaesque nightmare of looping bureaucracy, departments on top of departments, managers who refuse to make decisions without passing things on to another manager, and workers who spend years to finish work that should take weeks
As for LIUNA, you've cherry-picked some rates, but as an ex-contractor, I can tell you that most contractors big enough to bid municipal and provincial work are either unionised or are essentially paying union rates regardless. On the concrete side, the LIUNA rate for a labourer in the ICI market is significantly less than quoted, though heavy civil is much closer. That applies for the entire GTA, from Hamilton to Oshawa, and up to Barrie. Away from Toronto is much, much less. My last company fought tooth and nail to avoid unionisation, lost, and discovered it was the best thing that happened to them. Rates were broadly similar, and the union massively streamlined the HR process by providing clear rates and regulations. The burdens went up a bit, but by eliminating the existing company pension and benefits, the cost difference was minimal. Their biggest problem, similar to many contractors these days, was finding effective staffing to complete work. LIUNA didn't solve that problem entirely, but it did make it a lot easier.
Speaking of which, that's a huge factor in a lot of this cost escalation. Construction labour rates have jumped massively over the past 10 years, over 100% in a lot of cases. Finding people willing to swing a hammer or finish concrete on their knees all day is very difficult, let alone people who are good at it. Canadian city kids mostly think the work is beneath them, and are often over-educated. And immigration has been focused on professional people, so there's a lot fewer new faces there interested in the work or cut out for it. Lots of kids who think they should be boss after showing up for a week, or who can't figure out problem-solving to save their lives, or who think getting dirty is for others. All this means it costs more per person, and with way more people, to get less done than it did 10 or 20 years ago. Add significantly higher safety costs, along with lost efficiencies due to added requirements, and the cost per square foot to get anything done on a larger scale these days is massively higher. Other industries have been able to improve efficiencies with technology and automation, but the construction business has been extremely difficult to streamline that way. On top of all that, many material suppliers took advantage of the various crises over the past few years to jack prices to the moon, regardless of whether it was justified. In some sectors they all did it, and if anyone complained, they'd just shrug and blame inflation. Or covid. Or Russia. Or the Suez Canal. Or storms in Texas. All while counting their record profits...
