Thunder Bay transit reliability concerns prompt calls for better reporting and complaint handling

THUNDER BAY — Thunder Bay's transit system is facing scrutiny over reliability concerns, including buses passing waiting passengers, prompting calls for better public reporting and complaint handling.

Earlier this year, transit management reported service delivery below its target, while city council rejected a proposed temporary reduction in summer frequency intended to make the schedule more predictable.

"The system delivered approximately 96 per cent of scheduled trips in 2025, against a 99 per cent target," Transit Services Manager Brad Loroff told council in March, according to a report.

READ MORE: Kelowna council candidate Davis Kyle outlines platform for 2026 election

READ MORE: Hamilton council candidate opposes data centres, pledges housing and transit reforms

Those figures describe trip delivery, not whether every operating bus arrived on time.

Council was presented with a proposal to reduce some summer frequencies to match available staffing, with supporters arguing a predictable schedule was preferable to unexpected cancellations.

Opponents raised concerns about longer waits and whether the proposal addressed underlying staffing problems, and council ultimately rejected it.

The city has since launched a broader Transit Service Optimization Review, working with Via Strategies, which covers 20 fixed routes, Lift+ specialized transit and potential on-demand services.

Final recommendations from that review are expected in late 2026.

However, complaints about buses passing waiting passengers require a separate examination, as research did not establish how frequently that happens or what proportion involves full or out-of-service buses.

A bus passing someone at a stop can have several explanations: it may be full, out of service, operating on a detour or serving a different route, with operator error or misconduct also possible.

Those possibilities should be investigated rather than assumed, according to the analysis.

A stronger complaint system would give every complaint a reference number, an acknowledgement deadline and a meaningful explanation of the outcome, while protecting employee and passenger privacy.

Thunder Bay already accepts questions, complaints and suggestions through its online transit feedback form, with transit customer service available at 807-684-3744.

A practical response should combine immediate service improvements with public reporting that shows whether those improvements work.

Council should require a monthly transit report that residents can understand without reading a lengthy budget document, separating the different ways service can fail.

The city should also publish total scheduled service hours to ensure a cancellation percentage does not improve simply because the timetable contains fewer trips.

Recruitment alone will not solve a shortage if experienced operators leave as quickly as replacements arrive, the analysis notes.

A staffing recovery plan should examine recruitment timelines, training capacity, certification delays, turnover, overtime, absences and working conditions.

Possible improvements include more predictable shifts, adequate recovery time between trips, better support following threatening incidents and a sufficient reserve of trained operators to cover normal absences.

Council should ask management to report the number of operators available for scheduled work, the number in training and the expected dates when trainees can operate independently.

Hiring announcements are useful, but filled shifts and fewer cancellations are the results riders need.

If a full bus repeatedly leaves passengers behind, the response should address capacity, while if a stop has moved, signage and trip-planning information need attention.

If an operator improperly bypasses a passenger, management should address the conduct fairly and consistently.

Thunder Bay already directs passengers to the Transit app and NextLift for service information and publishes scheduled and real-time transit data for application developers.

A practical improvement would be to measure how long it takes a cancellation recorded by dispatch to appear in passenger information systems.

Apps and displays should clearly distinguish a scheduled arrival from a live prediction, with cancelled trips unmistakable and riders receiving the earliest possible notice when their usual trip is affected.

Information also needs to reach people without smartphones through telephone service, terminal displays and clear notices at affected stops.

The recommendations from the broader review should identify costs, staffing requirements and implementation dates.

Council should require options that show what can be achieved within existing resources and what additional investment would buy.

Immediate problems, such as unclear cancellation notices or unanswered complaints, should not have to wait for the entire review.

Thunder Bay is already reviewing bus-stop spacing, with the city saying adjusting closely spaced stops can reduce travel time and improve reliability, while identifying accessibility and safety as considerations.

That approach needs care, as a shorter bus trip may offer little benefit to someone who must walk much farther along an icy sidewalk to reach it.

Any proposed stop removal should assess walking distance, safe crossings, winter maintenance and access for people with disabilities.

Similarly, the city’s planned phased introduction of on-demand transit during 2026–2028 should be tested against clear standards, with council examining wait times, cost per passenger, accessible-vehicle availability and whether connections remain reliable.

The city describes a system bookable by app, online or telephone, connecting passengers within zones or to conventional transit.

With files from NetNewsLedger