Skip to main content
Log in

The influence of employer ridesharing programs on employee mode choice

  • Published:
Transportation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Employer ridesharing programs and employee mode choice were analyzed using Southern California data. Problems in estimating the costs and benefits of employer ridesharing programs were identified. Surveyed firms used a wide variety of information to estimate employee mode split internally. Virtually all surveyed firms offered free or subsidized parking to some or all of their employees. Few responding firms estimated the cost of providing employee parking accurately, if at all. Despite these significant data limitations, factors influencing firm choice of employer ridesharing program components were identified. The influence of employer ridesharing programs on employee mode choice was modeled using weighted least squares logit regression analysis. Firm size was foung to be the single most important variable identified in the analysis. Larger firms were more likely to offer ridesharing incentives to their empolyees, and to report direct employer benefits from ridesharing. Alternative work hours hindered the formation of ridesharing arrangements in some cases. Relatively few firms promoted ridesharing on a purely voluntary basis. A private market for employer ridesharing services was found to exist, however. Personalized matching assistance may be a critical factor in developing more effective employer ridesharing programs. Parking pricing and supply control measures probably would have a larger impact on employee mode split overall. Parking management faces severe obstacles in implementation, some of which might be overcome through the more extensive provision of ridesharing services, such as personalized matching assistance. to employees at specific employment sites by their employers.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

AWH:

alternative work hours

CBD:

central business district

CTS:

Commuter Transportation Services, Inc.

DRI:

direct ridesharing incentive

EMS:

employee mode split

ERP:

employer ridesharing program

ETC:

employee transportation coordinator

NRDP:

National Ridesharing Demonstration Program

PMA:

personalized matching assistance

SCAQMD:

South Coast Air Quality Management District

References

  • Booth R & Waksman R (1985) National Ridesharing Demonstration Program: Comparative Evaluation Report. Report No. DOT-TSC-UMTA-85-17, U.S. Department of Transportation, Urban Mass Transportation Administration, Washington, D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cervero R & Griesenbeck B (1988) Factors influencing commuting choices in suburban labor markets: a case analysis of Pleasanton, California. Transportation Research 22A: 151–161

    Google Scholar 

  • Commuter Transportation Services, Inc. (1985) The Benefits and Costs of Ridesharing to Employers. Final report to the U.S. Department of Energy, Los Angeles, California

  • Doxsey L (1982) Weighting of date from national ridesharing program projects. Technical memorandum. U.S. Department of Transportation, Transportation Systems Center, Cambridge, Massachusetts, November 23, 1982

    Google Scholar 

  • Dueker KJ, Bair BO & Levin IP (1977) Ridesharing: psychological factors. Journal of Transportation Engineering 103: 685–692

    Google Scholar 

  • Feeney B (1989) A review of the impact of parking policy measures on travel demand. Transportation Planning and Technology 13: 229–244

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferguson E (1986) A conceptual cost model of employer-based ridesharing programs. Presented at the 3rd Annual Southern California Regional Conference of the Association for Commuter Transportation. El Segundo, California

  • Ferguson E (1988) The influence of employer ridesharing programs and alternative work schedules on employee mode choice: a case analysis of Southern California. Presented at the 30th Annual Conference of the Association of Collegiate Schools in Planning, Buffalo, New York

  • Ferguson E (1990a) An evaluation of employer ridesharing programs in Southern California. Transportation Research Record (forthcoming)

  • Ferguson E (1990b) The influence of household composition on residential location and journey to work in the United States. Transportation Research Record (forthcoming)

  • Gordon P, Kumar A & Richardson H (1987) Congestion and city size. Presented at the 10th Pacific Regional Science Conference, Pusan Korea

  • Hershey WR & Hekimian AJ (1983) Measuring the effectiveness of personalized ridesharing assistance. Transportation Research Record 914: 14–21

    Google Scholar 

  • Horan TA (1986) A Model Based Evaluation of Company Rideshare Programs. Unpublished dissertation, Department of Psychology, Claremont College

  • Jessiman WA & Kocur GA (1975) Attracting light rail transit ridership. Transportation Research Board Special Report 161: 126–146

    Google Scholar 

  • Kocur G & Hendrickson C (1983) A model to assess cost and fuel savings from ridesharing. Transportation Research 17B: 305–318

    Google Scholar 

  • Kocur G, Hyman WA & Aunet B (1982) Wisconsin work mode choice models based on functional measurement and disaggregate behavioral data. Transportation Research Record 895: 24–32

    Google Scholar 

  • Levin IP (1976) Attitudinal Modeling of Travel Behavior : Application of the Information Integration Approach of Experimental Psychology. Working Paper No. 17, Institute of Urban and Regional Research, University of Iowa

  • Levin IP (1982) Measuring tradeoffs in carpool driving arrangement preferences. Transportation 11: 71–85

    Google Scholar 

  • Levin IP, Strathman JG & Schwarcz JE (1981) A Survey of the Relationship Between Home Satisfaction, Changes in Travel Behavior, and Commuting Distance. Report No. 107D, Institute of Urban and Regional Research, University of Iowa

  • Levy P (1988) Answers to questions about The Commuter Program (Regulation XV). South Coast Air Quality Management District, EI Monte, California

    Google Scholar 

  • Louviere JJ & Kocur G (1983) The magnitude of individual-level variations in demand coefficients: a Xenia, Ohio case example. Transportation Research 17A: 363–373

    Google Scholar 

  • Mehranian M, Wachs M, Shoup D & Platkin R (1987) Parking cost and mode choices among downtown workers: a case study. Transportation Research Record 1030: 1–5

    Google Scholar 

  • Pisarski A (1987) Commuting in America. Eno Foundation for Transportation, Inc., Westport, Connecticut

    Google Scholar 

  • Roche P & Willson R (1986) Rideshare requirements in downtown Los Angeles: achieving private sector commitments. Presented at the 65th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C.

  • Ross C (1983) Measuring transportation system effectiveness. Journal of Urban Affairs 5: 299–314

    Google Scholar 

  • Schreffler E & Meyer M (1983) Evolving institutional arrangements for employer involvement in transportation: the case of employer associations. Transportation Research Record 914: 1–8

    Google Scholar 

  • Shoup D (1982) Cashing out free parking. Transportation Quarterly 38: 351–364

    Google Scholar 

  • Surber M, Shoup D & Wachs M (1984) Effects of ending employer-paid parking for solo drivers. Transportation Research Record 957: 67–71

    Google Scholar 

  • Theil H (1971) Principles of Econometrics. John Wiley & Sons, New York, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Department of Commerce (1982) 1980 Census of Population, Journey to Work. U.S. Bureau of the Census, Washington, D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Department of Commerce (1987) 1985 County Business Patterns, California. U.S. Bureau of the Census, Washington, D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  • Urban Transportation Monitor (1988) Limited success shown in ridesharing. Urban Transportation Monitor 2(15): 1, 8–9

    Google Scholar 

  • Valdez R & Wang J (1989) Comparison of transportation demand management market research study results and transportation management association development in three suburban activity centers. Transportation Research Record 1212: 1–10

    Google Scholar 

  • Wachs M (1984) Autos, transit, and the sprawl of Los Angeles: the 1920's. Journal of the American Planning Association 50: 297–310

    Google Scholar 

  • Wegmann FJ (1986) Employer Ridesharing Programs: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis. The University of Tennessee, Transportation Center, Knoxville, Tennessee

    Google Scholar 

  • Wegmann FJ (1989) Cost-effectiveness of private employer ridesharing programs: an employer's assessment. Transportation Research Record 1212: 88–100

    Google Scholar 

  • Wegmann F & Stokey S (1983) Impact of flexitime work schedules on an employer-based ridesharing program. Transportation Research Record 914: 9–13

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ferguson, E. The influence of employer ridesharing programs on employee mode choice. Transportation 17, 179–207 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02125335

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02125335

Key words

Navigation