Re: Boo Hiss to Hillside

[Vaughan Williams <ender2000@my-deja.com>]

I don't take most of these attacks personally (though of course I'd
prefer people didn't use phrases like "you don't have a clue", but my
time in politics and lobbying has caused me to develop a thick skin)

If any service provider cannot accept responsibility for a failure to
deliver the service, how can they hope to attract customers?

Melbourne's franchised (not quite privatised) and fragmented system
does not preclude running the system properly, it just makes it a
little harder to do and requires a bit more creativity.

Its quite possible for the government to arm-twist the operators and
make them do what they want. The subsidies paid out are more than
generous despite kennett rhetoric about saving the government money
(according to Mees, who would know, PTC last year got about $300m in
capital and operating grants, the private operators this year are
getting about $410m. Figures may be out a bit but are approximately
correct).

The private operators will not voluntarily make improvements to the
service. They'd have to be mad (and be defrauding their shareholders!)
to do so. They made this quite clear to us in several meetings that
they will do that which they are required to do under their contracts
and no more.

Theres nothing wrong with an *efficiency* mentality. Having a couple of
spare buses should go without saying - suppose that you pay two drivers
to be on standby all year round. Thats about $70k a year. The spare
buses should be available anyway if bus services are going to be at all
reliable. So should the drivers really. Money could be saved by
providing a bus service that people would actually use instead of
having the buses wandering all over the place.

brian's posting is telling - it explains exactly why there has to be a
contingency plan to get services moving again when theres a disruption -
 because if your service isn't reliable, people won't use it. They'd be
better taking their car (even allowing for unexpected congestion).

Vaughan

> I'm not trying to attack you, I agree with you in principle, however
we live
> in a society that for worse has adopted Thatcherism as its doctrine
and
> everything has to be paid for.
>
> In a perfect world standby buses would be the order of the day, but
the
> public transport system of Melbourne is now completely in private
hands and
> is required to make a profit (for its shareholders).
>
> Give PT back to the people, remove the profit mentality and we might
be able
> to co-ordinate things again???
>
> As it is, PT competes with each other whilst we still build Freeways
for the
> car to polute the air.
>
> Bob.
> Vaughan Williams <ender2000@my-deja.com> wrote in message
> 83fj2c$7rt$1@nnrp1.deja.com">news:83fj2c$7rt$1@nnrp1.deja.com...
> > And here you point out what some of the major obstacles are.
> > There is no planning for public transport in melbourne.
> > The various modes try to compete with each other instead of with the
> > real competitor - the private car.
> > Buses wander all over back streets and/or try to compete with the
> > trains by taking passengers all the way into the city. the result is
> > low frequencies and buses wandering around all over the place going
> > nowhere and doing nothing, AND no spare buses in the depot waiting
to,
> > for example, substitute for a broken down bus.
> >
> > A good public transport system plans for the fact that a service
> > disruption of one form or another will happen on a reasonably
regular
> > basis and a contingency plan is required (Ringing up some bus
companies
> > to enquire if they have some buses just waiting in case the railways
> > need them does not equal contingency plan).
> >
> > In article <83dim5$5ch$1@otis.netspace.net.au>,
> >   "Exnarc" <gwrly@netspace.net.au> wrote:
> > >
> > > Vaughan Williams <ender2000@my-deja.com> wrote in message
> > > 83cva0$db9$1@nnrp1.deja.com">news:83cva0$db9$1@nnrp1.deja.com...
> > > > This reply is to a few messages:
> > > > 1. Suburban buses should all be running at a ten minute
frequency
> > > > during the peak, so the odd cancelled bus shouldn't matter much
if
> > > > buses DO need to be pulled off their runs to do train
replacement.
> > >
> > > Then the PTUA would be the first complaining about bus
cancelations!!!
> > >
> > > >
> > > > 2. The bus companies should have a couple of spare buses for in
case
> > > > one of theirs (for example) breaks down. These buses could be
> > organised
> > > > for train replacement if needed. Bus companies, unfortunately,
are
> > even
> > > > more administratively incompetant than the rail operators hence
the
> > > > hopeless service they provide.
> > >
> > > So a private bus operator is required to have "X" number of
drivers
> > and
> > > buses standing by to provide replacement transport for it's
> > competition???
> > > Interesting concept!!!
> > >
> > > > 3. The railways probably should have a bus or two on standby
> > (perhaps
> > > > could be shared with the tramways) for any major service
> > disruption. It
> > > > might take 20 or 30 minutes to organise it and a little while
for
> > it to
> > > > get to where its required, but it shouldn't take hours.
> > >
> > > So now the railway companies need to employ bus drivers for
standby
> > > services, whose footing the bill???
> > >
> > > >
> > > > 4. Contingency planning dictates that it is known to the
railways
> > and
> > > > tramways that major disruptions occur on a reasonably regular
basis
> > > > somewhere in the system, whether its a fire on the tracks, an
> > overhead
> > > > coming down or whatever. There has to be a plan and procedure
for
> > > > whenever this happens. This might include organising special
extra
> > > > trams if the affected stations are on a tram route, getting at
> > least a
> > > > couple of buses on standby (rather than doing a ringaround of
the
> > bus
> > > > companies, the station staff should know exactly where the spare
> > buses
> > > > are and who to ring to organise them)
> > >
> > > Get real!!!
> > >
> > > > and going out of their way to
> > > > assist passengers like the person who kicked off this thread -
> > getting
> > > > him on the first bus, or if necessary putting him in a cab.
> > >
> > > I agree on this point, re the passenger who had to catch another
> > connection,
> > > but this is not an exclusive Hillside or Bayside problem, its the
> > result of
> > > selling off a public assett to the private sector, in PTC (pre
> > Kennett) days
> > > the culture was changing as a result of the Service Now program
(for
> > all its
> > > faults) an effort would have been made to help this individual.
But
> > then the
> > > emphasis was on SERVICE not PROFIT.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > 5. The analogy someone drew with Vicroads not helping if theres
> > heavy
> > > > traffic is quite different. Vicroads do take prompt action to
divert
> > > > traffic around an accident, and even severe congestion shouldn't
> > make
> > > > you miss a train if you allow plenty of time. The railways are
> > > > responsible for getting their passengers from A to B and must
take
> > all
> > > > the reasonable steps to do so. This includes having a mechanism
to
> > > > promptly secure at least a couple of buses rather than ad hoc
> > searches
> > > > for buses that show up when they show up.
> > > >
> > > > A year or two ago I was held up at Heidelburg because someone
> > jumped in
> > > > front of a train at Rosanna. It took almost two hours for the
first
> > bus
> > > > to arrive, and there was no sign of any more for another half an
> > hour
> > > > after that. The disruption may be beyond the railways control
but
> > the
> > > > poor planning and long delays in obtaining a substitute service
is
> > not.
> > >
> > > How can you plan when some fool is going to jump in front of a
> > train???
> > >
> > > If you could do that you could arrange for the Police to arrive to
> > arrest
> > > him/her.
> > >
> > > Whilst the operator should make every effort to arrange
replacement
> > > services, the reality is that you can't have buses/trams standing
by
> > on the
> > > slim chance that something might happen.
> > >
> > > Bob
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> > Before you buy.
>
>


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.