Bus complaint line running hot

[jibb]

From Today's Advertiser:-
The problems are still there with late running etc,complaints unfortunately are growing,with the North-East copping its fair share;-
http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/bus-complaint-line-running%20hot/story-e6frea6u-1226296492030

[jibb]

From Today's Advertiser and AdelaideNow(Tuesday 13th March);-
http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/transport-minister-chloe-fox-blames-own-department-for-delays-in-fining-bus-companies-over-bad-service/story-e6frea83-1226297520135

[busrider]

The J1 to Elizabeth? Well, that's a well researched article... Bonus points for using a picture of a Merc artic.

[bigrobbo]

This is not a politically bias comment, but airing my grievences at The Advertiser.

It seems that someone (reporters/editors/management) at The Advertiser really want to sink the boots into the current Government. Could be Ink Cartridges, could be certain individuals. One area is Public Transport.

Reading the complaints published in print on Monday, most complaints about buses arriving late or not at all were quotes from October. We all know that a new company came on board, with completely new drivers, and teething problems needed to be sorted out.

Since then, the majority of complaints seem to be more personal (was one that my driver smelt bad???) or inaction of drivers to sort out dangerous situations.

We all know that road conditions lately for the Gawler Rail Substitute services (Salisbury Highway/Kings Rd Corner, the development of Playford Alive, major works on Main North Rd) have not helped these buses run on time. Some could have been avoided, and the Government should be blamed for poor planning, not the bus companies trying to run a service.

Imagine if we had unbias reporting by The Advertiser. Yes, we know that 30 year old buses are running the rail substitute services, but using these buses have prevented service cuts in other areas. Does that get reported properly?

Our reporting from a one-paper city should not be full of bias opinions and report more on both sides of the story.

Yes, bus companies are not exempt from blame. Far from it. Running times could be changed, routes could be re-routed and/or cut and allocate that bus to more popular routes. Driver training could be better. Attention can be given to O'Connell St, Melbourne St, other routes within 2km of the city that are often full once they get towards the city. The same can be said for every business in Adelaide, including The Advertiser.

But, people from The Advertiser, please report a story from all angles and not rubbish a system that is trying its best to deliver a good service.

And, stop using private companies as a scapegoat to rubbish the Government without offering all sides to the story in your articles.

[bigrobbo]

Oh, and to The Advertiser, stop wheeling out absolute crap on anything when you are looking to fill pages in your paper. People can see through your opinion pieces, and that you are not providing all the facts. No wonder why more and more people are seeking alternate news sources!

Andrew Robinson!

[tramfan70]

News Corporation i.e. The Adertiser have a distinct dislike to Labor governments nationwide so SA is not unique. The story is getting another trot out because the situation has clearly not improved much, not because The Advertiser a short on stories.

I've caught Public Transport for 22 years to CBD most (peak) days and Bedford Park for 18 months as part of that. Been an O-bahn commuter since 1986. Never in all this time have I seen services at such a low standard of on time delivery. I took the time to write to the local member for Hartley whose seat is adjacent to Paradise Interchange and the cancelled 530 service, letter sent October 2011 and a reply was received from Chloe Fox December 2011. The reply did not address the questions in my letter but the reply was full of platitudes.

The current round of Advertiser commentry is highlighting public complaints not being addressed and services still not up to scratch.

[bigrobbo]

tramfan70 - I respect your informed information, and believe what you say to be true. There is so much that needs fixing across the entire system, especially in the last few months. The Advertiser has highlighted them again, without presenting all sides of the story. Yes, News Corp does not like Labor, and that is evident across Australia, especially in the Labor elected states and federally.

But, The Advertiser does have a habit of "headline grabbing" by bringing up anything that is bad regarding South Australia, especially on slow news days. A good journo worth his weight in gold should be making FOI requests to the Government constantly. It has a habit of sitting on information for months and waiting for the opportune moment, or a time that it wants to sell more papers or get more hits on its website, or get people talking on forums or talkback radio, so it can boost its advertising revenue (which, quite frankly, is it's only real source of revenue).

I personally do not see The Advertiser presenting all the facts. They wheel out stories for profit. they really do not care about Public Transport. If they did, they would be reporting in a different manner. They care about the almighty dollar.

Well, that is how I see it anyway.

[jibb]

Big Robbo you are way way off the mark-I felt the Advertiser articles on both days was not only fair and reasonable but well and truly justified.
Comments in the majority of cases were genuine complaints and refer to the current situation on a lot of routes.All 3 companies have to accept responsibilities for complaints on their services and do something about it.
We are talking about the whole bus network not just a small isolated pocket.Transfield are by far the worst culprit and have scored the highest number of complaints out of all 3 companies.Because of their lack of experience in running a bus company,plus schedulers in Sydney who know nothing about buses or Public Transport or our City,you get the shambles that they operate.
I spend a considerable time monitoring bus services in both the City and Marion Interchange and can tell you that more than 50% of their services run consistently late(and I don"t mean 5 or 10 minutes late.)

[bigrobbo]

Jibb - I also respect and agree with basically everything you post on here. And, in this case, you have a fair arguement about the articles in The Advertiser.

I am not doubting for one minute that services run late (I catch buses basically everyday myself) and understand perfectly that road conditions, vehicle problems, volumes of passengers etc etc are a problem and we need to constantly look at why buses are late, etc, etc, etc.

A fair report by The Advertiser would have split the service complaints into two sections. The first few months after the contracts changed, and the first 3 months of 2012.

Doing this would have still highlighted that services are still far, far, far from perfect. But, it would have shown that (IMO anyway) that services have improved since October. And, a piece on how each company has worked on improving services would bring a more bias opinion to the whole matter.

At the moment, a story is written - a very negative story - is written based on FOI documents and public complaints. Where is the report from the other side? Where is the positive from (say) Transfield about how they are trying to improve thier performance?

The Advertiser have a poor record on reporting stories properly (Ink Cartredge story for example - what is reported and what actually happened are two different things. You need to trust me on that). And, in my opinion, while what they do have to say is factual (no doubt, not argueing that), they are sensationalising the story for their own profits.

[jibb]

Thanks Big Robbo for that reply.Don't expect a reply from anyone at Transfield. Comments from their PR lady has the gall to say that the problems were due to them taking over 900 bus routes and 30000 bus stops??-you've got to be kidding.(this is not Sydney or London!)
Her office by the way is in Sydney-trust Transfield-sure can't!
The State Manager for S.A. for Transfield has his office in Sydney!!
A lot of these problems didn't exist when Torrens Transit had these contracts.
I would think the Government wishes it had never issued these contracts to Transfield.
Lets hope that in the next round of timetable reviews/changes they just concentrate on making the running times a lot more realistic and not changing Routes and Routes nos!Also making rosters more realistic for drivers so they have sufficient time to travel between depots and terminuses,and between terminuses.
Maybe the old STA/MTT/TA way of drawing up timetables where a bus and its driver stayed on the same route most of the day was spot on!

[Paul From Hull]

Today is the 13th March 2012 in the 21st century so why on earth is any of this allowed to happen. As an outsider looking in, reading all your sightings, views and comments about the Adelaide Metro bus system, it really does look like something from the 13th March 1912 !!!! What is it going to take to run a modern bus network?
Many of the drivers working at Transfield were with Torrens so already knew the routes, yes many were also new drivers who maybe did not get enough route learning before things started in October but the biggest issue seems to be the fact that Transfield are running duties/schedules from their offices in Sydney. If this is the case, you may as well give the job to a blind man! Local knowledge in bus scheduling is invaluable and listening to local staff on how bus workings should be put together is a must, any bus operator should know that.
It is surprising that Southlink may have been given fines as nothing there has changed, the same with Torrens as they are still running what they did before but on a smaller scale.
Is the lack of depots causing Transfield problems?
Is the lack of local people with bus knowledge causing Transfield problems?
Is allot of it now being blown out of proportion?
Is allot of the lack of staff moral causing issues?
What is it and what will it take to get it all right?
The problem is, if Transfield has been fined heavily and will lose a substantial amount of money, it could make things worse within the company, cuts here, cuts there, running times tightened here and there, fleet reductions etc etc etc.
I am an outsider yes and I know its harder for me to say, but I have allot of friends in the bus world with first hand reliable knowledge in Adelaide who DO know what they are talking about, they work in the industry as I do and have done for a very long time, so I know my information is spot on! I feel for the city, it could have one if not the best bus system in Australia! I just hope Transfield can get it right, I hope they can work closely with local knowledgeable staff and give its passengers what they deserve!

[jibb]

Certainly when Neil Smith of Torrens Transit had these contract areas he had a few problems,but nothing like now-he kept a close eye on his services and was very involved in route and timetable planning.
Maybe now that he has lost those 2 areas he is not so heavily involved,especially as Swan Transit has picked up more contract areas plus his companies involvement in ferries in Queensland and New South Wales.

[marshall]

All that can be said is that before News Corporation took over the Advertiser the paper was a respectable publication since News Corporation took over it has dropped such respectability and never has since.

[jibb]

News Corporation and The Murdoch family have always owned the Advertiser and that goes back long before you and I were born!

[LowRider]

News Corporation and The Murdoch family have always owned the Advertiser and that goes back long before you and I were born!

No they haven't. They have owned it for quite a while. They owned The News, that was the Murdochs first paper, and in the late 80's they ended up taking total control of The Advertiser, and sold off The News. So unless you are younger than like 1987, they haven't always owned it.

[TT]

Let's not try to blame the Advertiser for the woeful state that Adelaide's bus service has become since October last year. They are just highlighting how bad it is and the media have plenty of poetic license to jazz up the problems as they like: if there weren't any problems they wouldn't have anything to pick on and glamorize.

[jibb]

Before then even when he owned News Ltd ,Rupert Murdoch had a financial interest in Advertiser Newspapers Lts.

[nscaler69]

Does anyone know if a Facebook page has been created so people can post late running / no shows / delays etc.

[Port Adelaide Fan]

Late buses making us late to work

WORKERS are being warned by employers, quitting jobs and changing rosters because buses are consistently running late or routes have been scrapped.

The impact of unreliable and delayed services on employees has emerged as a common concern in feedback to AdelaideNow in the wake of recent coverage of Adelaide's public transport woes.

While some sympathetic employers are allowing staff to alter shifts to avoid peak commuting hours, many workers in less-flexible industries are allowing up to an hour extra to ensure they are not late to work.

The frequent delays have prompted some commuters - posting on AdelaideNow - to call for transport to be free every time the service is running more than 10 minutes behind schedule.

But one employer group has warned that despite the unreliability of the public transport system, workers have an obligation to their company to be punctual.

more: http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/sout ... 6302661220

[Volvo B12B Driver]

Does anyone know if a Facebook page has been created so people can post late running / no shows / delays etc.

Try this one: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Adelaide- ... 9585510535

[runawaybus]

Something the Advertiser has left out conveniently is that the Auditor General's report about the bus contracts indicate that Transfield was awarded the contract for the North-South and Outer North East when they don't even have any public transport service experience or operating bus services and it was somewhat cleared by the Auditor General as being okay and it ticked the box as being "acceptable" in the box according to what the people who choose who runs what service in the category of 'public transport experience'.

Something tells me that when the Libs get back in there will be a Corruption inquiry launched into various government contracts and the hell is going hit the fan in regards to Rann and Co awarding contracts to certain companies.

As far as I know Transfield have experience in maintaining rail track and upgrading it like they did on the Belair line, they also have some part of the Warship Destroyer contract but someone told me that possibly they were awarded the contract so they can operate the O-Bahn to its maximum capacity and then cry out to replace the O-Bahn with Light Rail instead.

[tramfan70]

they can operate the O-Bahn to its maximum capacity and then cry out to replace the O-Bahn with Light Rail instead.

The maxium capcity is 18000 people per hour in any one direction. In 2004/2005 there were about 9,000,000 boardings for the year. I think there is a while before capacity is reached. I'm sure the government (not party) is very happy with the $98 million initial outlay for track and buses in the late 1980's given the infrastructure is now over 20 years old. If anything re-casting sections of concrete track if required will far outway any conversion to Light Rail cost.

[Volvo B12B Driver]

Even with the current size of the fleet on the O-Bahn you can't move more than about 10 000 people an hour on it.

[marc506]

Something the Advertiser has left out conveniently is that the Auditor General's report about the bus contracts indicate that Transfield was awarded the contract for the North-South and Outer North East when they don't even have any public transport service experience or operating bus services and it was somewhat cleared by the Auditor General as being okay and it ticked the box as being "acceptable" in the box according to what the people who choose who runs what service in the category of 'public transport experience'.

Something tells me that when the Libs get back in there will be a Corruption inquiry launched into various government contracts and the hell is going hit the fan in regards to Rann and Co awarding contracts to certain companies.

As far as I know Transfield have experience in maintaining rail track and upgrading it like they did on the Belair line, they also have some part of the Warship Destroyer contract but someone told me that possibly they were awarded the contract so they can operate the O-Bahn to its maximum capacity and then cry out to replace the O-Bahn with Light Rail instead.

before your next post how about reading up on the position of auditor general (I'll give you a hint it's not the Attorney General) because there's not corruption here (plus the Liberals can't throw any stones there - Motorola and EDS might just come back to haunt them) unless you can prove something like bribes took place - after a I don't think Serco had much experience with running buses when the Liberals gave them the contract and weren't that crash hot to start with.

At the end of the it comes down to cost and the government had gone with the more expensive tenders they would have been getting in the neck anywy.

[runawaybus]

Trust me I know what an auditor general is and the Attorney General's department because I worked at the latter for a couple of months as a temporary administrative officer. In that time I learned that the Attorney General's department and Auditor General actually work together to find cases of corruption inside and outside the public service. Yes I know the cheapest tender wins even though all tenders all stipulate "the lowest bid does not neccearily mean a win for your company".

I am not saying anyone is corrupt far from it I think most people who choose are competent in what they do but if we read the auditor general's report there were some clear conflicts of interest which were solved much later in the decision process and I would recommend all those interested in tenders for bus companies read Auditor General's report as well as the 2005 report and see if there are any differences and in it at least we can have some robust discussion and debate.

Yes Adelaide has somewhat a small market for PT with 23% of cost recovery and is somewhat like Perth in someways but Perth and Adelaide showed it can be done successfully without too much hassles- by this I mean look at Melbourne.

Yes, the buses and depots are owned by the Government and leased by the Operators for a fee (I have heard its quite low) and yes service planning is both up to the providers and also the government that is a bonus, there is well now two liveries when there was before only one. One common design for timetables and maps. Dare I say it I think its quite hard for some operators to make it successfully here in Adelaide because they claim that they can't bring in their own buses and set up their own depots, I don't know if it is just me but who wants more depots around the place and yes Golden Grove Depot and also Edinburgh should have stayed to ease the burden on St Agnes Depot have a look at St Agnes Depot on a weekend say around 7pm and you will see it is full as anything!