Southern ITSO PAYG
On Jul 5, 4:00*pm, Paul Corfield wrote:
On Sun, 05 Jul 2009 14:19:16 GMT, (Neil
Williams) wrote:
On Sat, 4 Jul 2009 23:32:05 -0700 (PDT), ticketyboo
wrote:
Singapore is a small, tightly managed state. The way they do things
largely doesn't translate to here, in particular touch out.
I'm not sure that is true. *Making sure people touch out can be
enforced by charging a maximum fare on boarding and refunding back on
alighting, so there is a pecuniary disadvantage to not touching out
Well we have that in London and it seems to cause no end of difficulty
in terms of people understanding it, accepting it and generally
recognising that something had to be done to stop the situation that
existed in the beginning where only the minimum fare was deducted on
entry.
There is, as Paul states, the potential issue of people touching out
and not alighting, but that applies equally to a paper ticket system
where you can buy the cheapest ticket and ride further, and can't be
that much of a problem or bus companies would use more inspectors to
catch people out doing it or move en-masse to flat fare, both of which
Stagecoach and First appear to show no interest in.
I suspect it is much more to do with the basic cost structure in these
companies - they simply don't employ revenue inspectors because they
cost too much. If some of the punters are ripping them off they simply
shove the fares up for everyone else. *I also doubt that Stagecoach and
First are alone in taking the axe to things like revenue staff and
inspectors who manage the service. I've read that there are now "lead
drivers" who are saddled with driving and supervising their colleagues
as well as other ancillary management tasks. *Part of the reason for
some of TfL's extra costs for the bus network is that they have people
managing bus stations and pay for the operators to have people out and
about actually managing the bus service.
--
Paul C
Paul, you put it very well.
|