V/Line conductor accused of Sunbury bias

 

News article: V/Line conductor accused of Sunbury bias

[color=#000000][size=3][font='Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif][b][b]V/LINE has reminded its conductors it has no right to refuse Sunbury passengers from boarding its trains after a woman was prevented from getting on a service.

  melbtrip Chief Commissioner

Location: Annoying Orange
The rules are set by PTV, not by a sitting member (whoever that may be).

In the PTV Fares and Ticketing manual, on page 13, it says:

"Where V/Line train services stop at railway stations in the metropolitan area, pick up and set down restrictions may apply. These restrictions are set out in V/Line timetables which may be viewed or obtained at V/Line railway stations and viewed online at ptv.vic.gov.au. The tickets of customers boarding or alighting at stations in contravention of these restrictions are not, or cease to be, valid for travel on the relevant V/Line train service."

On looking at the Bendigo timetable on the PTV site, all Up trains stopping at Sunbury are marked with a D symbol, which means "Drops off passengers only".

It would seem from this that suburban passengers may not board an Up V/Line train at Sunbury, and if they do, they would not have a valid ticket (and could be penalised). It would also seem that a conductor who tries to prevent such boarding is not playing up, just doing the job.

If suburban passengers ARE in fact allowed on, as has been suggested, then the above section of the manual needs to be rewritten, and a new directive needs to be circulated to all concerned, so that there will be no doubt in anyone's mind - both employees and passengers. Alternatively, the D symbols need to be removed from the timetables, and station announcements such as "Do not board this train" need to be stopped.
Lad_Porter

Clearly PTV must do the right thing and take away the U and D next to Sunbury in the timetables - State government, PTV and V/Line said the following: "Sunbury can still use the V/Line service to/from Melbourne go to Sunbury.

Sponsored advertisement

  ZH836301 Chief Commissioner

Location: BleakCity
The rules are set by PTV, not by a sitting member (whoever that may be).  Blah blah BS
Lad Porter

Groan.  

The PTV is subordinate to the Transport Minister.

If suburban passengers ARE in fact allowed on
Lad Porter

They are, end of story.
  railblogger Chief Commissioner

Location: At the back of the train, quitely doing exactly what you'd expect.
Clearly PTV must do the right thing and take away the U and D next to Sunbury in the timetables - State government, PTV and V/Line said the following: "Sunbury can still use the V/Line service to/from Melbourne go to Sunbury.
melbtrip

Not sure if it would make any difference though since from what I've seen, hardly any Sunbury passengers use V/Line services compare to metro trains.
  frezno Junior Train Controller

What a dumb suggestion - there are not insignificant numbers travelling to and from Sunbury from the Macedon Ranges.

You want Vline to cut that connection to enforce an idiotic rule that doesn't even apply to Sunbury? The backlash from the parents of students alone would be enough to send a shiver into the sitting member at the thought of such an idea, if you can call it that.

Seriously, some people need engage their brain before posting.

Dare I say this thread is just a Newcastle rail user using this article as a means to have a whine about suburban users on regional trains, as happens up north? It would explain how they missed the entire point of the article, that this is a perfectly legitimate thing to do at Sunbury. Certain Vline conductors have instead decided to ignore the directives passed down from the sitting member via their own management.

If I were in Vline management, I would sack the next conductor who plays up - how many times does it have to occur?
ZH836301

Looks like a sore nerve, perhaps Z is one of these Scumbury freeloaders?
By the way, I thought locations outside the urban growth boundary didn't exist? Or is that just within eastern Victoria? *Smacks forehead* Of course.

Let's just say, for the good of ALL Victorians, It's good you're NOT V/Line management, though you may be from another rail organisations.. The philosophy is right, 'Sack first, ask questions later.'
  melbtrip Chief Commissioner

Location: Annoying Orange
Looks like a sore nerve, perhaps Z is one of these Scumbury freeloaders?
By the way, I thought locations outside the urban growth boundary didn't exist? Or is that just within eastern Victoria? *Smacks forehead* Of course.

Let's just say, for the good of ALL Victorians, It's good you're NOT V/Line management, though you may be from another rail organisations.. The philosophy is right, 'Sack first, ask questions later.'
frezno

Sunbury people are not freeloaders - they pay same amount of fare for example as Riddells Creek person does.

All Myki revenue goes to PTV and all zone 2 areas of MYKI is treated as Met Fares.

So for person travel from Sunbury to Melbourne is paying a same fare as person in Riddells Creek only difference is they're leaving at Sunbury.

Or they could rebuild Rupertswood station and if Sunbury people want use V/Line service - they can use at Rupertswood.
  YM-Mundrabilla Minister for Railways

Location: Mundrabilla but I'd rather be in Narvik
Should be so simple (within reason). If train goes from your origin to your destination you should be able to travel on it. This includes North Melbourne to Spencer Street.
  Simbera Train Controller

Seems pretty simple to me. At the time of Sunbury electrification, they were forced by local lobbying to say that people could still use V/Line trains from Sunbury to Melbourne. This did happen and has been repeatedly confirmed, when someone goes to the effort to actually ask the higher-ups.

However, this is an aberration and they don't want to do it, so once they had placated the protestors by saying they would, they just continued as normal, assuming that it would all go away and by that stage the protestors would have less leverage (since it is now already built).

They may have to accept that people are allowed to board at Sunbury, but they're not going to advertise it in timetables because they don't like it. They are also likely to instruct conductors to not allow people on (or at least not bother to tell them Sunbury is the exception to the rule) because few people would press the point if questioned, and even fewer would go to the paper.

By all accounts this is what has happened. It's not in the least surprising, and I would also not be surprised if this exception goes away in coming years.
  melbtrip Chief Commissioner

Location: Annoying Orange
Seems pretty simple to me. At the time of Sunbury electrification, they were forced by local lobbying to say that people could still use V/Line trains from Sunbury to Melbourne. This did happen and has been repeatedly confirmed, when someone goes to the effort to actually ask the higher-ups.

However, this is an aberration and they don't want to do it, so once they had placated the protestors by saying they would, they just continued as normal, assuming that it would all go away and by that stage the protestors would have less leverage (since it is now already built).

They may have to accept that people are allowed to board at Sunbury, but they're not going to advertise it in timetables because they don't like it. They are also likely to instruct conductors to not allow people on (or at least not bother to tell them Sunbury is the exception to the rule) because few people would press the point if questioned, and even fewer would go to the paper.

By all accounts this is what has happened. It's not in the least surprising, and I would also not be surprised if this exception goes away in coming years.
Simbera

It will not go away -- V/Line and state government said we can use the service and so for they must do that right thing and remove the u's and d's from the timetable
  ZH836301 Chief Commissioner

Location: BleakCity
Let's just say, for the good of ALL Victorians, It's good you're NOT V/Line management, though you may be from another rail organisations.. The philosophy is right, 'Sack first, ask questions later.'
frezno

Sunbury has been restriction free since the electrification - any conductor who still hasn't figured this out is not fit to work.
  Lad_Porter Chief Commissioner

Location: Yarra Glen
The fact remains that the Us and Ds ARE in the timetable, and have only been there since electrification.  The Fares and Ticketing manual spells out in precise terms what these symbols mean.

If this part of the Fares and Ticketing manual is to be ignored, then what else can also be ignored?
  MtBeenak Train Controller

The reference to disabled passengers was clearly added for the sympathy vote.  She is smeg because she used to be able to get a v/line service to the city before they electrified the line, but now no longer can.  Ah, the age of entitlement!  The logical next extension for this is that once suburban passengers are allowed on v/line services, they will start demanding that trains stop at intermediate stations, stations where v/line services are not timetabled to stop.  

The other day I had an argument with a disabled passenger who wanted the train I was running to stop at an intermediate station, when it was clearly timetabled to run express.  I told him to catch the next, which was stopping all, but he would have none of it.  And his next comment was to threaten to complain about me.  Go ahead, I said.  Only problem is, someone will listen to him...
  ZH836301 Chief Commissioner

Location: BleakCity
The fact remains that the Us and Ds ARE in the timetable, and have only been there since electrification.  The Fares and Ticketing manual spells out in precise terms what these symbols mean.

If this part of the Fares and Ticketing manual is to be ignored, then what else can also be ignored?
Lad Porter

Groan.

If the government says I can dance around naked on the train, I can - the PTV has no say.

She is smeg because she used to be able to get a v/line service to the city before they electrified the line, but now no longer can.
MtBeenak

More likely because she can, but was denied boarding because some presumably bargeasre conductor couldn't be bothered throwing down the ramp.
  Lad_Porter Chief Commissioner

Location: Yarra Glen
Groan.

If the government says I can dance around naked on the train, I can - the PTV has no say.
ZH836301

Good point - that's because there is nothing in the F&T manual about dancing naked on a train.  (Although it would be interesting to know what the police would think of that idea.)

PTV is a part of "the government".  It is a statutory authority, and its website address contains .VIC.GOV.  If the minister decrees (should that be "says"?) that what is written in their manual is incorrect or not applicable, then he should get the documentation brought into line - in this case either amend the relevant section, or remove the D and U symbols from the timetable.  You can't have it both ways, and if there is a dispute then the written word should take precedence over something said.  

My question remains:  if that section can be ignored, what else can also be ignored?  

Sunbury passengers should be allowed on V/Line, I have no argument with that.  My concern is the conflict with the published documentation, which must be enforceable or is worth nothing.

Sponsored advertisement

Subscribers: AidanPowell

Display from:   

Quick Reply

We've disabled Quick Reply for this thread as it was last updated more than six months ago.