Why Doesn't Melbourne Have School Buses to Alleviate PT Squeeze?

SkMed on 20/07/2018 - 14:07
Last edited 12/08/2018 - 19:02 by 1 other user

If your are a fellow Melbourneite who catches Public transport to work each day you'll know about the dreaded the morning squeeze which returns when kids finish their holidays and head back to school. Public Transport is at peak capacity already during the school holiday season, but when kids go back to school and fill the trams its a joke.

It's becoming common for me to be 15-30 mins late to work 1 or 2 days a week now due to overcrowding outside of school holidays and i'm sure a lot of other people are in the same boat tram.

Just wondering if there is any reason why we don't have School busses running to take kids to school? A ban on school kids using PT during peak hours would help ease congestion on PT. School busses running along the same routes could be a perfect solution. There is no reason Busses couldn't actually share the tram line lanes in a lot of places too which would mean that they theoretically wouldn't even add to road congestion.

Surely i'm not the only sardine having this thought this week?

Education & Work

Comments

  • HighAndDry on 20/07/2018 - 14:12
    +79

    A ban on school kids using PT during peak hours would help ease congestion on PT.

    …

    You want to ban school kids - probably the sole demographic who literally has no options to get to school aside from PT - from using PT?

    School buses will have similar issues - more buses on the road, more congestion during peak time. Peak time is what it is.

      • HighAndDry on 20/07/2018 - 15:15
        +23

        I feel like an easier solution would just be more tram services during peak hours… if the buses are going to be running along the tram lines.

        • SkMed on 20/07/2018 - 15:52
          -5

          Well ideally, yeah, but we all know thats not going to happen!

        • idonotknowwhy on 23/07/2018 - 15:17
          +4

          @SkMed: School busses are even less likely to happen!

      • SydStrand on 20/07/2018 - 17:45
        +4

        Yes I agree, they have literally no other option which is why School busses are the perfect solution lol

        It's not. School buses are great if you're moving all kids between school and one or few stops, e.g. nearest train station. If they're commuting in from different locations, it makes no sense to have more, partially-filled school buses, or single one doing a long, weird loop to collect them all.

        • ozkiwi75 on 23/07/2018 - 20:41

          Exactly. And to add to your comment, the roads that allow buses on them are limited anyway. Standard buses can't physically fit or manoeuvre in/out of some streets as they are not designed to cater for the tracking of such a vehicles. Mini buses may be, but not normal buses.

  • retiredfeline on 20/07/2018 - 14:15
    +8

    Yes banning kids would be a blunder-buss. 😜

    Is your age showing, OP? https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/plural-of-bus

    • [Deactivated] on 20/07/2018 - 14:23
      +1

      Upvoted for pun you age-ist. Leave OP and his peppermint tea be.

    • No ONE on 21/07/2018 - 14:52

      Why did ios adblocker blocked this link?

  • dasher86 on 20/07/2018 - 14:25
    +27

    It's becoming common for me to be 15-30 mins late to work 1 or 2 days a week now due to overcrowding outside of school holidays and i'm sure a lot of other people are in the same boat tram.

    If it's 1/2 days a week, you're not leaving home early enough to cater for this.

    • SkMed on 20/07/2018 - 15:05
      -3

      I've tried leaving earlier but unfortunately its totally random and impossible to predict how the PT is holding up that particular day.

      During School holidays it doesn't seem to be an issue if trams are a little slow but as soon as kids go back to school and the trams are dragging arse it the trams will be exploding and unable to pick up passengers by the time it gets to our stop which is only about the 5th stop along the line.

      Also leaving any earlier gets me to work 30-40 mins early usually :/

      • dasher86 on 20/07/2018 - 15:19
        +9

        Better 30 minutes early than 5 minutes late.

        • donga100 on 20/07/2018 - 17:25
          +25

          @SkMed: You don't need to start work early. Relax and have a coffee, browse OzBargain, etc., if you get there early.

        • smartazz104 on 21/07/2018 - 16:29
          +8

          @SkMed: you will either get to work early or late, not right on the dot. Quit your damn complaining and make your choice. You don’t live in some fantasy land where you get to work right at 9 and finish right at 5.

        • Daabido on 22/07/2018 - 18:14
          +4

          @smartazz104: Some of us do.

        • idonotknowwhy on 23/07/2018 - 15:19
          +3

          @smartazz104: You do if you live in an apartment opposite your office :)

          Edit: sometimes I'm delayed by a surprise need to take a dump just as I'm heading to the door so even this isn't a guarantee.

        • chriskq on 23/07/2018 - 16:51
          +3

          @idonotknowwhy: very un-ozbargain of you to not make use of the company free toilet paper >_<

        • Godric on 23/07/2018 - 19:10
          +1

          @donga100:

          Why stop when work starts, browse Ozb all day!

        • SkMed on 24/07/2018 - 16:01

          @smartazz104: 9 to 5! thats just a myth isn't it!? more like 9-5.30/6 for most jobs these days.

      • MessyG on 22/07/2018 - 13:00
        +5

        Gosh…I would KILL to get to work 30-40 minutes early. I barely scrape in right on time thanks to my tiny dictator children. Seriously go in 30 minutes early, relax, drink some coffee eat a nice breakfast, chat to the other early birds and enjoy the quiet time!!

      • Cartman2530 on 22/07/2018 - 15:56
        +5

        Is your employer flexible enough so you can start and finish earlier or later? That would somewhat alleviate your problem.

    • garage sale on 23/07/2018 - 10:08
      +1

      kids classes start at 8:30 am so you might want to time your travel to before of after their time window.

      if you think it’s crowded now, wait as the population grows and it’s not just kids as the schools don’t physically grow due to lack of space, but fellow workers living in tiny apartments as we pack more people into the same footprint and these are built near transport lines.

      buses are. a limit on how many people can be packed on, the large trams carry about the equivalent of 3 bus loads but you only need 1driver.

      the route from melb uni to kew already does extra trams for the school peak times. not the worker peak times ….they are different as kids leave to get gone earlier than the worker afternoon peak hour.

      buses aren’t very effective way to move lots of people at peak times, hold few people and its 1driver per bus, trains are best for number of people per hour and number of drivers needed, the long trams are next best thing ….

      lots of schools are 1000 students , it’s a lot of buses to move that number of kids over 30 minutes …. and then what do the drivers do after that spike ….you still need to pay them.

      the pressure has to be on government for train lines and stations and number of people that can be moved per hour not “well it has tram ….so,is,serviced by public transport” …

  • chumlee on 20/07/2018 - 14:32
    +16

    You know you could get up 15 mins earlier and get an earlier tram and be at work on time.

    Some schools don't have a school bus because students can come from various suburbs so it could take a couple of hours to pick up all the students from home.

    • SkMed on 20/07/2018 - 15:07
      -7

      I have tried this, but even leaving 10 mins earlier than usual will get me to work about 30-40 mins early which is not ideal.

      If trams are running on time, or its school holidays I already get to work about 10 mins early.
      If they are slightly behind they are filled with students and im not able to board for a good 20-30 mins.

      • HighAndDry on 20/07/2018 - 15:11
        +32

        leaving 10 mins earlier than usual will get me to work about 30-40 mins early which is not ideal.

        I'm going to go out on a limb here, and I could be wrong, but being late 15-20mins regularly and getting fired for it is also not ideal.

        • HighAndDry on 20/07/2018 - 17:27

          @SkMed: I think others don't have the luxury of maybe being late every day depending on traffic so it never occurs to them. Not a knock against you - just that I think this is a situation you're in a unique situation to ponder about.

        • Lv80 on 21/07/2018 - 23:21
          +5

          @SkMed: you are in a higher position somewhere going by that and yet you have a selfish self entitled, inconsiderate perspective and view?

          Can't imagine what worked under or with you would be like!

          Get back to your little sheltered world and let the rest of us that are all trying to live in an imperfect system get on with it.

          If you want to complain, pen a letter to the Minister of Transport and come up with a better suggestion than banning a specific group of people from using PUBLIC frikkin TRANSPORT.

          Still can't believe you don't understand the very (simple) definition of such.

        • SkMed on 24/07/2018 - 16:14

          @Lv80: lol what are you talking about? Im in a mid position. I'm spitballing potential solutions for the current PT issues which are going to become catastrophic issues in the very near future unless something is done. I'm also concerned about the people further along on my tram line who currently aren't able to get on the tram at all during peak when school is back.

          …In what world is proposing/asking about running school busses along the tram line considered selfish, self entitled and inconsiderate? I've even suggested they could/should be free but obviously they can't be so said they would probably need to be priced the same as regular PT.

          You sound pretty angry and stubborn, so I'd hate to be working with you too. Also yet to hear your solutions.

      • chumlee on 20/07/2018 - 15:13
        +1

        Can you not start 30 mins earlier and finish 30 min earlier or not in your role?

        • SkMed on 20/07/2018 - 15:17
          -5

          Not really due to meetings, reviews, clients etc. I mean they are flexible and allow me to work from home 2 days a week, they also and understand what PT is like in Melbs so it's not ever going to be an actual issue with my employer, but I do feel bad rocking up 30 mins late still, and I know other people work in places which arent so laid back/relaxed about being late so more asking as a general question.

  • dasher86 on 20/07/2018 - 14:39
    +25

    Next Post-
    Why doesn't Melbourne make more people catch public transport…
    I am late to work 1 or two days a week due to traffic and road congestion.
    Just wondering if there is a reason why we don't make more people do this.

    • Emli on 21/07/2018 - 10:02
      +9

      Wherer I live, different state, many children are driven to school in 4WD and have no concept of how to catch public transport. This cycle will potentially repeat itself and the traffic on the road will only increase. I think it’s great that the children are using public transport.

      • dasher86 on 21/07/2018 - 10:55
        +2

        I agree wholeheartedly.
        They also learn many skills when doing so rather than being chauffeured around by their parents

      • btst7000 on 21/07/2018 - 12:34
        +1

        justqldthings

  • mskeggs on 20/07/2018 - 14:42
    +13

    I welcome immigrants to Australia, but for the last decade, both political parties have maintained annual immigration intakes approximately double the historical average.
    This has made it impossible to build infrastructure fast enough to cope with the spike in numbers, and has contributed to rising house prices.
    Because the vast majority of new arrivals settle in Sydney and Melbourne, the overcrowding has been most pronounced there, hence your crowded trams.

    Unfortunately, there is a reluctance to bring immigration back to historical levels (approx 100k p.a. instead of 200k p.a) because business loves the growth they get from extra customers and the downward wage pressure new arrivals bring, and politicians fear without this house prices will slump and the economy stall.

    The price we all pay is the deterioration in our quality of life, crowded services, lower wage growth and costlier housing. But business profits are up!

    • chumlee on 20/07/2018 - 15:03
      +8

      Governments spent decades underinvesting in infrastructure and now we are feeling the pain as governments play catch up.

      Japan & parts of Europe show what benefits you can have by constantly investing in infrastructure

      • HighAndDry on 20/07/2018 - 15:33
        +4

        Not the best examples, considering both Japan and Europe have been in fairly steady/serious economic decline for the better part of the last decade.

        • ozkiwi75 on 23/07/2018 - 20:52
          +1

          Agreed, but be mindful that their economic decline is not necessarily a result of investment in infrastructure. On the contrary, their economy could be in an even worse situation if their infrastructure was not as efficient as it has been built to be.

    • GG57 on 20/07/2018 - 15:42
      +3

      Agreed.
      Along with infrastructure, some cities (i.e. Melbourne) have not forward planned the diversification of businesses away from the CBD. There may be some, but not to the extent that exists in Sydney for example.

      The planning of transport infrastructure is abysmal and decades behind, and although in catch-up now, will take years to improve.

      Back to topic: just leave home earlier, get to work earlier, and leave earlier (if possible). Try to structure your meetings and other commitments accordingly. You are already working from home 2 days / week, so your employer is obviously flexible.

    • HighAndDry on 20/07/2018 - 15:43
      +4

      and politicians fear without this house prices will slump and the economy stall.

      I think this is the major factor. As Keating put it, "It's the economy, stupid." People are far more tolerant of small deterioration in our quality of life so long as their networth (mostly locked up in property) continue to rise. The next few years is going to be interesting because the property market is being hammered by the credit crunch by big banks, and also going to be affected by the slowdown in the Chinese economy.

      • Cartman2530 on 22/07/2018 - 16:04

        That's true, only if you look at housing as an investment. People that just buy a house to live in (as it should be) it won't affect them as they are in the long game and not looking to sell for decades.

        • HighAndDry on 23/07/2018 - 09:54
          +1

          Not entirely. Even many owner-occupiers, especially ones who don't have other investment properties, will have much of their wealth locked up in their home and they certainly will care. Even if it's not an investment, it can be useful by way of redraw facilities, refinancing, etc to unlock equity if the value goes up.

        • Cartman2530 on 23/07/2018 - 16:19

          @HighAndDry: Ok, since you put it that way I'll agree with you, as I should have said wouldn't affect AS MUCH in my previous post.

          I don't plan on selling my home to make a profit, that's for my kids when I pass away. I also don't plan on redrawing/refinancing using the equity I have against my place as its crazy to get into more debt than you need to. I feel that it was crazy getting a loan in the first place, as I'm really against loans of any kind but it was sort of a necessary evil to get a home in the first place.

          Most people don't need to redraw against the equity of their home, they want things and that can get dangerous if there is easy money around. Hopefully, the royal commission into the banks will slow this flow of easy money and get more people to live within their means instead of splashing out getting stuff on credit to keep up with their friends who are doing the same.

    • donga100 on 20/07/2018 - 17:15
      +2

      From an economic/infrastructure perspective immigrants are ideal as they are ready to work and pay taxes immediately without tax dollars needing to go towards childcare/schooling like children born in Australia. They just need to be selected appropriately to ensure they are capable of contributing towards society.

      • HighAndDry on 20/07/2018 - 17:40
        +5

        Even better, they pay full fees for uni courses here, which subsidizes local students.

      • mskeggs on 20/07/2018 - 18:10

        Sure, but even if they are all rocket scientists if you bring a million into Sydney ang Melbourne in a short time there will be over crowding and market distortions.

        • HighAndDry on 20/07/2018 - 18:11
          +8

          Well… if they were all rocket scientists, we could try colonizing the Moon and Mars……..

      • arescarti42 on 23/07/2018 - 21:48
        -1

        That only works if you ignore the cost of immigration on society. Every new immigrant needs added investment in public infrastructure such as roads, public transport, hospitals, schools, etc. The investment is needed up front, despite the fact they've contributed nothing at that point.

        First generation migrant families also have more children than the incumbent population, so actually place more demand on childcare/schooling. In addition to kids, once they have citizenship, most migrant families will then try and get two sets of elderly parents into the country, who draw on health care and age pensions, despite never having contributed any tax.

    • Lv80 on 21/07/2018 - 23:25
      +1

      What has immigrants got to do with a lack of supply in the public transport system?

      This isn't an immigration issue. It's a lack of governance prioritising PEOPLE above MONEY.

      It's about government not putting in policy that dictates that infrastructure MUST be invested in all the time.

      Again…this has nothing to do with immigration.

      FFS.

      Infrastructure is never thought about till it's too late. Infrastructure and services are always updated for the current capacity rather than future proofing it.

      Not to mention we are still not prioritising active transport, and redeveloping and redesigning cities instead of allowing them to keep sprawling.

      • mskeggs on 22/07/2018 - 12:27
        +7

        I am sympathetic to the view that infrastructure needs to be upgraded to support population increase, of course.

        But if the cinema is full, selling more admission tickets while complaining that the management should have built extra screens to support demand isn't fixing the problem. The people who can't fit into the theatre are justifiably angry that the management kept selling tickets after the crowd outstripped the capacity.

        Since the mining boom, net overseas migration has increased to approximately double the long term average. In broad numbers, about 200,000 people extra each year compared to about 100,000. This graph shows the jump in the light blue line (and figures have remained similar in following years).
        https://www.homeaffairs.gov.au/about/corporate/information/f…
        There has also been a large jump in short term numbers via student and 457 style work visas.

        Australia has had a long term migration program based around sustained increases of around 100,000 people. When the government doubled this, they did not direct double the funding to infrastructure growth, and they still aren't.
        It is reasonable to say the answer is increased funding for infrastructure, that would address the problem after the lag as new projects are completed.

        But it is also true to say that maintaining historically high migration without that increase will strain the existing systems.
        So why not scale back immigration to historical averages rather than adding more people to the problem while infrastructure catches up?

        As I said, I welcome new immigrants. But there are plenty who are ambivalent or worse, and they also feel the over-crowding. This leaves the atmosphere ripe for One Nation etc.

        "Again…this has nothing to do with immigration."
        This is nonsense. You are pretending that increases in immigration do not exacerbate over-crowding. That is just untrue whether you say FFS or not. By all means, redirect spending to infrastructure (from where is to be debated) but don't pretend pushing extra people into a crowded system can't be partially addressed by pushing fewer. Putting your fingers in your ears and pretending high immigration isn't worsening quality of life, especially in Sydney and Melbourne, is doing nothing to address the problem.
        And by not addressing the problem you are boosting the prospects of One Nation et al.

        • Lv80 on 22/07/2018 - 19:22
          +7

          I'll preface what I say but stating that I don't agree with increasing population or that a capitalist society where more people are needed to feed the beast and investment is something we should be aspiring to, all for the sake of jobs and growth.

          But… we are neither lacking in funds nor land, and so people are not the issue. Government foresight and investment ahead of capacity has been lacking for some time.

          There is no cap on city boundaries nor incentives/disincentives for companies to base outside of big cities/not base inside them. So people live further out and all still migrate to the one centre point. Train lines that have been spoken about being electrified for 30 years are still not so. New estates and growth corridors have no new train lines to service them. Shall I go on?

          None of this has to do with a huge influx of people. It has to do with government not prioritising peoples and societies happiness till it's at breaking point and people are beyond fed up.

          I live in said area where that electrification of a train line has been spoken about. And this is in an area that is going gang busters with new estates.

          Planning is a wonderful thing and would take into consideration buffer zones. IE build a 3 lane highway to begin with instead of a two lane highway, especially when every other highway is now 4-5 lanes wide and not capable of servicing current vehicles.

          Like most things, immigration has doubled every 10 years. So 190k now. 10 years ago 120k. 10 before that 60k. Government actively promote and encourage tourism and student visas and temp residency. Not to mention their desire to 'grow' Australia all for GDP.

          Immigration isn't the issue. Planning and design is.

          We had a massive increase in migration in the late 80's. And as a % of total population a lot more than currently…with no issue.

          1984–85 54,500
          1985–86 80,000
          1986–87 101,700
          1987–88 122,100
          1988–89 124,700
          1989–90 120,200
          1990–91 112,200
          1991–92 98,900
          1992–93 67,900
          1993–94 62,800
          1994–95 76,500
          1995–96 82,500
          1996–97 73,587
          1997–98 66,840
          1998–99 67,821
          1999–00 70,237
          2000–01 80,597
          2001–02 93,054
          2002–03 108,072
          2003–04 114,362
          2004–05 120,064
          2005–06 142,933
          2006–07 148,200
          2007–08 158,630
          2008–09 171,318
          2009–10 168,623
          2010–11 168,685
          2011–12 184,998
          2012–13 190,000
          2013–14 190,000
          2014–15 189,097
          2015–16 189,770
          2016–17 183,608

          Planning.

        • ozkiwi75 on 23/07/2018 - 21:07

          @Lv80: Unfortunately we live in a society where the planners and engineers are controlled and silenced by the politicians. We therefore end up with infrastructure that gives short term political results, irrelevant of the required long term planning that has been advised by professionals.

          The reality is that the practitioners working in this industry are not going to bite the hand that feeds them. That is why you don't hear about it in the press. Most press releases to do with infrastructure are by the govt. You would be utterly shocked if you knew the wastage of public money that goes on in infrastructure.

        • arescarti42 on 23/07/2018 - 22:04

          @Lv80:

          The structure of the economy has changed since the 1980s. Population growth was easy then because the biggest share of jobs was in manufacturing, which was distributed throughout the suburbs, where people lived, and cities were much smaller and less built out.

          Manufacturing is now dead, and all the jobs are in managerial and professional roles, which are located in the central city. To grow at a high rate now requires massive retrofitting of existing suburbs to either bring housing close to jobs, or huge expensive railways and freeways to make it easier for people commute. Either option is slow and extremely costly.

        • ozkiwi75 on 24/07/2018 - 22:02

          @arescarti42: It's a double whammy. It's true that the economy has changed since the 80's. But there was also more residual capacity left in the infrastructure back in the day. Many bridges for example were over designed to last beyond a typical bridge design life horizon. Meaning that when it was built, for a fraction of extra cost, the next generation didn't need to fork out to rebuild it because it had plenty of life left in it.

          Now a days things are built to the nearest cent so that politicians can boast they've saved us enough $ to get re-elected, with no incentive to ensure it doesn't need to be rebuilt in a decade's time, by which time co-incidentally they're not in office any more!

      • arescarti42 on 23/07/2018 - 21:59

        State and federal governments are investing billions and billions of dollars in infrastructure every year, more than has ever been invested before. We'd have to add an extra zero or two to the infrastructure budget to even come close to meeting the demand for new infrastructure, and governments don't have the money.

        Even if they did, we don't actually have the capacity to build at the rate we need to meet population growth - we're already at the point where there's so much construction going across the country on that every additional big project just pushes up the cost of materials, project managers, and engineers, and makes new infrastructure even more expensive.

        Planning also can't solve this problem. Check out infrastructure Australia's recent publication of planning for population
        http://infrastructureaustralia.gov.au/policy-publications/pu…

        Under every scenario they modelled (increasing density, transport oriented development, sprawl) traffic congestion and transport delays ballooned.

        We simply cannot manage population growth at this rate and keep our quality of living in tact.

    • MessyG on 22/07/2018 - 13:03
      -4

      Are there any complaints on Ozbargain lately that someone doesn't link to immigration? It's getting as common as bikies and luxury vehicle brags.

      • Daabido on 22/07/2018 - 19:45
        +4

        And why do you think that may be? Perhaps people are concerned by the level of immigration.

        • MessyG on 23/07/2018 - 09:16
          -2

          Yes and it devalues their point when they get hysterical about it and blame it for everything.

    • Thaal Sinestro on 22/07/2018 - 21:13
      -4

      Australia is full. No more people. Australia has a large land mass, but 95% is desert that nobody will live in. Australia, the dryiest continet with the most infertile soil.

  • Quantumcat on 20/07/2018 - 14:43

    Go to work earlier

    • SkMed on 20/07/2018 - 15:58

      So leave earlier when school is on and arrive at work 30-40 mins early every day to avoid maybe being late 1 or 2 days a week while school is on?

      That would mean leaving home at 7.30.
      Arriving to work at about 8.20ish.
      waiting around for 40 mins.
      Starting work at 9.
      finish at 6.
      back home around 7.

      Thats not really practical or healthy :/

      • Quantumcat on 20/07/2018 - 16:06

        Why finish at 6? If you start earlier go home earlier. It doesn't hurt you. Why can't you start before 9? Is the office locked up before then? Most people start at 8.30am where I work (I start around 7.30), office opens at 7am.
        If it takes longer to get to work though you would just leave home that much earlier to allow for it, doesn't mean waiting around anywhere.

        • SkMed on 20/07/2018 - 17:18
          -3

          I assume you don't catch PT at peak hour? Leaving 10 mins early does not equal arriving 10 mins earlier. one day it could mean arriving 40 mins early, and the next day arriving 5 mins early. PT at peak hour is horrendously unpredictable, made even more so when school starts.

          Work gives me a little flexibility on start/finish times, but not enough that I can just start and leave early every day. That would mess with the whole business, meetings, reviews, other peoples schedules, clients etc.

        • Quantumcat on 20/07/2018 - 17:38
          +1

          @SkMed: Where I live it doesn't matter what time I take the bus, it's always about half an hour except the early bus (6.30) which takes 20 minutes, I guess cause there's less people to pick up. So I don't really have the same experience as you, maybe I shouldn't judge. Bottom line is though, public transport is cheaper than driving and if you want to enjoy more money in your pocket you just have to make allowances for the unpredictability. If it doesn't meet your needs then you'll need to look at other options (eg driving or participating in a carpool).

        • HighAndDry on 20/07/2018 - 17:41
          +13

          @SkMed: I think you've fallen for (a variant of?) sunk cost fallacy. If leaving 10mins earlier could mean getting to work 40mins earlier…. you've effectively gained 30 free minutes for nothing.

          Think of it as wasting 30mins less on PT and getting to work on time.

        • SkMed on 21/07/2018 - 15:41
          -1

          @Quantumcat:

          Not here, I go through the city and out the other side. Also PT is actually a lot faster than driving on my route (when PT is running as it should). Parking is a major issue around work which has had me driving around in circles for a good 30 or 40 mins the few times and then still having to run down to move the car every 2 or 4 hours so there aren't really any other options available.

        • Lv80 on 21/07/2018 - 23:28

          @Quantumcat:

          Ride a bike. Buy an electric bike if you are too lazy.
          You live 30 minutes in peak hour from work. This isn't a big journey.

          I live an hours drive from work in peak hour and can ride to work in 45minutes.

          If a transport option doesn't meet your needs then you need to look at other options.

        • Quantumcat on 22/07/2018 - 08:37
          +1

          @Lv80: Did you mean to reply to OP? I love taking the bus, and I cycle a couple of times a week when it isn't so cold.

        • Lv80 on 22/07/2018 - 09:26
          +1

          @Quantumcat: I did sorry @Quantumcat :-(

        • SkMed on 23/07/2018 - 12:37

          @Lv80: I'd love to ride, I used to pretty much every day when I worked closer to home until the office moved further away then it became too far to ride. As I said earlier I'd happily take a 20 percent pay cut to be able to work within a reasonable riding distance to work again :(

          Also not sure where you got the impression i'm 30 mins from work at peak. Im close to an hour, sometimes more at peak.

      • GG57 on 20/07/2018 - 16:17
        +2

        Why would you wait around for 40 mins? Surely there is something to be done, even if it is preparation for the day, or having a coffee.

        I'm not sure about this discussion:
        - you raised the 'issue' of too many people on public transport (that appears to correlate with school terms) at the time that you (and a lot of the rest of the population) want to travel.
        - you already get to work from home 2 days / week.
        - if delayed, maybe 1 - 2 (of the other) days, you can be 'late' by about 15-30 mins.
        - you are not prepared to travel outside of that defined time.

        Maybe look at some other solutions, such as:
        - move to another residence closer to work.
        - change employment to something closer to home or with different hours of work.

        • SkMed on 20/07/2018 - 17:13
          -2

          If you catch public transport around peak hour you will know that the difference of 10 mins (either side) can sometimes equal out to be arriving 30-40 mins early/late depending on time, distance, PT on that particular day etc.

          I work from home 2 days a week usually but its flexible, I was just using that as an average to avoid confusion!

          Yeah I wish I could move to another job closer to home, I'm even prepared to take a 20 percent pay cut to be somewhere closer so I could ride to work. However unfortunately all the jobs in my industry are in the south which is something I did not realise until too late in my career and moving south side just isn't an option, so PT and renting it is for ever! Just thinking of ways the PT could be improved.

        • SkMed on 20/07/2018 - 17:19
          -1

          Also on the good days I already arrive 10 mins early, and I already get breakfast on the way to work. Not really any prep to do in my job.

        • Quantumcat on 20/07/2018 - 17:45

          @SkMed: What do you do for a job? If you're renting and don't have dependents, and you can do your line of work in the public service, I recommend moving to Canberra. You can cycle to work from nearly anywhere and there are bike paths everywhere (I'll start riding to work again once it warms up), the buses are pretty predictable, and at least in the non-upper levels you get flextime so you can show up whenever you want and leave whenever you want within reason. If you have loads of work and need to stay late to finish it that just means you can leave early another day when you don't have a lot of work.

        • SkMed on 21/07/2018 - 15:43

          @Quantumcat: haha the only places where I can work in Aus is really Sydney or Melbourne, Nd since my whole life is in Melbourne I have no desire to move. Thanks for the suggestion though.

  • JimmyF on 20/07/2018 - 15:33
    +8

    It's becoming common for me to be 15-30 mins late to work 1 or 2 days a week now

    You mean you fail to plan enough time to get to work 1 or 2 days a week.

    School busses running along the same routes could be a perfect solution

    So when they cut back the PT buses and change them to school only buses, you'll be complaining that the school buses are empty and the PT buses are full.

    FYI there are school only buses around. They are arranged by the school.

    But seriously, the entitlement of not wanting to 'share' your PUBLIC transport is amazing.

    • SkMed on 20/07/2018 - 15:40
      -1

      Problem is that its unpredictable. Leaving at the same time could mean a difference of 30-40 mins depending on how the PT is running that particular day, I've just noticed its never an issue until kids go back to school which is why I thought dedicated school busses might be a solution, especially as PT users are increasing so rapidly (There are 5 apartment buildings going up around my tram stop right now, so when they are finished im dreading my commute)

      • JimmyF on 20/07/2018 - 19:26
        +2

        Problem is that its unpredictable

        Thats the life of PT in general.

        But school hours are VERY predictable

        • SkMed on 21/07/2018 - 15:44
          -1

          Well you'd think that… Until PT is running behind and the school kids with it!

        • JimmyF on 21/07/2018 - 15:57

          @SkMed:

          Until PT is running behind

          Again, Thats the life of PT in general, it rarely runs on time. This isn't Japan!

    • Lv80 on 21/07/2018 - 23:29
      +3

      "But seriously, the entitlement of not wanting to 'share' your PUBLIC transport is amazing."

      DAMN STRAIGHT!! Way too much entitlement going on in Australia these days. So well said!!!

  • onetwothreefour on 20/07/2018 - 16:26
    +3

    Just leave home earlier so you are not late. If you don't want to start work early then go get a coffee or read a book or browse Ozbargain, it's not a big deal.

    • SkMed on 20/07/2018 - 17:20
      -2

      As mentiond above. 30-40 mins early to work each day isn't really ideal. And I do those things for about an hour on the tram already! haha

      • Quantumcat on 20/07/2018 - 17:49

        Can you negotiate with your boss to start and finish earlier? If you go to work before all the kids go to school it would probably be predictable travel time right?

        • SkMed on 21/07/2018 - 15:45

          Not really. Most of the time I'm relying on working with other people as part of a team and need to be there for meetings, reviews etc so it wouldn't really work.

        • obiwanmy on 22/07/2018 - 08:55
          +2

          @SkMed:

          But going to work 30 mins late existingly worked for your team … looks like you mean you prefer others to wait for you than you waiting for others - is that correct ?

          No offense mate but I am glad I don’t work for you.

      • onetwothreefour on 20/07/2018 - 18:36
        +1

        30-40 mins early to work each day isn't really ideal.

        Neither is arriving late so often.

        • RadioShack on 21/07/2018 - 09:25
          +1

          It’s only 30/40 minutes. You could actually see it as an opportunity to get more work done and progress in your job.

        • SkMed on 21/07/2018 - 15:47

          @RadioShack: Not really, there isn't much else I can do most of the time, sure occasionally O can get a head start on a project, but most of the time my job requires collaboration etc.

      • smartazz104 on 21/07/2018 - 16:32

        Well you can do the stuff at work that you do on the tram, it doesn’t really matter.

  • Mike88 on 20/07/2018 - 19:49
    +5

    Always someone else’s fault you’re late.
    No one ever wants to take responsibility for their faults these days

    • Specialist Diaz on 21/07/2018 - 18:30

      I am late to work almost every day and it's totally my fault!

  • ToxicPhatGrunt on 21/07/2018 - 09:06

    Buses down tram lines is the dream. It works fine outside crown, just expand it and create new routes. Problem is the number of buses that the private operators have available is no where near enough for the city

    • SkMed on 21/07/2018 - 15:49

      Huh, I didn't know they had that. Interesting. Well I'm sure on my tram line it would only take 4 or 5 school busses at peak hour to move the kids off PT at peak hour so shouldn't really be a massive issue I'd imagine. It's going to have to happen, that or a lot more trams on at peak hour, as the lines are about to be filled with several apartment buildings full of people which are popping up everywhere.

  • RadioShack on 21/07/2018 - 09:22
    +2

    My son gets a private chartered bus to school and it’s ridiculously expensive so I understand why kids would use PT. You could always leave a bit earlier in the morning to miss the rush.

    • Daabido on 22/07/2018 - 18:19
      +1

      It would be expensive to have your own private chartered bus each day.

  • konradthecat on 21/07/2018 - 09:31

    Geelong has ptv school buses. Why do you think Melbourne wouldn’t?

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join