AT email response to our petition - from a customer liaison representative

The AT bosses didn't give us the courtesy of a direct reply and haven't addressed our concerns. You can read my response to them, and their email to me, below (I can't add it as an attachment). I am sorry it hasn't worked out for the best for our BT buses. This ends my public involvement, although there may be some final media comment. I will not be liaising any further with AT. It has been my pleasure to have your enthusiasm and support, to read your comments and to act as your representative. I hope other citizens' groups might take up the cause. Thank you all. From: CustomerLiaison (AT) [mailto:CustomerLiaison@at.govt.nz] Sent: Monday, 13 June 2016 6:51 p.m. To: kgoa Cc: David Warburton (AT); Councillor Christine Fletcher; Lester Levy (AT) Subject: Auckland Transport-CAS-318127-C0L9L6-Auckland Buses Fleet Branding Dear Karen, Thank you for your email and interest in the branding of Auckland's public transport bus fleet. The public transport operating model has been under review nationally for over 10 years to incorporate the views of funders (the Crown and Local Government), operators (the bus companies) and customers (traveling public). The objective of this review has been to improve the customers traveling experience, reduce the funders subsidy costs (a direct burden on taxes and rates) and improve opportunities and flexibility for operators. The focus in Auckland over the last five years has been on improving the network services, upgrading the bus specifications and broadening the service offering for operators to expand their tendering base. The branding strategy has been one relatively small but essential component of this large operational review. AT recognizes that, as with any change, there are some elements that some may not appreciate but are necessary to make the integrated network across Auckland operate efficiently. The standardized branding is one of those elements but is an integral part of any major city's public transport service, e.g. London's red buses, and Auckland is no longer 7 small, separate metropolitan areas. From the customer's perspective the upgrading of the buses in this process has incorporated reduced emissions / noise, improved accommodation (air con, wifi, seating) and a common brand so there is standardized identification for the traveller (local or visitor) irrespective of who is providing the service on a specific contracted route. For the operator, the standardization of brand allows the use of a common fleet across Auckland, the ability to tender for any routes, the ability to joint tender with other operators (all have the same livery), to optimize vehicle efficiency and provide resilience when vehicles have to be cross leased for emergencies. These aspects are critical as AT wanted to retain the ability to use the efficiencies of existing operators while managing the expansion of service levels and growth across Auckland. Contrary to the view of many, this approach has secured the opportunity for efficient operators to expand their business and reduce their risks through cooperative activities and joint ventures. With respect to costs and efficiencies, the roll out of new buses has been integrated into the new contracts. The brand change occurs in line with existing vehicle replacement programmes over time with the residual accommodating under new competitively priced contracts, and costs spread over contract term. Consequently, the additional costs referenced in the press are not correct as the new buses are painted anyway on delivery or when refurbishment is required. To confirm the validity of the approaches outlined above, the only area to have had the new operating model implemented to date is the Southern area. This roll out saw the tendering by a number of operators, the joint venture action of some and consequently provided a 20% increase in services with a 15% reduction in costs. This result is in the interest of the rate / tax payer and benefits the traveling public. New South Auckland services will commence on the ground under the new brand later this year. The remainder of Auckland will have the different elements of the Programme rolled out progressively over the next 18 months. We trust this provides you with a more complete picture as to why a common branding position has been taken for our bus fleet across Auckland. From: K Goa Sent: Tuesday, 14 June 2016 8:33 a.m. To: 'CustomerLiaison (AT)' Cc: 'David Warburton (AT)'; 'Councillor Christine Fletcher'; 'Lester Levy (AT)'; northcote@parliament.govt.nz; George Wood; 'Brendon Main (AT)' Subject: RE: Auckland Transport-CAS-318127-C0L9L6-Auckland Buses Fleet Branding Dear xxx, Thank you for your email. Am I to assume this is the official response to the bus petition I submitted on behalf of almost 2500 petitioners? (The petition is not mentioned anywhere). If so, by failing to respond directly, the petition recipients show a deplorable lack of courtesy in treating this submission as if it were a request to fill in a pothole or replace a street sign. I feel sorry that you have been tasked to deliver this message. The reply is a generic rehash of AT’s marketing strategy that fails in every respect to address our genuine concerns regarding cost, co-branding, community, and safety. How much of the supposed 15% cost reductions in South Auckland has been clawed out of bus drivers’ pay packets? There is deep suspicion among petitioners that drivers, who have to deal day and night with the hideous Auckland traffic (as yet unrelieved by AT) are bearing the brunt of that savings. I also suspect that the full cost of re-branding has yet to be made public. Moreover, no credible reason has been given for allowing co-branding on ferries but not on buses. If AT can roll a coat of paint over a private company’s carefully built brand and erase it forever, this is a poor excuse for democracy and a blow for private enterprise. Most importantly, the safety aspect has been completely ignored. London’s red buses are visible in all weather. AT has taken an Emperor’s New Clothes approach to the blue/grey design by spending money on invisible buses. If this causes accident, injury or worse, some of the blame can be laid at AT’s feet. It is no doubt naïve to expect the supercity’s administrators to show any regard for the strong sense of community felt in metropolitan areas, including the North Shore. BT’s drivers are known to their passengers and vice versa. This is part of the reason that BT provides superior customer service. Many bus passengers will let a rival operator’s bus go by, so they can take a BT bus instead. This is no longer an option under the new system, when all buses look the same. I do not expect, and do not want, any further comment from AT. It is clear that AT fully intends to act against the wishes of a substantial number of its customers, without the slightest bit of negotiation. Thank you for your time. Sincerely, Karen Goa