TransLink Feedback/Customer Relations.

[Cazza]

The point of this thread is to highlight the issues regarding the TransLink Response Team. I'll kick it off.

Last Sunday (19th March), I sent TransLink some feedback regarding the addition of a morning Route S788 (there is only an afternoon S788 running from The Gap State School to the City via The Gap High, Waterworks Rd/Musgrave Rd).
The route can be found here -> https://jp.translink.com.au/plan-your-journey/timetables/bus/t/s788/inbound/2017-03-27?pageDirection=After&pageTo=0000.
So, as I said, I sent some feedback regarding a morning service to be introduced. Here it is:

"Can we please have a morning route s788? With the new timetables, outbound 380 gets to The Gap Village at 7:57 and 8:32 am. This means that if we catch the 7:26am (leaving Wickham Tce) 380, we get to school early (7:57am) with 40 mins to the official starting time. But if we were to catch the bus arriving at 8:32, it could be delayed, cancelled etc and then we wouldn't get to school on time. If a morning s788 was introduced arriving at The Gap Village at around 8:15-8:20am, then we are 99.99% guaranteed to get to school on time. You can check the patronage levels on both these morning services (both quite high) and look at the afternoon s788 patronage (most days, it is almost full). I don't see why this can't be introduced. Once, I was waiting at Stop 16 on Waterworks Rd at around 7:50 one morning and counted 4 not in service buses heading outbound in 6 mins. If you are still in doubt, you could trial the service for the rest of the year. Please, it would help us Gap kids out immensely"

*Note: I would have said more/gone into more detail if there wasn't the 1000 character limit.

So after waiting 6 days (5 of those were working days), I finally got a response yesterday (Saturday, 25th March). And it's the same response structure I get every single flipping time I send feedback:

"Dear Callum,

Thank you for contacting TransLink with your feedback

I would like to advise you that your comments have been formally registered and forwarded to our Network Planning Team. We have requested that your request for an additional S788 service is reviewed and considered for future changes.

Customer feedback is very important to TransLink and this information will be used to help improve our services.  Although a further response may not be possible on this occasion, you can be assured that your comments have been sent to the appropriate area within TransLink for their attention.

We're here to take your feedback 24/7 online or at 13 12 30. You may also wish to download TransLink's free mobile application, MyTransLink, where you can plan your journeys and so much more. SEQ customers can also access Real-time information to check their next bus, train, ferry or trams predicted departure time and customise service notifications.

Kind regards

Theo
TransLink Customer Relations"

Well thank you very much Theo, that helps me so very much... This has not helped me one bit. In fact, I am more p*ssed off then before I sent this feedback because:
A- TransLink use the same structure that they respond to every piece of feedback:

Paragraph 1- "Thank you for taking time out of your life that you have just wasted and will never get back because you just sent feedback to a brick wall"
Paragraph 2- "We have read your feedback and we can't be bothered changing our network because we are stubborn and think that it works perfectly fine because we sit in air-con offices all day and drive home to our luxury homes so I will try and sound as friendly as possible so you still use our overpriced and inefficient services"
Paragraph 3- "Because you haven't sent feedback before, here is where to send feedback. We also have an app that we are making it sound REALLY good to take away from the fact that I have given you a hopeless response"
Paragraph 4- "Thank you for wasting you time, Love From *insert a random name that we haven't used in a while* xoxo

And B- You are always talking about sending the information off to the "appropriate area within TransLink". WHY CAN'T IT JUST GO THERE IN THE FIRST PLACE!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Australia Post have been doing it since 1809:
1) Mail comes into a distribution centre (feedback)
2) It gets sorted out (customer service people within TransLink)
And then 3) It is distributed to its final destination (appropriate area within TransLink).

Then, they can give you an actual response with reasons why/why not that service change is viable. Telling me that "your request will be reviewed and considered for future changes" is absolute BS (and if it's not, then we will have to wait another 20 years for the next network change). The last bus network change was in 2012. It was more of "let's cut services to increase our profits and not add or change any services because they run 100% perfectly".

I am not annoyed that a morning S788 has not been introduced, I am annoyed at the fact that TransLink aren't listening to the people that keep their organisation alive. If the people that use your services are asking for change and you don't provide it, they will go back to their cars.  The public have been calling for a bus network review for years now an nothing at all is being done about it^. Sending feedback to TransLink is like talking to a brick wall: it will just come straight back.

^Yes, I am aware that TransLink are just the overall network managers and private companies (including BCC) actually own the vehicles/infrastructure.

Ok, rant over. Who's next?

[#Metro]

Hi Cazza,

TL gets loads of feedback every week. They are not even really TL but a contract company of call centre staff who know whoopee about public transport.

All they do is register the feedback in databases or forward it to the relevant area (who probably also put it in databases) where it will sit until someone decides to do a network review (which could be years).

Maybe someone who has worked at TL can enlighten you about what happens to feedback there.

What I would suggest is get some people on board. If you have a group of people, that will make your case stronger. I would suggest (a) getting formal support from whatever schools are in the area (this could be a letter or something in the school newsletter (b) getting endorsement from you local BCC councillor and State MP. And maybe having some kind of Change.org petition to go with it.

If you have a twitter account, you could also try tweeting the BCC Deputy Mayor as well.

Almost all buses are in service during the peak hour, so council would probably need to buy another bus ($500 000?) and then pay for whatever operating costs are associated with that as well. So you can see why they hold out.

But this really shows how badly bus reform really is needed. A lot of route km will be freed up with bus reform, and that freed up distance can then be used to create services elsewhere on the network.

[Stillwater]

The governance of replies is really quite rigid.  There are 'approved words' that cover most responses, and these are signed off at high levels within an organisation, or even at Ministerial office level.  A bureaucrat who uses the approved words in a response knows that if they use those words (even though it doesn't answer your query) they won't get into trouble.

They are also required to reply within a certain timeframe, so they don't use the resources to actually research what you propose.  Therefore, you get a vague response such as 'this matter has been referred to the appropriate section'.  The people who respond to you are there to protect others in the organisation (network planners etc) from pesky public inquiries.  Those people can get on with their real jobs, while some sort of Claytons interaction occurs at the feedback level.

Most likely, the request you make feeds into a spreadsheet, where your inquiry is a line item.  The spreadsheet gets dragged out at the next review for the area concerned, or for the network as a whole.  If five other people register a similar inquiry, the spreadsheet reflects times 5.  They get somewhat concerned if there is a significant number of complaints about a thing -- then they might investigate.

And, if they feel a specific response is needed in such circumstances, some new approved words are formulated.

So, the response you get back might read: 'As to your specific query, TransLink will review your suburb's network needs next year.  Monitor your local media for how you can participate'.  blah. blah, blah.

They are not so much concerned about the specifics of your feedback, just that so many pieces of feedback were received and all (or 99 per cent) were responded to within the set timeframe.  The quality and the relevance of the feedback to you is not important to TransLink.  Taken to the extreme, you could get a response that says 'the sky is blue' and that would be registered as a response having been given.

[Cazza]

Thanks Metro and Stillwater, you have both told me some new information as to how it works (I sort of realised how if the issue only gets raised once then it isn't very important and will generally ignore it). The main thing that really gets me is, as Stillwater said, that they have to respond and then can tick that off the list and never come back to you. I just find that frustrating.

Thank again though 

[#Metro]

The governance of replies is really quite rigid.  There are 'approved words' that cover most responses, and these are signed off at high levels within an organisation, or even at Ministerial office level.  A bureaucrat who uses the approved words in a response knows that if they use those words (even though it doesn't answer your query) they won't get into trouble.

They are also required to reply within a certain timeframe, so they don't use the resources to actually research what you propose.  Therefore, you get a vague response such as 'this matter has been referred to the appropriate section'.  The people who respond to you are there to protect others in the organisation (network planners etc) from pesky public inquiries.  Those people can get on with their real jobs, while some sort of Claytons interaction occurs at the feedback level.

Exactly. Any kind of statement in any public organisation (private too) will have censors/sanitation department rip out all the meaning and leave you with something the resembles Home Brand cheese slices.

On the other hand, there is no charge to give feedback to TL, and thus they are deluged with lots of 'noise' and nuisance enquiries. There needs to be some way to deal with that volume of feedback.

[aldonius]

As always, Yes Minister is recommended viewing for making sense of bureaucratic organisations.