Article: There was very nearly blood on the tracks

[ozbob]

From the Melbourne Age click here!

There was very nearly blood on the tracks

There was very nearly blood on the tracks

    * Gabriella Coslovich
    * May 16, 2009

THIS week I committed an offence. As befitted my heinous behaviour, I was detained, my name and address was noted, my driver's licence scrutinised.

I refused to give my private address. Yes, I'll admit, I had a hissy fit. Body shaking with indignation, face screwed up tight like a shrew, like a virago, I eye-balled and argued with the officer who had dared pull me aside.

He did not lose his composure. He insisted, infuriatingly, on observing the law to the letter, on exercising his state-sanctioned powers. He phoned The Age.

"Does Gabriella Coslovich work there? She has committed a ticketing offence."

The words made me squirm. The shame of it. I felt like a child who had been caught shoplifting. My offence was rushing for the 9.10am Balaclava train (incredibly, running on time) and, having assessed my likelihood of missing it and the next train being cancelled, deciding to jump on and validate my 10-trip ticket at my terminating station, Flagstaff. Several other commuters made the same split-second call. "Don't worry about it," I heard one shout as the train doors began their nerve-rattling guillotine beep.

I had a premonition of trouble as, in full view of ticket inspectors on the other side of the barriers at Flagstaff, I approached the woman at the turnstile and explained that I didn't have time to validate at Balaclava and that I would like to do so now. I made no attempt to jump the turnstile, to cut and run, to evade my fare. Didn't trouble her at all ? she was about to validate my ticket, except a uniformed and badge-holding public transport authorised officer put an end to that. "Could I see your ticket please?"

"Why? What's the problem?" I said, bristling with tension, with the frustration of a commuter who benignly tolerates delays, cancellations, crammed and stinky carriages, and goes back for more, day after day, only to be hit with price hikes for shoddy service.

Yes, I had "attitude", as the officer put it. An attitude not too dissimilar, in fact, to that of a Connex train driver who, this week, when approached by a Connex boss and asked whether he was the driver, said: "Yeah, and what's it got to do with you?" The boss merely wanted to applaud him for the helpful announcement he had made.

The driver's response was emblematic of a system in disarray, of a widespread fall in morale. And the ticket inspectors who stalk the system have become emblematic insults to the concept of civil society, and to the vexations regularly faced by commuters.

In no uncertain terms, I expressed the absurdity of the situation. Yes, I admit I used the word "crap" to describe the public transport system. Here we were, discussing the finer points of punctuality, the need to be responsible for one's lateness. Had he checked Connex's record lately? I stood and argued. Dammit, if I was going to get a fine, I was going to make them earn every cent.

Last year, $7.9 million was collected in fines by Connex ticket inspectors. But it is the State Government that sets the rules, imposes the fines (which start at $167) and reaps the money, which goes into consolidated revenue. For all I know, those millions could have been used to plug the hemorrhaging grand prix, or fund those cryptic State Government ads spruiking the public transport system with an image of drifting clouds and the slogan, "It's part of the plan" ? in effect a one-finger salute to the train-using public.

The ticket inspector could have used his discretion. Instead, he confiscated my ticket ? despite my protest that it still had six unused fares on it (I was told that the ticket didn't belong to me, but to the Department of Transport) ? and I can expect a $167 fine in the mail. One hundred and sixty seven dollars. For running late. If only transport users could take such immediate, punctilious action for tardy or disappeared trains. If only we could storm the office of Transport Minister Lynne Kosky, detain her, ask for her credentials, and demand she explain why the system is still so stuffed. But while the public transport authorised officers have many rights, including the right to arrest you, commuters have few. My ticket has been retained as "evidence" of my offence, and may one day be returned to me after its journey through the bureaucratic bowels of the Department of Transport. I'm not holding my breath.

I had to laugh the following morning when I read the "thought of the day" pinned to the noticeboard at Balaclava station. We have some truly wonderful Connex workers there of a morning, one in particular who undertakes her duties with the conviction and good cheer of a head nurse managing an emergency ward. How she delights in blowing her whistle and hurrying us up the path, even helping us validate when we're running late. Oh, and the thought of the day? "Grab a chance and you won't be sorry for a might have been."

Gabriella Coslovich is a senior writer.

[ozbob]

 

From the Melbourne Age click here!

Ticketing discretion would be a fine thing

Ticketing discretion would be a fine thing
Gabriella Coslovich
May 23, 2009

LAST week's column about being nabbed by Connex's inflexible ticket inspectors hit such a nerve that a second instalment seems necessary, which won't at all please straight-talking George from Grovedale who believes I should consider the trees before I write, or Len from Box Hill, who said that if I decided to speed down the emergency lane of the "Monash freeway car park" and got sprung I wouldn't be blaming Roads Minister Tim Pallas for traffic congestion. Too right, I'd expect to be fined for endangering people's lives. Reckless driving doesn't compare ? in any case, speeding fines vary according to the size of your vehicle and the speed at which you are caught, starting with $141.81 for cars going no more than 10 km/h above the limit. With Connex it's one fine fits all ? $167 for "making a journey without a valid ticket".

Mark Paterson, head of corporate affairs at Connex, was also mightily unimpressed and judged my column self-indulgent. Perhaps my motive had less to do with egotism and more with a desire to draw attention to the absurdly excessive fines set by the State Government and the lack of discretion with which they are enforced by ticket inspectors.

"Not all of us have access to a column in The Age to vent our spleens," Mr Paterson wrote.

All the more reason to speak on behalf of those who don't and, judging from some of the responses, they are out there with their own tales of petty bureaucracy gone mad, relishing the chance for a vicarious venting.

Such as Ned, a team leader for a health insurance fund: "There are many people out there who have had enough, not only with the service provided ? but the added insult of being fined like you were for what really is a very minor incident. If you were fined a lesser amount for not validating your ticket ($50 for example) perhaps it would be easier to take."

It would.

Last week I wrote about my encounter with Connex's Authorised Officers, those folk in ill-boding coats who reap millions for the State Government by pursuing fare evaders, a role they perform with astonishing obduracy. I was running late for my train, had a 10-fare ticket in hand, with seven fares left, and decided to jump on the train and validate at Flagstaff station, as I've done on occasion without punishment, but just as the Connex worker at the Flagstaff barrier was about to validate my ticket for me, an Authorised Officer called me over and confiscated my ticket. I expect a fine in the mail..

According to Mr Paterson, fare evasion has decreased because of "improved patrol practices and better customer understanding of the system" and that if people don't believe a fine is appropriate "there are avenues of appeal open to all".

Sounds great in theory, but not so appealing in practice, as one reader, Gerry from Reservoir, found. Gerry spends $116 a month on Connex fares and has been commuting nearly every day for the past 30 years.

"I have had my ticket inspected, very regularly and never had an issue. The week before Easter, in error, I validated a spare daily ticket instead of my weekly ticket purchased the previous Friday. I didn't travel on Tuesday but on the Wednesday the inspectors boarded and it was only then that this error came to light. Despite my explanation a report was made which resulted in a fine. I wrote to ask for a review ? but there was no leniency or discretion shown despite my explanation or me not having history, so the fine stood ? I know that I may do this again as I am human and getting older and am really concerned for the aged pensioner who has to pay the $167 fine any time they get muddled."

Sebastian from Kensington was livid about unreliable technology: "How often have I turned up at a ticket machine with no cash only to find that it would not recognise my bank card and do an EFTPOS transaction? How many times has a validating machine failed to properly validate my ticket and it is me who is penalised by being forced to apply for refunds in writing ? What is my recourse in these situations? What compensation am I entitled to? None!"

Brenda O'Keefe pointed out the inconsistencies in our impossibly fragmented system ? had it been a tram I was running late for I could have validated on board. Connex, she said, should have a validation point in each train carriage.

"I hope Gabriella takes this matter to court or wherever a public transport user goes to challenge a fine ? I would follow her progress because I would love to know how a person goes about doing this!" she wrote.

What do you think Mr Paterson, would that be too indulgent of me?