Why not stage-centric bus fare?

When I was home, I was in a better place; but travelers must be content. – William Shakespeare, English dramatic poet (1564-1616) in As You Like It.

Travel in Shakespeare’s time, domestic or foreign, was for pleasure and education. In today’s world, most of the travel, especially in cities, is to work and earn a living.

With the advancement and sophistication of IT, there is a small move to work from home and, thus, avoid commuting on jam-struck roads. But, by far an office, shop or factory job involves commuting by public transport, either state-run like KSRTC or by private operators. The setting of fares and the method of collecting them is commuter unfriendly – even tortuous and extortionist.

After the historical fares are set, minimum and add-ons for additional distances are revised upwards  from time to time, taking into account the cost of running, specially ever-advancing fuel costs. There is a charade of taking the views of transporters and commuters. At the public hearing organised by the Regional Transport Authority both the transporters and consumers/citizens are given a semblance of a platform to present and argue their points. But, given the nature of lobbies, transporters generally have their way because it is a strong lobby, working with RTOs almost on a daily basis, spending time in RTO’s  ante-chamber and often sipping tea with him. They also have the blackmail power of withdrawing service and hold the public to ransom if they do not have their way. The commuters’ lobby is ad hoc and loosely assembled for the public interaction for fare fixing and is not a permanent, cohesive and sustained body.

The transporters lobby has its case well worked out and even canvassed through the media with press conferences, press releases and exclusive interviews. One aspect that is overlooked in fixing the fare is the load factor. The transporters argue about lean times, like early morning and late evening, when the capacity of the bus is underutilized and lesser revenue per trip is realized. This is a valid argument and should be, and is being, taken into account. As commuters increase and additional buses are not put into service proportionately, the lean time spans are getting reduced and peak time durations are correspondingly increased, resulting in heavy overcrowding of buses most of the time.

In this context, the commuter lobbies can argue that during rush hours the transporters are reaping a bonanza which should be taken into account while revising fares. For instance, the 40-seater bus is allowed 10 standies. But, during peak hours, the buses carry even 30 standees, realizing 40% extra illegal collection. This is violation of law and the rights of commuters to travel with minimum discomfort. Thus, we have buses in which commuters are packed like sardines and exposed to the danger of pick-pockets and bottom-pinchers. The point is that RTO and police wink at the illegalities for reasons best known to them – which translate to collusion and conflict of interest for discerning citizens.

But, such overcrowding, and 40% over-realisation of revenue will not be taken into account while fixing fares. Doing so would mean admitting and accepting illegality of overcrowding beyond the legal limit. Thus, the commuters have to suffer increased fares and enforced discomfort. This brings us to the second point of rational bus stages/stops. A new mayor was elected in a city. He called the Commissioner and asked him to fix a street light in front of his bungalow. The official demurred and explained that the request cannot be granted because the distance between two lamp poles is fixed by rule and there cannot be any pole in between. Mangalore’s bus stops might have been determined by the city’s babus and netas to suit their convenience. Like lamp posts, bus stops should be at fixed intervals, say 300 metres, giving marginal concession to road architecture and traffic generation.

For instance, the first stop from Bondel terminus is 300 metres away at Kambla Katte which generates poor traffic. At 200 metres is MGC High school campus lane. The students with their heavy baggage, particularly irksome during monsoons, have to perforce alight/board at the terminus walk 200 metres. Even in Mumbai, there are “request” stops where buses stop, like outside a hospital. As for schools, the “request” can be during the starting and closing hours of schools.

If such stages, as noted, are fixed, the fare structure can be rationalised and the present exploitation by conductors overcharging can be eliminated. When the fares are revised, the buses were to carry a table of fares, noting fares against major stops. If at all it is put up in the wake of revisions, it disappears pronto and the fare is not what the RTO fixed but what the conductor demands. To question that demand is to invite the wrath of the conductor and ridicule of fellow passengers who, even in their misery, do not let go the pleasure of one of them being humiliated.

So, what is the way out? Reorganise the bus routes on rationally devised stages. After the minimum fare, the commuter should be aware that he can travel two stages, say 600 metres, for every additional 50 paise. This will require the transporter to have printed tickets with stages for punching. This is being done by BEST in Mumbai for decades and state transport buses do it in Karnataka and elsewhere. This can effectively stop the large scale loot of commuters going on at present.

Incidentally, when this transparent ticketing is done, commuters will know that if they walk to a stop ahead of them, they can save 50 paise. This will lead to a pressure on bus capacity by about 10% and achieve overall de-congession in city buses.

Finally, there are seats reserved for ladies, handicapped persons and senior citizens. While ladies seats are respected, they also have an obligation to occupy their reserved seats first and then compete for the general seats. Otherwise, it amounts to foreclosing chances of males, as Birlas foreclosed licences under the Licence Raj Regime. As for other reservationists, commuters can occupy them as long as they are no claims from reservists. But, once the reservists raise a claim, it is the duty of the conductor to have the seat vacated for the intended beneficiary (Most conductors shirk this duty now). Incidentally, should the senior citizen carry age proof or will grey hair do? While on the subject, what about women with advanced pregnancy and women carrying a child? Over to you!