Track Record 42, January to March 2010 - Public Transport Victoria

ISSUE
42
Services January to March 2010
Track Record
Victorian Transport Services
Quarterly Performance Bulletin
Department of Transport

Contents
SECTION 1
Introduction and Summary 3
SECTION 2
Punctuality and Reliability 5
SECTION 3
Payments 9
SECTION 4
Customer Satisfaction 11
SECTION 5
Performance of
Automatic Ticketing System
(ATS) Equipment 17
SECTION 6
Glossary of Terminology 19

Section 1
Introduction and Summary
1.1 Introduction
This edition of Track Record provides details on the performance of public transport services in Victoria for the
period from January to March 2010 (referred to as the March quarter 2010).
New franchise contracts for the operation of Melbourne’s passenger train and tram networks commenced on
30 November 2009. Metro Trains Melbourne (operating as Metro) and Keolis Downer EDI (operating as Yarra
Trams (KDR)) are the current operators.
The new contracts and customer charters include revised definitions for punctuality and reliability measures
and new service level thresholds for passenger compensation:
• Metropolitan trains and tram services are now regarded as punctual if they arrive no earlier than 59 seconds
before and no later than four minutes and 59 seconds after the timetabled arrival time.
• Reliability for metropolitan trains and trams is now based on the percentage of the timetable delivered.
Performance measures for regional trains and coaches and for metropolitan buses are unchanged.
Further explanations and threshold details are outlined in the Glossary at the back of this bulletin.
To enable comparisons of current and past performance, punctuality and reliability figures based on both the
new and former measures are provided in Section 2 of this bulletin.
Please note:
Metropolitan trains =
Connex (up to and including
November 29, 2009) and Metro
(from November 30, 2009)
Metropolitan trams =
Yarra Trams operated by Metrolink (up to
and including November 29, 2009) and
KDR (from November 30, 2009 onwards)
Regional trains
= V/Line Passenger
3
Track Record ISSuE 42

1.2 Summary
Punctuality
Metropolitan trains
Punctual to 4 minutes, 59 seconds: 83.6 %
Punctual to 5 minutes, 59 seconds: 87.8 %
Metropolitan trams
Punctual to 4 minutes, 59 seconds: 81.8 %
Punctual to 5 minutes, 59 seconds: 84.9%
V/Line Passenger 81.5 %
Reliability
Metropolitan trains
Percentage of timetable not delivered: 1.5%
Percentage of network cancellations: 1.2%
Metropolitan trams
Percentage of timetable not delivered: 0.9%
Percentage of network cancellations: 0.3%
V/Line Passenger Percentage of services cancelled: 2.0%
Payments
All train and tram operators incurred penalty payments in the March quarter 2010 for not meeting agreed
performance standards.
Metropolitan trains - Metro
Metropolitan trams - KDR
V/Line Passenger
Customer satisfaction
Metropolitan modes (trains, trams and buses)
Metropolitan taxis
V/Line Passenger trains
V/Line Passenger coaches
Availability of ticketing equipment
Railway vending machines
Railway validators
Tram vending machines
Tram validators
Bus ticket issuing machines
Bus validators
-$3.0 million
-$95 thousand
-$442 thousand
58.2 index points
56.0 index points
75.1 index points
78.4 index points
98.46 per cent
99.51 per cent
96.7 per cent
97.5 per cent
99.3 per cent
99.3 per cent
4

Section 2
Punctuality and Reliability
For an explanation of how punctuality and reliability is determined, please refer to the Glossary on page 19.
2.1 Punctuality
Please note: punctuality outcomes for metropolitan trains and trams discussed in the text below are based on
revised measures introduced in the new franchise contracts, that is, punctual to 4 minutes and 59 seconds.
Details of the results under both the previous and current measures appear in Table 1
Metropolitan trains Metropolitan Trams V/Line Passenger trains Metropolitan buses
Metropolitan train
punctuality in the
March quarter 2010
was 83.6 per cent.
This is lower than in
the December quarter
(86.0 per cent) and
the March quarter
2009 (85.1per cent).
Tram punctuality
(average over route)
in the March quarter
2010 (81.8 per cent)
was slightly lower than
the previous quarter
(82.2 per cent) but
significantly better than
in the March quarter
2009 (77.9 per cent).
Regional train
punctuality was
81.5 per cent in the
March quarter 2010,
lower than in the
previous quarter (84.8
per cent) and the
March quarter 2009
(82.0 per cent).
Metropolitan bus
punctuality was
94.6 per cent in the
March quarter 2010.
This is a slight increase
on the previous quarter
result (93.9 per cent).
Table 1 On-time performance for trains, trams and buses as a percentage
of services run, March quarter 2009 to March quarter 2010
Jan–Mar
2009
Apr–Jun
2009
Jul–Sept
2009
Oct-Dec
2009
Jan–Mar
2010
Metropolitan trains
4 minutes, 59 seconds
5 minutes, 59 seconds
85.1
88.7
86.3
90.2
88.6
92.4
86.0
90.7
83.6
87.8
Metropolitan trams –
average over route
4 minutes, 59 seconds
5 minutes, 59 seconds
77.9
81.4
80.0
83.5
82.3
85.3
82.2
85.3
81.8
84.9
Metropolitan trams
– at destination
V/Line Passenger
trains
4 minutes, 59 seconds
5 minutes, 59 seconds
66.2
71.2
68.9
74.0
71.9
76.6
71.8
76.7
71.6
76.3
82.0 86.5 89.3 84.8 81.5
Metropolitan buses 94.5 94.5 94.2 93.9 94.6
5
Track Record ISSuE 42

Figure 1 On-time performance for trains, trams and buses as a percentage of services run,
March quarter 2009 to March quarter 2010*
Percentage of services running on time
100
90
80
70
60
50
Jan–Mar 2009 Apr–Jun 2009 Jul–Sep 2009
Metropolitan buses
Metropolitan trams – average over route
Metropolitan trams – at destination
V/Line Passenger trains
Metropolitan trains
Oct–Dec 2009 Jan–Mar 2010
*On-time figures for metropolitan trains and trams in the table above are based on the new punctuality measure.
2.2 Reliability
Please note: reliability outcomes for metropolitan trains and trams discussed in the text below are based
on the revised measures introduced under the new franchise contracts, that is, percentage of timetable not
delivered. See the Glossary for more information on the new reliability measures. Details of the results for
both the previous and current measurements appear in Table 2.
Metropolitan trains Metropolitan Trams V/Line Passenger trains Metropolitan buses
A total of 1.5 per cent of
the timetable was not
delivered in the March
quarter 2010. This is
an increase on the
December quarter result
(1.2 per cent) but is
significantly better than
the March quarter 2009
(3.0 per cent).
A total of 0.9 per cent
of the timetable was not
delivered in the March
quarter 2010. This is an
increase on the previous
quarter (0.7 per cent)
but lower than the
March quarter 2009
(1.1 per cent).
Network cancellations
in the March quarter
2010 (2.0 per cent)
were higher than the
December quarter
(1.7 per cent) but
lower than the March
quarter 2009 results
(3.5 per cent)
A total of 0.1 per cent of
services was cancelled
in the March quarter
2010. This is consistent
with previous quarters.
6

Table 2 Cancellations of trains, trams and buses, March quarter 2009 to March quarter 2010
Jan–Mar
2009
Apr–Jun
2009
Jul–Sept
2009
Oct-Dec
2009
Jan–Mar
2010
Metropolitan trains
% of timetable not delivered
% of network cancellations
3.0
2.8
0.8
0.6
0.8
0.6
1.2
1.0
1.5
1.2
Metropolitan trams
% of timetable not delivered
% of network cancellations
1.1
0.4
0.8
0.2
0.6
0.1
0.7
0.2
0.9
0.3
V/Line Passenger
trains
% of network cancellations 3.5 1.4 1.1 1.7 2.0
Metropolitan buses % of network cancellations 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
Figure 2 Cancellations of trains, trams and buses, March quarter 2009 to March quarter 2010*
Percentage of services cancelled
4.0
3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
Jan–Mar 2009 Apr–Jun 2009 Jul–Sept 2009
Metropolitan buses
Metropolitan trams
V/Line Passenger trains
Metropolitan trains
Oct–Dec 2009 Jan–Mar 2010
*Figure 2 reflects the new reliability measure of percentage of timetable not delivered for metropolitan trains and trams.
7
Track Record ISSuE 42

2.3 Passenger compensation
Metroplitan trains Metropolitan trams V/Line Passenger trains
Passenger compensation was
payable in January, February and
March as network punctuality was
below the applicable threshold.
No passenger
compensation was
payable in the
March quarter 2010.
Passenger compensation
was payable in January and
February as punctuality was
below the applicable threshold
on all corridors except Ararat.
Passenger compensation
was payable in March as
punctuality was below the
applicable threshold on all
corridors. Reliability on the
Shepparton line was also
below the relevant threshold.
For details of thresholds for passenger compensation, please refer to the Glossary on page 20.
8

Section 3
Payments
See the Glossary on page 20 for an explanation relating to the payment details in this section.
3.1 Metropolitan trains and trams
The payment information provided in Tables 3 and 4 relates to the current metropolitan franchise contracts
that commenced on 30 November 2009. The payment schedule in these contracts includes several
adjustments in the types of payments provided.
The new franchise contracts have introduced several new payments and/or payment arrangements, including:
• The establishment of a monthly cap (of $1 million for train and $500,000 for tram) for penalty and incentive
payments.
• The replacement of farebox and farebox-related payments with a new ticketing revenue guarantee payment
for the transition period (that is, until 18 months after the Metcard ticketing system is turned off).*
• The introduction of a new Business Systems Upgrade payment to encourage incremental upgrades to
information, telecommunications and technology systems.
• The introduction of the Customer Service Standards and Customer Experience Performance Regime
(aimed at improving customer satisfaction with public transport services) with capped payments/penalties
(of $1 million per annum for train and $500,000 per annum for tram).
* More information on the new ticketing revenue guarantee payment is available from the Glossary.
Both operators incurred Operational Performance Regime penalty payments as service disruption levels
exceeded the agreed target levels in the March quarter 2010:
• Metro: -$3.0 million
• Yarra Trams (KDR): -$95 thousand
Table 3 Metro payments ($ ,000)
Table 4 Yarra Trams (KDR) payments ($ ,000)
30 Nov–31 Dec Jan–Mar
Payment type
2009 2010
Base contract 23,900 41,667
Ticketing revenue
guarantee
21,866 59,415
Maintenance 0 34,090
Business Systems
Upgrade
Rolling stock
adjustment
0 0
7,233 21,408
Incentive and penalty 26 -3,000
Capital projects 0 469
Electricity 0 3,590
TOTAL 53,025 157,639
30 Nov–31 Dec Jan-Mar
Payment type
2009 2010
Base contract 4,246 12,794
Ticketing revenue
guarantee
14,648 41,520
Maintenance 0 4,420
Business Systems
Upgrade
Rolling stock
adjustment
0 0
2,922 8,767
Incentive and penalty 544 -95
Capital projects 0 529
Mulhouse tram rental 1,869 0
Electricity 0 866
TOTAL 24,229 68,801
9
Track Record ISSuE 42

3.2 V/Line Passenger trains
Payments by the State to the regional rail operator (V/Line Passenger) – including payments for coach
services directly contracted by V/Line – are summarised in Table 5. Farebox revenue is retained by V/Line and
is included to provide an overall indication of the cost of the services. State contract payments represent the
net payments required for V/Line Pa ssenger to run the services.
V/Line Passenger incurred an Operational Performance Regime penalty of $442,000 as service disruption
levels exceeded the agreed target levels in the March quarter 2010.
Table 5 Payment for V/Line Passenger train services ($ ,000)
Payment type Jan-Mar 2009 Apr-Jun 2009 Jul-Sep 2009 Oct-Dec 2009 Jan-Mar 2010
Base contract 57,683 64,509 62,284 64,444 62,199
Farebox 17,193 17,739 18,191 16,729 18,009
Rolling stock 8,953 8,953 8,953 8,953 8,953
Incentive and penalty -579 -176 142 -387 -442
Capital projects 843 1,036 2,607 368 1,447
TOTAL 84,093 92,061 92,177 90,107 90,166
3.3 Metropolitan and regional buses
Payments to metropolitan, regional and school bus operators are presented in Table 6.
Table 6 Payment for metropolitan and regional bus services ($ ,000)
Payment type Jan-Mar 2009 Apr-Jun 2009 Jul-Sep 2009 Oct-Dec 2009 Jan-Mar 2010
Metropolitan bus 105,923 111,194 111,787 110,484 112,456
Regional bus 24,176 24,707 24,646 26,866 26,523
School bus 30,435 45,692 46,600 46,723 31,504
TOTAL 160,534 181,593 183,033 184,073 170,583
3.4 Metlink
Under current metropolitan rail franchises, Metlink is a provider of system-wide services. Payments to Metlink
for services supplied under contracts with the State are presented in Table 7.
Table 7 Payment for Metlink and services ($ ,000)
Payment type Jan-Mar 2009 Apr-Jun 2009 Jul-Sep 2009 Oct-Dec 2009 Jan-Mar 2010
Metlink 3,948 3,926 4,160 4,355 5,338
Other 272 0 0 0 0
TOTAL 4,220 3,926 4,160 4,355 5,338
10

Section 4
Customer Satisfaction
For an explanation of how customer satisfaction is determined, please refer to the Glossary on page 22.
Please Note: satisfaction rates are presented as index points, not percentages.
4.1 Overall satisfaction with metropolitan services
Metropolitan public transport (trains, trams and buses) recorded an overall satisfaction result of 58.2 index
points in the March quarter 2010 which is slightly less than the December quarter result of 59.7 index points.
Figure 3 Overall satisfaction with metropolitan public transport services (trains, trams and buses),
March quarter 2008 to March quarter 2010
Customer Satisfaction Index
85
VERY
SATISFIED
80
75
70
65
SOMEWHAT
SATISFIED
60
55
50
Jan–Mar
2008
Apr–Jun
2008
Jul–Sep
2008
Oct–Dec
2008
Jan–Mar
2009
Apr–Jun
2009
Jul–Sep
2009
Oct–Dec
2009
Jan–Mar
2010
Customer satisfaction results for metropolitan trains in the March quarter 2010 were comparable with the
December quarter results. Customer satisfaction with metropolitan trams, buses and taxis all recorded
slight decreases
Metropolitan trains
Metropolitan trams
Metropolitan buses
Metropolitan taxis
60.9 index points
68.6 index points
68.2 index points
56.0 index points
11
Track Record ISSuE 42

Figure 4 Overall satisfaction with metropolitan train, tram, bus and taxi services,
March quarter 2008 to March quarter 2010
Customer Satisfaction Index
VERY
SATISFIED
85
80
75
70
SOMEWHAT
SATISFIED
65
60
55
50
Jan–Mar
2008
Apr–Jun
2008
Jul–Sept
2008
Oct–Dec
2008
Jan–Mar
2009
Apr–Jun
2009
Jul–Sept
2009
Oct–Dec
2009
Jan–Mar
2010
Metropolitan trains
Metropolitan trams
Metropolitan buses
Metropolitan taxis
4.2 Overall satisfaction with V/Line Passenger services
The overall customer satisfaction indices for the V/Line trains recorded a slight increase during the March
quarter 2010. Satisfaction with regional coaches significantly increased.
• V/Line Passenger trains 75.1 index points
• V/Line Passenger coaches 78.4 index points
Figure 5 Overall satisfaction with V/Line Passenger trains and coaches, March quarter 2008
to March quarter 2010
Customer Satisfaction Index
VERY
SATISFIED
85
80
75
70
SOMEWHAT
SATISFIED
65
60
55
50
Jan–Mar
2008
Apr–Jun
2008
Jul–Sep
2008
Oct–Dec
2008
Jan–Mar
2009
Apr–Jun
2009
Jul–Sept
2009
Oct–Dec
2009
Jan–Mar
2010
V/Line Passenger trains
V/Line Passenger coaches
12

4.3 Key aspects of service quality for trains, trams, taxis, buses and coaches
The following graphs summarise customer satisfaction with specific aspects of service. Each graph presents
an overall customer satisfaction index as well as separate measurements for major aspects of service, such
as ‘Passenger travel experience’. Note: the overall customer satisfaction index is produced from a specific
question in the survey and is not an average of other results.
All graphs are for the March quarter 2010. A statistically significant increase or decrease in the customer
satisfaction index from the December quarter 2009 is respectively indicated by a green ‘up’ or red ‘down’
arrow. Where there is no arrow, no statistically significant change has occurred. Minor shifts in the index can
be due to the nature of the survey, rather than reflecting a genuine change in customer satisfaction.
Metropolitan trains
• Metropolitan train services recorded an overall satisfaction rate of 60.9 which is comparable with the
December quarter result (60.6).
• There was a significant increase in satisfaction with the service aspect of Metcard ticketing.
Figure 6 Customer satisfaction with metropolitan trains, March quarter 2009
Service aspects
ranked highest to lowest
Overall satisfaction
Train staff
Metcard ticketing
Information
Price
Running of services
Passenger travel experience
Train stations
Personal security
Statistically
significant
increase from
December
quarter 2009
to March
quarter 2010
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Customer Satisfaction Index
13
Track Record ISSuE 42

Metropolitan Trams
• Metropolitan trams recorded an overall satisfaction score of 68.6 points, slightly less than the December
quarter result (70.0 points)
• There was no significant change in any key service aspects between the December and March quarters.
Figure 7 Customer satisfaction with metropolitan trams, March quarter 2010
Service aspects
ranked highest to lowest
Overall satisfaction
Tram staff
Running of services
Tram stops
Metcard ticketing
Personal security
Information
Passenger travel experience
Price
No significant
change from
December
quarter 2009
to March
quarter 2010
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Customer Satisfaction Index
Metropolitan buses
• Metropolitan buses recorded an overall customer satisfaction score of 68.2 points, slightly less than the
December quarter result of 70.7 points.
• There was a significant drop in the satisfaction with the key service aspect of Information
Figure 8 Customer satisfaction with metropolitan buses, March quarter 2010
Service aspects
ranked highest to lowest
Overall satisfaction
Passenger travel experience
Bus staff
Metcard ticketing
Personal security
Bus stops
Price
Running of services
Information
Statistically
significant
increase from
December
quarter 2009
to March
quarter 2010
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Customer Satisfaction Index
14

V/Line Passenger trains
• Regional train services recorded an overall customer satisfaction of 75.1 points, an increase compared with
the December quarter result (73.4 points)
• There was no significant change in any key service aspects between the December and March quarters
Figure 9 Customer satisfaction with V/Line Passenger trains, March quarter 2010
Service aspects
ranked highest to lowest
Overall satisfaction
V/Line staff
Price
V/Line Ticketing
Passenger travel experience
Information
Personal security
V/Line Train stations
Running of services
No significant
change from
December
quarter 2009
to March
quarter 2010
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Customer Satisfaction Index
V/Line Passenger coaches
• V/Line passenger coaches recorded an overall satisfaction score of 78.4 points which was a significant
improvement in satisfaction compared with the December quarter result (71.7 points)
• There were also significant improvements in the key service aspects of Coach Stops and Personal Security.
Figure 10 Customer satisfaction with V/Line Passenger coaches, March quarter 2010
Service aspects
ranked highest to lowest
Overall satisfaction
V/Line staff
Personal security
Price
Passenger travel experience
V/Line ticketing
V/Line coach stops
Running of services
Information
Statistically
significant
increase from
December
quarter 2009
to March
quarter 2010
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Customer Satisfaction Index
15
Track Record ISSuE 42

Metropolitan taxis
• Metropolitan taxis recorded an overall customer satisfaction result of 56.0 points, a slight decrease compared
with the December quarter result of 57.5.
• There was a significant decline in satisfaction with the key service aspect of Finding a taxi on the street *
* Note: the service aspect of Finding a taxi was updated to Finding a taxi on the street in survey questions from January 2010
Figure 11 Customer satisfaction with metropolitan taxis, March quarter 2010
Service aspects
ranked highest to lowest
Overall satisfaction
Personal security
Fares and payment system
Booking service
Passenger travel experience
Taxi ranks
Price
Taxi drivers
Information
Finding a taxi on the street
No significant
change from
December
quarter 2009
to March
quarter 2010
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Customer Satisfaction Index
16

Section 5
Performance of Automatic Ticketing
System (ATS) Equipment
See the Glossary on page 22 for details on Automatic Ticketing System (ATS) Customer-Defined Availability
(CDA) reporting and a background on the ticketing contracts.
Note: all figures in this section relate to the performance of the Metcard ticketing system and equipment.
New Ticketing System (NTS) equipment availability will be published following transition to ‘final state’
monitoring processes.
5.1 Railway station ticketing equipment
Availability of railway station ticketing equipment exceeded relevant targets in the March quarter 2010.
Table 8 ATS CDA for ticketing equipment at metropolitan railway stations (%)
Device Target Jan-Mar 2009 Apr-Jun 2009 Jul-Sep 2009 Oct-Dec 2009 Jan-Mar 2010
Vending machines 98.26 98.46 98.71 98.77 98.70 98.46
Validators 99.47 99.51 99.50 99.56 99.51 99.51
5.2 Tram and bus ticketing equipment
Availability of ticketing machines and validators on trams and buses all recorded slight decreases in the
March quarter 2010 but remain relatively high.
Table 9 ATS availability for metropolitan mobile equipment (%)
Mode Device Jan-Mar 2009 Apr-Jun 2009 Jul-Sep 2009 Oct-Dec 2009 Jan-Mar 2010
Tram
Vending
machines
96.7 97.6 98.2 97.7 96.7
Validators 97.5 98.1 98.4 98.1 97.5
Bus Issuing machines 99.3 99.5 99.6 99.4 99.3
Validators 99.3 99.5 99.4 99.5 99.3
5.3 Long term trends
The availability of ticketing equipment on metropolitan trains and buses has remained very high over past
years. The availability of equipment on trams has declined over the past two quarters but remains high.
17
Track Record ISSuE 42

Figure 12 Quarterly availability of ATS equipment from December 2006 to March 2010
Availability of Ticketing Equipment (%)
100
95
90
85
Dec–
2006
Mar–
2007
Jun–
2007
Sept–
2007
Dec–
2007
Mar–
2008
Jun–
2008
Sept–
2008
Dec–
2008
Mar–
2009
Jun–
2009
Sept–
2009
Dec–
2009
Mar–
2010
Train vending machines
Train validators
Tram vending machines
Tram validators
Bus vending machines
Bus validators
5.4 Vandalism of ATS equipment
There were 1,356 reported incidents in the March quarter 2010.
Figure 13 Incidents of vandalism to ATS equipment by quarter, March 2001 to March 2010
Vandalism indicidents per quarter
8,000
7,000
6,000
5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000
0
Mar
2001
Sept
2001
Mar
2002
Sept
2002
Mar
2003
Sept
2003
Mar
2004
Sept
2004
Mar
2005
Sept
2005
Mar
2006
Sept
2006
Mar
2007
Sept
2007
Mar
2008
Sept
2008
Mar
2009
Sept
2009
Mar
2010
Total Vandalism Incidents
18

Section 6
Glossary of Terminology
6.1 Contracts and partnership agreements
Metropolitan buses, trains and trams and regional town bus services are operated by the private sector
under contracts or franchise arrangements (referred to as Partnership Agreements) with the State Government.
Regional V/Line train and inter-town coach services are operated by the V/Line Passenger Corporation,
a Government statutory authority.
Note: new Partnership Agreements for the delivery of metropolitan train and tram services started on
30 November 2009.
The Director of Public Transport manages the train and tram Partnership Agreements and bus contracts.
The agreements and contracts specify requirements which operators must provide in relation to:
• Levels of service and service performance;
• Customer Service Charters including complaints handling and the provision of compensation for
poor service;
• Standards for the cleanliness, services and information available at stations/stops and on trains and trams;
• In the case of trains and trams, working with the Government on network and project planning;
• The tickets they must offer and the fares they must charge for tickets; and
• Other performance standards. For example, during special events and public holidays; and minimising
disruptions during planned works.
In response, the Government monitors the quality of services operators provide to the community, with
emphasis on:
• Punctuality and reliability: comparing the performance of train, tram and bus services with government-set
punctuality and service delivery targets and thresholds; and
• Customer satisfaction: using surveys to measure whether operators are providing the quality of service
customers expect.
6.2 Punctuality and reliability measurements
Punctuality
Punctuality is defined as the percentage of delivered services that run on time.
Metropolitan trains, trams and buses – For trains and buses, on-time performance is measured at the
end of the journey.
Tram on-time performance is measured at monitoring points along the route (as the average of the second,
third and fourth of five monitoring points) and near the destination (at point four of five monitoring points). Since
tram on-time performance is greatly affected by road congestion, both the destination punctuality performance
figures and the average punctuality are reported.
A metropolitan train or tram service is considered on-time if it arrives no more than 59 seconds before and no
more than four minutes and 59 seconds after the time in the timetable. Prior to 30 November 2009, a service
was considered on-time if it arrived no more than 59 seconds before and no more than five minutes and
59 seconds after the time in the timetable.
Metropolitan buses are on time if they are no more than two minutes early or five minutes late at the destination.
19
Track Record ISSuE 42

For tram services, the 77 per cent passenger compensation threshold for punctuality relates to the average of
the punctuality at the second, third and fourth of the five monitoring points along the length of the route under
the new punctuality measure.
V/Line Passenger trains – long distance V/Line Passenger services are considered to be on time if they
arrive no more than ten minutes 59 seconds late, while short-distance services are considered to be on time if
they arrive no more than five minutes 59 seconds late. Early arrival at the destination is also considered to be
on-time.
Reliability
The reliability measure for metropolitan train and tram services changed on 30 November 2009.
Previously, this was a measure of the percentage of scheduled services that were cancelled and a 98 per cent
threshold applied. The reliability measure has been expanded to include short services (ie services delivered
in part but not in full) and loop bypass events, such as when a service is scheduled to travel through the City
or Westona loops but fails to do so. Although the measure has been expanded, the 98 per cent threshold has
not changed.
For trains, a short service is counted as a quarter of a cancellation and a bypass event is counted as an
eighth of a cancellation. For trams, a short service is counted as an eighth of a cancellation. This improved,
new measure of service delivery is referred to as the percentage of timetable not delivered. An increase in this
measure reflects a decline in performance.
The reliability measure for regional trains continues to be based on the percentage of scheduled services that
are not cancelled. The threshold is 96 per cent. See Table 10 for further details.
Metropolitan and regional bus services are deemed reliable if 99 per cent of all scheduled services on any
day operate and are completed.
How Operational Performance Regime payments or penalties are calculated
All timetabled train and tram services are monitored every day of the week.
Delays, cancellations and other service failures are measured to the nearest 60 seconds and ‘weighted’
according to the number of people estimated to be travelling on the train or tram. The passenger weightings
vary according to the time period, day of week and direction of travel. Delays to a heavily-loaded peak train
or tram are given a greater value than delays to a less loaded off-peak train or tram. This system provides a
measure of operational performance expressed in ‘passenger-weighted minutes’ of delay.
Passenger-weighted minutes of delay in each month are checked against performance targets set in the
partnership agreements. Performance against these targets determines whether a bonus or a penalty
applies to an operator. This bonus and penalty system is referred to as the Operational Performance
Regime (OPR). Bonuses and penalties are capped at $1 million for metropolitan trains and $500,000
for trams per calendar month.
Metropolitan bus services are not included in this performance regime. Bus operators provide performance
data for bus services (on-time running and cancellations) via monthly ‘key performance indicator’ returns.
6.3 Passenger compensation
Train and tram Partnership Agreements require operators to provide punctuality and reliability (number of
cancellations) service levels above a government-set threshold. Operators must report to passengers every
month on whether or not they have met the minimum service requirements.
20

Operators who fail to meet minimum service levels must provide compensation (in the form of complimentary
tickets) to passengers. The compensation applies only to passengers holding valid periodical tickets of four
weeks or more who travelled on the service concerned during the month in question. Passengers apply
directly to the operator for the compensation.
V/Line services within each corridor are separated into short-distance and long-distance services, with
passenger compensation assessed and payable separately for the two categories.
Table 10 Service level thresholds for compensation purposes (%)
Punctuality
Reliability
Arrival by 4 minutes,
59 seconds
Arrival by 5 minutes,
59 seconds
Metropolitan trains Metropolitan trams V/Line Passenger
88 77
92 # 80 # 92^
% of timetable delivered 98 98
% of kilometres delivered 98 # 95 # 96
#
Measure valid until 29 November 2009
^
For long distance V/Line services, on-time arrival is defined as arriving no later than 10 minutes and 59 seconds
after the timetabled arrival time.
6.4 Payments
The details presented in this bulletin on payments for public transport services include:
• Components of the contract payments made by the State to the operators and major service suppliers
for the services provided;
• Incentive or penalty payments relating to performance during a particular period; and
• Ticketing revenue guarantee payments.
The incentive and penalty payments are reported on an accrual basis. The magnitude of these payments
(whether an incentive or penalty payment) is capped at $1 million per month for metropolitan trains and at
$500 thousand dollars per month for trams. The figures are not final, as the contracts allow for adjustment in
limited circumstances in later periods. Payments for prior quarters are subject to change based on audits or
mitigated performance adjustments.
The new ticketing revenue guarantee payment replaces the farebox distribution that was provided to all
operators prior to 30 November 2009. The new payment is a result of the introduction of the new myki
ticketing system and is expected to continue for 18 months after the Metcard ticketing system is turned off.
At that time, the franchisees will be entitled to farebox distribution under the revenue split arrangements
stipulated in the New Ticketing System Revenue Sharing Agreement.
The new train and tram Partnership Agreements do not include concession top-up payments for the usage
of concession tickets.
All payments are exclusive of GST. Negative figures represent payments by the franchisee to the State.
21
Track Record ISSuE 42

6.5 Customer satisfaction
The Director of Public Transport commissions monthly surveys to measure whether operators are providing
the quality of service customers expect. A sample of people is randomly selected from electronic telephone
directories in areas where train, tram, bus, coach and metropolitan taxi services operate. Interviews are
conducted by telephone. Interviewees are asked to:
• Indicate their usual public transport usage
• State their level of satisfaction with specific aspects of public transport, as well as the service overall.
Respondents who do not use public transport are asked for their reasons and to indicate what would
influence them to begin using public transport.
Up to the end of March 2009, responses from interviewees were given a score of between 0 and 100 as per
the following scale:
• Totally satisfied 100
• Very satisfied 80
• Somewhat satisfied 60
• Somewhat dissatisfied 40
• Very dissatisfied 20
• Totally dissatisfied 0
From April 2009 onwards, customers provided ratings using a 0 to 10 scale where 0 represented ’extremely
dissatisfied‘ and 10 represented ’extremely satisfied‘. Note that overall satisfaction questions continued to be
asked using the old scale to facilitate comparisons over time.
Survey results are compiled into quarterly customer satisfaction indices to allow for comparisons between
modes, operators and aspects of service delivery.
Note: Differences between metropolitan and regional passenger services should be taken into account when
making such comparisons. These differences include the purpose and distance of travel, and the types of
services offered on metropolitan and regional services.
6.6 Ticketing and Customer-Defined Availability (CDA)
A private company under contract to the State Government operates and maintains the Metcard ticketing
system for Melbourne’s public transport. The current contract was awarded in May 1994 to the consortium
OneLink Transit Systems Pty Ltd.
CDA targets represent minimum levels of acceptable availability and performance, and allow for specified
levels of non-availability due to maintenance, servicing and breakdowns.
The targets are included in the OneLink contract and determine whether OneLink incurs a penalty or receives
an incentive payment for its performance.
Monitoring of ticketing equipment
The status of ticketing equipment at railway stations is automatically monitored via communication lines to
OneLink. OneLink, therefore, has accurate and up-to-date information on the availability of ticketing machines
at railway stations and can promptly schedule repairs or servicing. For repairs, OneLink gives priority to
equipment at busier stations, where more tickets are purchased.
Mobile equipment on board trams and buses does not have a permanent communication link. Therefore,
equipment availability cannot be known exactly. Tram and bus operators are required to make vehicles with
faulty equipment available to OneLink.
Due to these differences between fixed and mobile equipment, measures and performance targets vary
between modes.
22

DOT5021/10