BUTE FERRY USERS GROUP

Download Petition: Petition PDF

Below you will find BFUG report as previously published Calmac responses – which have been added in red type – unedited from the company. We leave it to you to come to conclusions about the quality of this response. How much attention has been paid to the main issues? Can you detect any signs that service issues are recognised and are being addressed? Are you happy that the issues you are raising are being listened to? Calmac are looking for your support to lobby MSP’s and Executive about the tender process. What are you looking for from Calmac?

Please note - Due to other commitments there has been a delay in updating the website with CalMac's response.

BFUG can be contacted at info@buteferryusersgroup.co.uk

Download the PDF report - CalMac Responce

CalMac Response to

Bute Ferry Users Group

http://www.buteferryusergroup.co.uk

Report on ferry service

Wemyss Bay – Rothesay route, currently operated by Calmac Ferries

CalMac

There are a number of general comments we would wish to make about the report.

1 There are a number of factual inaccuracies within the report which would have been better removed before publication and normally, CalMac would be happy to receive a draft for correction.

2 The Report would benefit from a clear explanation as an introduction of who had commissioned it, who was consulted and what process was used. Clearly, as it carries the imprimatur of BFUG, it is assumed that BFUG is responsible for the content.

3 While the Report was referred to in passing at the meeting of December 18 it would have been more helpful if the Report had been available for that meeting and matters could have been addressed at that point. Given the timing of its publication, the report could easily leave the impression that issues have not been dealt with, when in fact they have been, and discussed at length with explanations offered in most of the cases.

Summary 3

Introduction 3

Historical comparison 5

Supporting business – 9

Tickets for cars 11

Choice 11

5 day 11

Non-transferability 12

Pricing in general 13

Access and Egress 14

Operational issues 14

Pier Facilities including parking 15

Customer Service Charter 16

Summary

This reports raises issues that are important to users of ferry service on Rothesay – Wemyss Bay crossing. They are issues familiar to ferry users across the country.

CalMac: the Company would be pleased to receive a copy of this research and the basis on which it was conducted to better inform its operational decisions.

The historical comparison is one which many travellers make; the report takes a look at whether perceptions have any basis in truth. A key topic of discussion is whether there has been a diminution in service over recent years or can we say the service has improved measurably. Issues discussed include journey time; ticketing choice and price; timetable; access and egress; pier facilities; and service promises. There is also a brief comment on people. The report necessarily is focused around Calmac as the current service provider.

CalMac: A minor point, but we would appreciate the correct reflection of the company name and brand (CalMac).

Introduction

This report has been written to raise awareness of service issues experienced by Bute Ferry Users, with a view to gathering further support from local authorities and other interested parties. Specifically we hope to bring about permanent improvement in pier facilities at Wemyss Bay; crossing times; passenger communication and support during times of disruption and/or cancellation, for all the customers.

This report is primarily based on data gathered by BFUG over the course of two years. This data takes several forms:

CalMac: the Company would be pleased to receive a copy of this research and the basis on which it was conducted to better inform its operational decisions. As detailed above, it is not clear how the information gathered in this report has been compiled and on what basis. There is no definition of the sampling in terms of scale or provenance. There is also little by way of definitions of e.g. “crossing time” – which is important as CalMac does already meet certain performance criteria, and is heading for a situation where the Performance regime is going to be even more strictly defined. It is important, therefore, that when making comparisons, these are valid and made on a like for like basis. The purpose of the ticketing analysis is noted – it was produced with a specific target in mind.

· Crossing time – journey time, a random sample of crossings that occurred between end of September 2005 and end of November 2005. The main purpose of the monitor was to record crossing time however other information relevant to the service was also gathered.

· Tickets, choice and pricing, an analysis was undertaken of Clyde crossing to ascertain the variety of ticketing being offered and multifarious pricing employed. The main purpose of the analysis was to support demand for a multi car ticket larger than current 10 journey option; and as an aside compare pricing on our route to others on Firth of Clyde.

· Ramp gradients – measurements were taken of the ramps used at both Rothesay and Wemyss Bay after users raised concerns about steepness and implications for passengers less abled physically or burdened with luggage/children in buggies/shopping etc.

CalMac: It is not clear who took these measurements and how. An explanation would have been helpful.

· Ramp including lift operation - a random period of time over which the operation the ramps was monitored. This main purpose of the monitor was to establish level of disruption caused to passengers’ egress and access and whether that matched perceptions.

· Consumer survey – Bute Highland Games afforded an opportunity for BFUG to gather insight from ferry users other than regular, island travelers. A questionnaire was used to gather opinions on a variety of service points from pier parking facilities to general satisfaction of journey experience.

· Dialogue between Calmac and BFUG – there has been ongoing dialogue and this will be referred to.

CalMac: it is noted that while this is mentioned there is little or no reference to it in the Report. It is CalMac’s view that over the last 18 months or so there has been a significantly improved level of communication between CalMac and BFUG which is not recognised.

This report will cover the issues that BFUG have identified as the key priorities for the majority of regular users however inevitably consideration is also given to infrequent users; these include both residents of Bute and visitors to the island.

BFUG is a non-profit making organization; the membership is circa 500 and is made up of residents of Bute and non-residents. All of the committee work full time off island and it should be appreciated that as passionate as we are, we are also time poor. This limits our ability to produce as comprehensive a report as we would like. Readers will forgive us for the simplicity with which we have used available data.

CalMac: the limitations as expressed by the authors is noted. CalMac has requested a copy of the BFUG Constitution as it would usefully inform our preparation for future consultation arrangements. It would also be helpful to have a breakdown of the island sectors represented/not represented on BFUG.

Historical comparison

One of the frequent complaints heard by seasoned travelers (more than a decade) is that there has been little or no improvement in the service over the years. Of course, it is part of our nature to look back to past times with fondness however is there any truth in the matter? This short section of the report will briefly compare boats and crossing time.

CalMac: the definition of “crossing time” is crucial for like for like comparisons.

On 30^th November 1954 the M.V. Bute (VI) began sea trials with a top speed of 15.46 knots recorded in conditions that were ‘rather stormy’. It began service on 6^th December 1954 and ran at 14 knots, with a capacity for 35 cars and 650 passengers. (www.shipsofcalmac.co.uk/ships.asp?vessel=bute)

Summer 2005 saw the launch of the latest M.V. Bute in Clyde waters. This Bute runs at 13/14 knots, with a capacity for 60 cars and 450 passengers. It can also carry 60-seater coaches, which is helpful during the tourist season and 48 tonne artics which it may be argued is less than useful for an island that does not have the road infrastructure to support such vehicles – nor council budget to repair the damage done if they did descend.

CalMac: it is the customers who decide the vehicles they purchase.

Figures for road wear proportion on vehicles of 48 tonne were not available for this report.

40 tonne artic (1999 onwards)	40 tonne artic

Numbers show typical weight per axle in tonnes. Road wear is proportion to the weight on the axle raised to its 4th power -this is shown by the length of the arrow. (www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_roads/documents/page/dft_roads_506830.hcsp)

In the interim period and still in service, Saturn, launched in 1977 the3^rd of what are commonly known as ‘the Streakers’, had a capacity of 40 cars and 510 passengers. Latest figures from Calmac website state capacity of 40 cars and 381 passengers, with a running speed of 12 knots.

It would appear that our more mature passengers have the rights of it. Although the new boat can carry more cars and has the capacity to carry big Lorries – passenger capacity has reduced. In terms of speed of crossing, the new Bute is slower than its vintage namesake and only 1-2 knots faster than the now ageing Saturn.

CalMac: it is not clear what point is being made about the axle weights. The ships have to be built to carry anything which is legal on the road. The implications of restricting vehicles types does not bear thinking about in terms of the islands’ economy. It is not within CalMac’s gift to deliver that in any case.

There have been improvements – such as extension of the sailing day – in days gone past the first sailing were 7.45am and the last 6.20pm. Now passengers are able to sail from 6.30am and last boat home 7.45pm – this makes the island viable for some commuters. It was also the case that Sunday service ran to Gourock as a norm; today Gourock is only used when weather prevents berthing at Wemyss Bay. However, there is an argument for these aspects of the service to be improved further and this will be discussed later in the report.

Journey Time

Punctuality is a key measure for Calmac – performance to target is an important part of the grant afforded to the company. How is the percentage arrived at?

Performance figure for month ending 30^th September 2006 suggested that a performance of 98.5% was achieved. With this caveat – ‘punctuality performance against actual sailings undertaken, taking into account any relief events’. Relief event examples are given as ‘sailings which were cancelled due to bad weather; in accordance with safety procedures; delays due to the availability or operational restrictions of harbour facilities, or having to wait for the arrival of other public transport connections’. This last, at least, has passengers as a consideration. Passengers however are very much impacted on by these events. Surely it is the true performance figure that should be published in ticket offices and on boats rather than a performance measure that is largely internal between Calmac and Scottish Executive.

One of the differences in language used between BFUG and Calmac relates to the time passengers spend traveling. Calmac measure ‘crossing time’ and this is taken from ‘ropes off’ to ‘ropes on’. If you are measuring how long it takes for a boat to cross this is, no doubt, a good measure. However BFUG would like to see ‘journey time’ being measured. This would be from passenger ramp off to passenger ramp on.

CalMac: this would not be a performance measure as it includes turn-round time which is variable. It is the crossing time (let go to all secure) which is time-tabled.

This would be a true measure of customer service – is Calmac fulfilling the promise made in published timetable of 35 minutes crossing?

From 21^st September 2005, 17 sailings were recorded for both these measures. The last one recorded on 11^th November 2005. However on one of these occasions the vessel was diverted to Gourock with a sailing time of 1 hour 59 minutes. As this would skew the figures unreasonably this sailing has not been included in the statistics. These sailings were not selected for any special reason and simply recorded at random. The two boats on the crossing during this time were Bute and Saturn.

*Crossing Time*		*Journey Time*

Mean	33.25	Mean	38.3125
Standard Error	0.5361903	Standard Error	0.6172435
Median	33	Median	38
Mode	33	Mode	40
Standard Deviation	2.1447611	Standard Deviation	2.4689741
Sample Variance	4.6	Sample Variance	6.0958333
Kurtosis	6.4997196	Kurtosis	0.3245972
Skewness	2.1314396	Skewness	0.5304776
Range	9	Range	9
Minimum	31	Minimum	35
Maximum	40	Maximum	44
Sum	532	Sum	613
Count	16	Count	16
Largest(1)	40	Largest(1)	44
Smallest(1)	31	Smallest(1)	35
Confidence Level (95.0%)	1.1428632	Confidence Level (95.0%)	1.3156243

The statistics above are outcomes from that monitoring. The journey time can vary a fair bit – this is important particularly to travelers hoping to connect with rail and bus services on the mainland.

It was stated that the target crossing time for the Bute was to be 30 minutes. During this time that target was not met on the monitored journeys.

CalMac: CalMac’s timetable clearly shows a crossing time of 35 minutes. The source of this “target time” is not detailed.

There were also 5 occasions when passengers had to either access or egress via the car deck. Weather was only recorded as a factor on one occasion, with these 16 sailings, and noted as ‘choppy’.

In times gone past, timetables published the ‘time in transit’ as 30 minutes. Many long time travelers testify that this was the expected time and weather permitting this expectation was met. With advances in technology, it was hoped the new boats would deliver a faster crossing.

Another factor for travelers to consider when planning their journey is when Calmac expect them to be available for boarding. Currently the time asked for is 10 minutes for foot passengers and 30 minutes for vehicles. A particular annoyance for those departing Rothesay is that the first two sailings require the repositioning of the vessels. It is a regular occurrence that the first vessel does not start turning until 6.15am with passengers left to stand in the weather until 6.25am. The same happens with 7am sailing. This has been raised many times, gets addressed and then slips again. We can als