…and the Trade Unions oppose something, then something good is bound to happen. In a welcome move, Tamilnadu government is planning to hire luxury buses from private operators and introduce them on inter state routes. Its high time they did something to the buses. Once upon a time, Tamilnadu boasted one of the best bus services in the country. But the problem is, we still have the same ‘once upon a time’ buses!
As always trade unions feel, exactly the opposite.
“Why should the Government lend its brand to a private bus operator? This amounts to privatisation in a different sense. Instead, we can go for a soft loan to purchase luxury buses in a phased manner. Steps should be taken to curb the omni bus menace in the State as contract coaches are being operated on regular routes, which is illegal.”
Omni bus menace? Menace for whom, mister? These guys should travel atleast once in these state express transport buses. Its almost equivalent to pariticipating in a Go-Karting race!
Government should ignore these unions and go ahead with plans that benefit the common man, than these greedy unions!
on 27 Feb 2007 at 9:49 am # Cacaphonix
Ferro,
I have very little information about this move. But it seems govt. is trying to frachise it service for a weird reason — plying with luxury buses. Usually big corporations frachise their “brand” to seep into farther/remote points of customers than to attract different segment of customers. That is, frachise option works for geographical strategy and not segment strategy. But it seems by doing frachise option govt. is trying to wash-away “more paying” segment. This move would prove to be detrimental to the transport corporation’s income. Once people turn bit more affordable they would expect more features/comfort, then the govt. would lose more of its customers. So totally turning the “more-paying” segment into private operators hand is simply giving the operators exploit these people. This kind of privatisation is totally irresponsible and insensitive. That way I too feel this move to be an unwelcome one and probably done with some ugly ulterior motive. Hence I oppose it. But I do not oppose it “idealogically”, which is also detrimental. So, to me, as such this opposition is good but I differ in the way.
Yours too seem to be an idealogical opposition to this issue.