Public Transport Sector Faces Tension as Private Owners Threaten Protest Action Over Route Sharing Dispute

Trouble is brewing in the public transport sector with private owners threatening protest action against the State-run bus company, claiming unfair allocation under their route-sharing arrangement.

The Alliance Owners of Public Transport (AOPT) has alleged that some Transport Board supervisors have shown favouritism to some privately-owned buses participating in the Transport Augmentation Programme (TAP).

“Some operators believe that there is some kind of favouritism within the programme where some supervisors would use their initiative by giving lucrative routes to some persons. If they don’t resolve this matter within a couple of days, I think we might have to look at some kind of protest action,” AOPT chairman Roy Raphael told Barbados TODAY, though adding that he believed the matter is one that could be resolved.

The AOPT represents owners of ZRs, mini buses, taxis, and other private service vehicles (PSVs).

Raphael said the organisation had requested a transport coordinator to oversee route allocation impartially when the TAP proposal went to Cabinet. He called for a review of the two-and-a-half-year-old programme, claiming some operators only work at certain terminals and cannot access all routes.

But, pushing back against the accusations, Transport Board Chief Operations Officer Lynda Holder said management meets regularly with TAP members to discuss adjustments, and a full review meeting was planned.

“The management of the Transport Board continues to meet periodically with the members of the programme and in those meetings, any adjustments to the programme are discussed,” she said.

“It was agreed that at a date to be finalised, we will have a full meeting and discuss any issues that had not been resolved previously in our regular meetings. To indicate that a review meeting has not happened would be incorrect, as adjustments have been made since the programme commenced that were done via meetings.”

Holder also challenged Raphael to provide evidence of supervisors showing favouritism, insisting that all routes should be shared equitably across lucrative and less profitable runs.

“If Mr Raphael has evidence of this practice he has not shared it with us,” she said. “However, if the practice does exist, the Board will work to correct any issues relating to favouritism as the programme is meant to operate as any other Transport Board-operated bus functions.

“All routes are considered important and it is acknowledged that some will have more ridership than others. The routes are to be shared equitably so that everyone gets some not-so-lucrative and some lucrative routes.”