Learner Transport Scheme: Western Cape Education Department & South African Small Bus Operators Council

Meeting report

Briefing by the Western Cape Education Department (WCED)

Mr Archie Lewis, Chief Director: Physical Resources, WCED, informed the Committee the learner transport was an attempt by the Department to get learners to school. The Department was currently transporting 59 000 learners on different routes throughout the province. There had been an overhaul on the learner transport system. Applications, initially, went through the district offices and would finally get approved at the head office through the bus committee. Then once the application was approved, contracts would be signed with the bus operators. In 2010 the Director-General picked up challenges, saying the transport routes were the same and there were overpayments. This led to the review of the contracts to resolve incorrect distances. The Department was sitting with a system of many routes where the learners get picked up and be delivered to many schools. Since the learner transport has changed nationally, the Western Cape had to review its learner transport system.

Mr Ronald Swartz, Head of Education, WCED, added that the process was being reviewed currently so that provinces could have the same Service Level Agreements (SLAs) which would be aligned with the national ones. Traffic regulations have been factored in the new system, something which has been a problem for a very long time. The current draft has made provision for adult supervision of primary school learners and disabled ones. It also provides penalties.

Discussion

The Chairperson wanted to understand if the involvement of a teacher to provide assistance at the pick-up point was still relevant.

Mr Swartz said the arrangement should be made between the school and the contractor. Every vehicle was required to be tested twice a year, especially the bigger buses, to ensure it was roadworthy and to check the validity of the driver's licence.

Mr Lewis also indicated the principal gets given a template or a form or checklist regarding the transport, especially on obvious things, but not on technical matters, and briefs the district office if he or she has qualms regarding the vehicle.

The Chairperson asked if the school was involved in checking the Professional Driving Permit (PDP), tyres, etc.

Mr Swartz stated there was a standard regulatory procedure that was at schools regarding learner transport. Vehicles get registered on a central database which was approved by the Department. All the details of the vehicles are at the central database. The district office facilitates the testing of the buses and hands over the report to the head office. There was a system in place that was being used to brief the head office of the condition of the buses. The Department works with the traffic department and district officials for control over the safety of the transport for learners.

Mr C Dugmore (ANC) pointed out there were matters that were raised by small bus operators during the initial initiation of the learner transport. The WCED offered a 10% increase proposal. The bus operators felt the 10% increase was not approved and was withdrawn suddenly. He asked for clarity on this matter and requested the bus operators be allowed to voice their concerns.

The Chairperson stated the small bus operators would not be allowed to speak because the meeting was not for public hearings.

Mr Dugmore insisted the small bus operators should be allowed to raise their concerns and this matter was raised in one of the previous meetings when Ms Botha was an Acting Chairperson. Members of the committee agreed on many things regarding this matter. He stated the bus operators should be given a platform because some of them were from outside Cape Town and it would not be fair not to allow them to speak.

The Chairperson was adamant the small bus operators would not be allowed to speak.

Mr Lewis told the Committee when the contract was signed there was a SLA that was entered into. It was indicated that if small operators wanted an increase in the tariff, that should be stated in the SLA. The new system was in place though there was nothing approved and has extended the contracts and routes of small bus operators. The Department was looking at an average of 10% increase. The letter went to all contractors and it stated the WCED was willing to consider the 10% increase. One of the conditions was that the contract must be extended first before the WCED looked at the tariff. Once the extension was approved, the contractor could apply for an increase in tariffs. The contractor must accept the extension first. He said the letter was misinterpreted. All contractors that requested 10% increase on tariffs got their allocation of 10%.

Ms L McGlen, WCED official, stated that service providers were engaged with in the process by the Department and were asked to indicate what they would need.

The Chairperson wanted to establish if the Department had a mechanism to arbitrate all the problems.

Ms R De Bruyn, WCED Director, said there was a negotiation committee in place that contractors could approach if they had grievances.

Mr F Christiaans (ACDP) asked if communication to the service providers was clearly sent in an understandable manner and enquired if the department received grievances after the communication was sent to the contractors.

Ms De Bruyn admitted the 10% increase was not clearly stated. The Department thought everyone would understand the 10% increase proposal. The Department then received a letter from the South African National Small Bus Operators Council (SANSBOC) on behalf of its members for not approving the 10% increase. She said the Department was still receiving and processing applications on the 10% increase proposal.

Mr Dugmore asked if it was factual that all the applications processed got the 10% increase except only SANSBOC. He also indicated it would be very much fair to listen to the voices of the small bus contractors who were at the meeting.

The Chairperson stated he was not aware there would be public hearings on the matter and reminded the Committee that he was in the meeting in an acting capacity.

Mr Dugmore pointed out that when he was informed of the meeting, it was indicated the invite was also extended to the small bus contractors and that he cleared the matter with the Committee Chairperson, Mr Kivedo.

As a result of the disagreement, the Chairperson asked members of the public to leave the committee room so that the Committee could deliberate on the matter.

It was agreed in camera that the Committee would hear from the small bus operators and they would be allowed to air their concerns.

Mr Lewis apologised to the bus contractors about the 10% increase communication that was badly sent, and he stated for the tariffs to be considered, the contractors should accept the extension first.

The Chairperson asked the Department to leave the committee room because the Committee wanted to engage with the small bus operators.

The Department indicated that they wanted to stay so they can respond to the questions from the small bus operators.

The Chairperson stated it was hard for him to put the Department in a difficult position, especially when the political head was not in the Committee.

[Eventually, the Department left the committee room].

The Chairperson clarified that knew about the presentation from the Department, but he was not fully briefed about the other agenda item.

Mr J Swanepoel, Member of SANSBOC, indicated that as far as the 10% increase was concerned, he found it difficult to misinterpret the letter if you were a contractor who wanted an extension. In the past years the 10% increase was never mentioned. The bus operators were only asked if they were still interested in the contract with the same price.

The Chairperson asked if the Department has granted the 10% increase.

Mr Swanepoel said nothing has been granted and they have never received the promised 10% increase.

A small bus operator said they had to fill a form from the Department to indicate if as a contractor you have approved the offer from the Department. The contract letter was approved, but the Department indicated the 10% increase was not approved though it gave them the offer.

Mr J Swartz, Chairperson of SANSBOC, stated the Department indicated it would talk with SANSBOC. There has never been a tender in the past years for the learner transport. As a service provider you were only asked if you still want to continue with the contract on the same price without considering the rate of inflation. Now there was an offer of 10%. He had asked for an increase after six years and the Department refused to give him an increase of R1.20 per kilometre per learner in the Wellington area. Instead the business was given to another contractor at a rate of R2.00 per kilometre per learner.

Another bus operator said she has been working with the WCED for a very long time. Recommendations were submitted to the Department and it has extended contracts on an ad hoc basis. The Department was not telling the truth when it stated the contracts had provisions to ask for an increase in tariffs. Last year during a public participation process on this matter, the Department refused to accept their proposals. She went further to say the issue of an adult supervisor on the bus was raised but that proposal was further shot down by the department.

The Chairperson asked if it was the national or provincial office that facilitated the workshop in Worcester.

Ms S Chilwan, SANSBOC Secretary, said it was the provincial office in association with the provincial Department of Transport. Regarding the fee for additional learners, she stated the principal would instruct you to take the extra learners, but the Department would say leave the learners outside up until the matter was sorted out by the Department.

Mr Dugmore thanked the Committee for listening to the small bus operators and he indicated the Committee now had an idea of the many concerns that have been raised and which the Committee has to consider and come up with proposals.

Ms Botha asked if learners were still transported, except for those under SANSBOC.

The bus operators stated they still transported the learners.

The Chairperson asked if fuel increases were catered for.

The contractors said they still carry on with the agreed price.

Mr Swanepoel indicated that if the Department could not help them, they would seek for a legal opinion. Otherwise if things continued the way they were, they won't be able to keep afloat.

The Chairperson stated he would write to the Minister and inform him of the variances and contradictions that emanated from the discussion the Committee had with the Department and small bus operators, and that this was an issue that needed urgent attention.

Mr Christiaans said there was a need to consider salary increases of 9% for employees and 4% for tyres and other things. This was a serious matter which needed intervention so that the bus operators could render a good, quality service.

Mr Swartz pointed out his fear was that taxis were now becoming bus operators. People were losing their contracts and have got workers who do the work for them twice a day, in the morning and afternoon. He said it was difficult to maintain the buses under the current situation and taxis were getting better off than bus operators.

The meeting was adjourned.