|
Voluntary Labeling in Adelaide
The City of Adelaide, Australia has only about
30 couriers yet they have devoted a lot of resources to address the few complaints
about couriers. The City does not have the legal authority to force messengers
to be labeled so they have worked to establish a voluntary system much like
the failed systems in Sydney.
The reports below once again show that the problems with couriers are perceptions - biased perceptions. Cities respond to the results of these reports by ignoring them. It should be noted that Council set out to devise a way to label messengers "to commend courteous behaviour or report negligent or dangerous riding." They did not set out to determine if a need existed but the report adressed this question anyway. Although the report showed that there was no need for a lebeling system it still advised the City to work for a voluntary system. Why? There is no safety need but there is a perceived political need to reinforce the bias. Here are some highlights of the reports: Adelaide
ITEM NO. 5.1
TO: BUSINESS & OPERATIONAL COMMITTEE ON 25/8/2003 FROM: GENERAL MANAGER POLICY AND PLANNING SUBJECT: BICYCLE COURIERS REPORT [B&O] (1999/02540) PURPOSE To report to Council about the ways in which bicycle couriers might be directed to wear identification numbers on their backs, and to advise Council on the background and potential need for such a system. RELEVANT CORPORATE GOAL VIVACITY - Create a city where a balance between vehicle traffic, pedestrians and cyclists exists. RECOMMENDATION That:- (1) The report be received and noted. (2) Council continue to work with SAPOL to identify specific problem areas for enforcement of the Australian Road Rules. (3) Council Officers redistribute the Courier Code of Conduct on a regular basis. (4) Council Officers continue to work with courier companies and other stakeholders to address cycling issues in the City. REPORT Background 1. This report responds to a Council resolution: “That a report be brought to Council
considering ways in which bicycle couriers might be directed to wear identification
numbers on their backs, to enable members of the public to commend courteous
behaviour or report negligent or dangerous riding.”
2. The issue of courier behaviour has been raised with Council a number of times. A report to Council on the 4 September 2000 addressed the need for courier companies to be brought under a code of conduct. A code of conduct was duly introduced (Attachment 1). A reminder of the need to adhere to the code was sent to courier companies on 12 April 2002 in a joint letter from Adelaide City Council and South Australia Police (SAPOL). 3. Complaints about couriers tend to be associated with the following breaches of the Australian Road Rules, the enforcement of which SAPOL are responsible:
Discussion 4. A meeting was held between Transpgvort SA, SAPOL and Council Officers. All issues related to cycle couriers were discussed and, as a result of this discussion, data was collected to attempt to establish the scale of the problem. 5. A monitoring exercise using observations of Parking and Information Officers was undertaken in June and July 2003, as was an analysis of crashes involving bicycle riders and/or pedestrians. These results indicated that the problem was not as large as anticipated and that the bicycle couriers are not the main offenders (Attachment 2). Rather it appears that it is regular cyclists who are breaking the Australian Road Rules. It appears that cyclists ride on footpaths because they find the roads intimidating, particularly streets where bicycle lanes are not provided. 6. Since the 2002 Council resolution, the four courier companies in the city have been approached to establish whether there would be any interest in working with the Council on this issue. 7. Discussion with these companies has highlighted that:
8. During 2002 three of the four courier companies changed from paying riders by the number of deliveries, to payment by the hour. This is believed to have reduced the pressure on couriers and therefore reduced the likelihood of them breaking the law. 9. Attempts to regulate bicycle couriers in Sydney have been unsuccessful Attachment 3. 10. A self-regulated courier identification system in Melbourne has met with limited compliance (not all companies are involved and less than 50% of riders display the numbers). Following the initial promotion and advertising campaign of the scheme the number of calls seemed to settle at an average of one call every two months, despite there being 100 couriers operating in the CBD (Attachment 4.) If a similar scheme were to be introduced in Adelaide; based on the Melbourne figures, such a scheme would receive roughly one call every six months and is likely to reduce to zero calls unless there was an on going commitment for advertising and heavy promotion of the reporting number. 11 The City of Perth examined the issue of bicycle couriers for their recent Draft Servicing City Access Plan. The recommendation of the Plan was to improve the bicycle network to reduce the occurrence of conflict with courier cyclists, rather than introduce regulations. Analysis 12. In 2000, the South Australian Minister for Transport and Urban Planning considered the possibility of introducing mandatory regulation (numbering) of couriers or a voluntary scheme, but considered that the scale of the problem was not sufficient to warrant government regulation/intervention. 13. Council has no power under current legislation to require bicycle couriers to wear numbers. In addition, the Local Government Act does not provide the Council with the power to regulate bicycle couriers in any form, including registration or behaviour. If the Council desires such legislation to be implemented it will need to lobby the State Government for changes to the legislation. 14. The Australian Road Rules provide the rules to be followed by all road users, including cyclists. At present, the South Australian Police are the only regulatory authority who are authorised to enforce the Australian Road Rules relating to cyclists. 15. SAPOL’s introduction of regular bicycle patrols in the City is being used to target cyclist behaviour and it is proposed that Council work with SAPOL to target specific problem areas. 16. The 2000 report to Council recommended that “the Corporation of the City of Adelaide work with BikeSouth and SA Police to establish a formal and regular communication mechanism with courier companies and couriers to support the existing voluntary Code of Conduct and improve the professionalism and image of the bicycle courier industry.” This formal communication mechanism was never fully established. 17. Council Officers will arrange a meeting with those courier companies who expressed an interest in working more closely with Council on these issues. It is likely that the meeting will give rise to requests from the courier companies for the improvement of their employees working environment (e.g. more bicycle lanes and bicycle parking). The results of this meeting will be used to inform the Strategic Bicycle Plan that is currently being prepared as part of the review of the Integrated Movement Strategy. 18. SAPOL and BikeSouth, Transport SA are supportive of any initiative that improves communication between Council and courier cyclists. Conclusion 19. The scale of the problem caused by bicycle couriers has been deemed, by the South Australian Minister for Transport and Urban Planning, not to warrant legislative intervention at State Government level. 20. Council has no power under current legislation to require bicycle couriers to wear numbers. In addition, the Local Government Act does not provide the Council with the power to regulate bicycle couriers in any form, including registration or behaviour. If Council desires regulation of the courier industry it will need to lobby the State Government for changes to the legislation. 21. Attempts to regulate courier cyclists, or introduce voluntary schemes, elsewhere in Australia, have been unsuccessful. 22. Council will work with SAPOL to identify locations where cyclist and pedestrian safety is a most at risk due to cyclist behaviour with a view to introducing regular patrols to monitor and report breaches of the Australian Road Rules. CODE OF CONDUCT
FOR BICYCLE COURIERS AND COMPANIES * adhere to the road rules * wear corporate uniform and photo ID when working * ensure that the bicycle is road worthy * document all deliveries * set realistic delivery times * promote realistic delivery times to customers * wear a helmet when riding * report all incidents to the company * cooperate with Police Prepared by BikeSouth (Department of Transport), in association with bicycle couriers, employers, Adelaide City Council and the South Australian Police Department A monitoring exercise using observations of the Parking and Information Officers has been undertaken. The main areas of illegal activity have been identified in only a few sections of the city and over a two month period the following violations were identified:
Collection of comprehensive data for cycling infringements would be impossible, but the exercise undertaken by the Parking and Information Officers provides a useful indication of the scale of the problem. Detailed analysis of Transport SA’s Road Crash Register which includes SA Police crash data for the Adelaide CBD was also undertaken. The following trends were identified for the period 1995 to 2002: 
Note: Bicycle Riders includes all people on bicycles not just bicycle couriers. This information indicates that the actual risk of a collision between bicycle couriers and pedestrians is relatively very low. In 2002, there were no reported incidents between cyclists and pedestrians. Clearly, there will be a number of incidents that are un-reported, however, the data serves to demonstrate the relative importance of this issue compared to pedestrian/motor vehicle incidents in the city. In particular, the analysis has highlighted a major rise in pedestrian/motor vehicle accidents since 2001 that will need further investigation. Consultation with Road Traffic Authority NSW Sydney CBD has approximately 200 bicycle couriers operating at one time. The industry is of a transient nature. Since 1990, they have attempted to regulate the bicycle courier three times, all of which were unsuccessful. In 1990, a voluntary scheme implemented by the Sydney City Council was introduced to identify couriers working for different companies and established a self-regulation system involving both courier companies and bicycle couriers. Under the self-regulatory arrangement, complaints about individual couriers were referred to the relevant courier company for action. The couriers were identified by a numberplate attached to the rear of their bicycles. By the end of 1992, the scheme had collapsed due to the unwillingness of the courier companies and the bicycle couriers. In the evaluation of the scheme it was noted that a voluntary scheme and "codes of conduct" carried little weight with the courier industry. In 1994, a discussion paper moved to introduce a new scheme to improve the conduct of bicycle couriers in Sydney CBD. Again, an identification scheme was introduced including identification stickers for their helmets and photo identification. A trial of this scheme commenced in 1994 and being self-regulatory only 49% of bicycle couriers signed up. Evaluation of this scheme showed that it was unsuccessful as it had little effect on improving behaviours of the bicycle couriers and the detection rate for traffic offences was not reduced. With the self-regulatory schemes being unsuccessful, the possibility of a mandatory scheme was announced in 1996. The Parliament of NSW Joint Standing Committee on Road Safety (Stay Safe 30) produced a report on Pedestrian Safety - Bicycle Courier Activities in the Sydney CBD. A report was issued with 6 of the 15 recommendations relating to the mandatory regulation scheme, which included: developing a mandatory registration scheme for bicycle couriers, including an ID system;
There was an issue raised during this period being the definition of a bicycle courier and whether a child delivering newspapers for pocket money was actually a "bicycle courier" meaning they would be required to be registered as well. The Government decided that the registration scheme would be too expensive to run and too difficult to operate. The Government came to the conclusion that it would be unlikely to be effective in changing behaviour. Since 1997, Sydney Police have run enforcement campaigns including enforcement and penalties for disobeying road rules. There is no formal or informal system of registration currently operating in NSW. Attempts to implement a mandatory regulation and registration system have not proceeded as government concluded that such a system would not result in improved behaviour and would be too costly and complicated to implement. Along with this, in 1996, a recommendation for bicycle couriers in Sydney's CBD included riders being required to pass a computerised knowledge test, which encompassed the road rules. This was to be the same test that learner drivers had to pass before becoming fully licensed drivers. However, this recommendation was not passed due to the cost involved and the workforce being too transient. Consultation with Melbourne Police Control Bicycle Group In Victoria, the Melbourne CBD currently has approximately 100 bicycle couriers operating. The Melbourne Control Bicycle Group has been running a self-regulatory system since 1998. Prior to their self-regulatory system in 1998, Melbourne Police had booked hundreds of bicycle riders (not necessarily bicycle couriers) in the CBD but it did not seem to affect their behaviour as they were still getting complaints. The Melbourne Police and the City of Melbourne got together to discover what would be the best way to fix the bicycle courier situation. Although bicycle couriers do cause concern, there were few collisions and generally it was seen to be a perceived problem rather than an actual problem. It was felt that it would be best to raise the public image of the couriers. The courier companies and bicycle couriers eventually only agreed to go ahead with the uniform wearing and identification of couriers. The bicycle couriers reluctantly used the identification system and as it was not compulsory to wear numbers, only 70-80% of bicycle couriers were wearing them. The numbers were 150 mm high and were attached to courier's backpacks. Melbourne Police took over the operating role by handling records and being the contact point for complaints and liaison. The phone number was advertised several times in the media launch and also at Council, in newsletters and circulated to all police stations. There was an agreement between the courier companies and the Police to not give details of their couriers - as long as the companies knew who was wearing what number then all the Police needed to know was the numbers and what company they were allocated to. Most complaints from the public generally resulted in a warning of the bicycle courier rather than a fine. If the "victim" wanted to pursue the complaint further then the Police and the courier companies would deal with it. Currently, the bicycle couriers are a little remiss about the numbering system and less than 50% of couriers are wearing numbers. To begin with, there were many complaints from the public, but by 1999/2000 this had fallen to approximately one complaint every two months and this has now fallen to virtually zero. Although, the scheme initially had a large media campaign alerting pedestrians and motorists of the phone number to make complaints, this number has not been heavily promoted since the scheme’s inception. It would appear that only an on-going commitment to advertising and promotion costs would be sufficient to maintain any momentum with the scheme. It is also debatable as to whether the one complaint every two months actually warrants the advertising and administrative investment.
|
