Abstract
Both the public- and private-sector transport sectors in South Africa have been plagued by many challenges. Media reports have often reflected instances of bus strikes, train breakdowns, rivalry among competing private taxi operators, including minibus, meter, and Uber taxis, all of which have often left commuters stranded or facing serious delays. While these challenges continue to feature in current affairs, there has been a dearth of research considering the transport-related concerns that affect the members of South Africa’s working population as they commute to and from their places of work. In response to this gap in the literature, this study has explored the experiences of blue- and white-collar commuters who regularly use public- and private-sector transport at Park Station, Johannesburg.
Telephone interviews were conducted with twelve blue- and white-collar workers who were recruited while commuting to and from work via Park Station, Johannesburg. Telephone interviews were selected as they would be more convenient for the interviewees than interrupting their commute for the purpose of an interview, or allowing a researcher whom they did not know to visit them at their private homes dispersed across Gauteng province. The research provided the opportunity to demonstrate the renewed utility of telephone interviews for research now that telephone access is nearly saturated in the global population. Such interviews proved effective in retrieving rich data from the participants regarding the factors that influenced their transport choices during their daily commute.
Access, affordability, reliability, and safety of transport, as well as the attitudes that transport operators displayed towards commuters emerged as major themes influencing the transport choices of commuters passing through Park Station. The interviews also revealed differences between the participants regarding their use and experiences of various public- and private-sector transport options. This included differences based on class. For example, blue-collar workers sometimes had less choice than their white-collar counterparts, as both proximity and cost limited the transport options available to them. The choices they exercised often left them feeling exposed to crime and to collisions. They struggled to arrive on time, and were disrespected by transport operators as they made their way to and from work. On the other hand, even white collar workers were sometimes inclined to choose options that they did not consider affordable within their own budget in order to avoid these calamities. The various public- and private-sector transport modes were therefore found to differ with respect to whom they served best, with potential implications for state-society relations. Additionally, the commuters in this study were not aware of any consultation process, where their views could have been expressed during the process of transport planning. This raises concerns with regard to the principle of collaborative planning.
M.A. (Urban Studies)