Tuesday, July 15, 2025

TT 208: How 1920s churches still influence today's Sunday timetables


Do churches that were prominent in the 1920s still influence Melbourne's Sunday public transport timetables a whole century later?

The answer is yes. Even if the successor to the churches involved is much less heard from today.   

A hundred years ago various interests staked claims on what Sundays should be about. Articles about this were then common in newspapers. Most notably in Melbourne, the varying political influence of those making these claims determined whether public transport operated on Sunday mornings, and, later, how frequently it ran. 

It's an interesting history so, aided by a Melbourne Tram Museum article and Trove newspaper archives, it's worth asking why this is. 

Unions

First the unions. Australian unions were the first in the world to win an eight hour day. However, until 1939, this typically involved a full day's work on Saturday. That is a 48 hour week with Sunday off. 

Sunday was seen as a day of rest, and, as wages grew, recreation also included picnics and excursions. Between the wars, before most families owned cars, pressure mounted on the railways and tramways to operate Sunday trips.

A reasonable-length day in the Dandenongs or at an outlying beach required a departure before noon. Especially in the summer for people wishing to have some time before it got very hot.  

The problem was that suburban trains and trams didn't run Sunday mornings for much of the early 1900s.

Churches


The protestant churches, notably Presbyterian, Methodist and Wesleyan denominations, wanted to keep it that way. Thus ensuring that the Sabbath remained free of trams grinding around corners and ringing bells. Sunday morning public transport was not seen as useful to churchgoers as it was assumed that most people would walk to their nearest suburban church

Having said that other less politically influential denominations supported Sunday morning public transport. There were also differences between CBD and suburban churches, with the former seeing it not as a vice but as a means to enlarge their congregations. 

Railways

Trains actually did operate on Sunday mornings at the turn of last century, albeit with significant gaps in timetables. However they were opposed by churches, did not recover their costs and railway workers did not like giving up their Sunday mornings.

Essendon lost its Sunday train in 1903, despite local opposition. More dramatically state cabinet agreed to discontinue trains on all lines before 1pm in 1905. The decision was described as 'a stage of virtue not been matched by any other Australian city, not even Adelaide, the city of churches'.  




Cancelling Sunday morning trains pleased the 'wowsers' but did not end debate, which only intensified after WW1. A decisive factor was the spread of cars in the 1920s, aided by the RACV popularising country motor touring. This led to perceived 'double standards' where the rich, with greater control of their time and funds to buy a car, could leave whenever they wanted on a Sunday but the workingman and family, without a car, were limited where they could go on their only shared day off because of restrictive tram and train timetables. Thus working class people (and their 'social improvement' champions, interested in popularising nature studies and physical health) kept requesting Sunday morning transport. 

The difference between what workers wanted to do and what churches thought they ought to do was partly resolved in the 1920s in favour of the former when the railways commenced Sunday morning excursion trains in 1928. These proved popular, reviving travel to beachside locations. Despite a less favourable climate Melbourne was luckier than other cities in that several lines, such as Altona, Williamstown, Sandringham and Frankston, had virtually beachside stations. 

By 1939 Sunday morning suburban train services had improved such that they were roughly every 40 to 60 minutes from 8am, with a 15 to 20 minute service in the afternoons (latter being better than 2025 on some lines). At the other end of the day, after 11pm Sunday evening trains were added in 1936, as a plan to extend service until midnight. 

It may have been significant that the railways had a working class skewed often Catholic workforce. The video below, on the 1955 Labor split, had the Australian Railways Union as one of the 'Groupers', after a period of communist leadership. Catholics in the unions may have been less worried than Protestants about working Sundays provided they got good penalty rates. If they were concerned it might have been more about family leisure time than attending church, especially as the latter's attendance rate fell. 



Melbourne has rarely had one metropolitan public transport mode that can be considered head and shoulders above the others. For example trains were typically faster than trams but came less frequently. Residents of suburbs like Northcote and Brunswick with closely parallel lines must typically choose between speed and frequency - they have no mode that delivers both (although they used to when trains were more frequent and trams faster). 

Another train/tram trade-off is span of hours versus frequency on Sunday mornings. Since Night Network started in 2016 trains on weekends do not have the later Sunday starts that still afflict most tram routes. However trains are often less frequent, with this distinction most prominent on the Craigieburn, Upfield, Mernda, Hurstbridge, Sandringham and Pakenham lines where 40 (and occasionally 70) minute Sunday morning intervals exist. This compares unfavourably with Sydney and Perth, which typically operate a 15 minute Sunday morning frequency on most if not all lines. 

Timetable upgrades are rarely completely 'greenfields', even if doing so might add less than 1% cost. Where a train timetable does get greatly upgraded in Melbourne, and of all the lines Frankston's has had the most improvement in the last thirty years, there is almost always a remnant of a past service pattern left.  

This can be seen on the Good Friday and Christmas Day (most years) schedule which uses the old pre Night Network Sunday timetable complete with its late morning starts. The result is that on these holidays the first train (9:24am) arrives at Frankston about 10 to 20 minutes after key longer distance bus routes 781, 782 and 887 leave. 


On those two days this represents a significant service span reduction on previous years. For evidence go back to 2009 and note the first train arrival at Frankston was 25 minutes earlier at 8:59am. Although as this was before Night Network this was the case on all Sundays as well as the abovementioned public holidays. 



Unlike (say) Sydney, whose train service levels look thoroughly modern every day of the week, the way that Melbourne schedules its trains may make an improvement but still retains, and in some cases exacerbates, decades-old historical quirks.

Melbourne's atavistic rail service funding and planning culture meant that the option to add two or three early morning trips to the holiday Sunday timetable when Night Network was added so that there would be wide spans 365 days of the year was never taken up. This is despite the trivial cost involved (a handful of extra trains per year per line as the wide span already exists on the other 363 days).

This culture of leaving the basic Sunday morning timetable alone even when service at other times improves remains in 2025. We know this because despite despite other aspects of its service improving (in this case interpeak going from every 15 to every 10 minutes) the Sandringham line's Sunday service (which includes 40 minute morning gaps) will remain unchanged according to the government.    


As for the Metro Tunnel timetables, we don't yet know as the government hasn't released even basic  frequency specifications for timetables. The official line is that 'timetables are still under development'. Sunday mornings on the Craigieburn and Upfield line will however improve from every 40 to 20 minutes, in a win for More Trains Melbourne's North and other campaigns. What is not yet known is how early the transition time from the 60 minute Night Network to the 20 minute regular service will be and whether the Good Friday and Christmas Day start issue as noted for the Frankston line will be fixed on these and other lines. 

The 'stickiness' of certain features of Sunday morning timetables doesn't just affect Metro lines. V/Line timetables have similar issues in its retention of late weekend starts for Geelong and Melton even after other parts of those weekend timetables got upgraded. Though in this case you can't entirely blame 1920s Sabbatarianism because the late starts exist (to a lesser extent) on Saturdays as well as Sundays and the Geelong line actually has a better 7 - 9am Sunday frequency than major Melbourne lines like to Ringwood, Mernda, Greensborough, Sandringham and more.   

Do decades-old historic remnants survive in our Sunday tram timetables too? Keep reading! 

Tramways

Ballarat trams ran on Sunday mornings, though the service was discontinued in 1906, with low patronage given as the reason. Melbourne trams in 1905 did not operate on Sunday mornings, though as noted above some of its trains still did. 

Trams had never run on Sunday mornings and were not about to start. A proposal accepted as technically feasible got voted down in 1915 after church objections. Note that this vote was taken when trams were run under groups of councils, ie before the formation of the MMTB.

Sunday morning service came up numerous times under the MMTB but kept getting rejected for different reasons, even though Sydney trams ran without incident. Claims were made that Sunday morning trams would be poorly used. However when trams were replaced by buses, which did run Sunday mornings, usage was high. But the now electric trams continued not to run Sunday mornings with controversy remaining, especially given that trains were now operating. 

The impasse was broken when MMTB Chairman Alex Cameron was forcibly retired in 1935 to be replaced by his deputy HH Bell (who supported Sunday morning service).

In 1936 Bell proposed a 6 month trial of Sunday morning trams on all but the Footscray network. Trams would operate every 30 minutes from 8am until the regular afternoon timetable started at 1pm. Families could buy discount tickets for trips beaches or Wattle Park, a move fiercely opposed by churches and the Womens Christian Temperance Union. But the people had spoken, with patronage exceeding expectations and Sunday morning trams becoming permanent. The profits on them even offset the losses incurred by running all night trams, which also started in 1936. 


After WWII 30 minutes continued to be the standard Sunday morning tram frequency. By this time patronage was declining. All night trams were replaced with all night buses. The latter ended in 1968 with some additional trips added to regular services. From the table below it can be seen that Sunday morning service started around 8am give or take about 30 minutes.  


Decades later...

Though hard to read, this 1984 tram timetable for Route 72 in Camberwell had approximately an 8am start and then two trams per hour on Sunday mornings until about 1pm. 

Some quieter tram routes were replaced by buses on Sundays in the 1960s. They remained that way until the mid 1990s. An example was Route 3 from Malvern East which ran as bus route 377 on Sundays. 


Two years later, as a dividend of Kennett minister Alan Brown's efficiency gains, Sunday service was restored on all tram routes. The basic service level remained similar to the 1936 Sunday morning trial nearly 60 years previously - that is a start of around 8am and a 30 minute frequency until 1pm. 


The biggest subsequent tram service boosts were the 1999 upgrades which saw Sunday service levels match Saturdays across both tram and train between 11am and 7pm. This was essentially a reinvestment for some of the savings obtained from removing conductors. 

Recent timetables indicate further, albeit minor, improvements to Sunday morning tram services since.  The biggest recent example (from nearly a decade ago in 2016) was all night service restored on six tram routes on weekends as part of Night Network.

Route 3 (which for a while operated as Route 3a via St Kilda on weekends) got a slightly earlier Sunday start. Also the time that a 20 minute or better service operated was made earlier. 


As can be seen from the typical 2025 example below, most Melbourne tram routes still start late on Sundays and 30 minute gaps often remain until after 9am. These offer inconsistent connectivity to Sunday morning train services, especially those on the majority of lines which are every every 20 or every 40 minutes. 

The Network Development Plan (Metropolitan Rail) from 2012 had a coordination framework based on 10 and 20 minute maximum waits on all main routes but this has yet to be implemented on most train, tram and major bus lines. This record demonstrates that Melbourne tram timetables are set in concrete almost as firm as that Sir Robert Risson insisted be used for their tracks.  


Modern opinion

Where would working class people and churches (the main protagonists in the 1920s regarding Sunday  morning public transport) stand these days regarding Sunday morning tram and train services?

The 'Continental Sunday' so dreaded by Methodists last century has become a reality in Melbourne. It is made possible by a massive casual and part-time student and foreign-born labour force who toil so that middle to upper income tourists and local Monday to Friday workers can enjoy being fed and entertained away from home. 

These workers need frequent and connected public transport over wide hours but too rarely get it, especially on Sunday mornings. Thus 2025's new working class needs Sunday morning public transport for their livelihood, not just for leisure excursions as more the case a century before.

Unlike in the 1920s when union coverage was higher, Melbourne's diverse service-sector proletariat who are more likely to work nights and weekends (when public transport is scarcest) is highly casualised and non-unionised. This bias might be why you rarely hear unions, whose advocacy priorities are shaped by members, call for better public transport services (though you might sometimes hear them demanding free parking). 

Then there is the matter of the relative influence of various unions in the current Labor government. Aided by cheap credit, construction unions like the CFMEU have undoubtedly been most successful, winning billions worth of work for members from Project 10 000, known today as the 'Big Build' of massive road and rail projects. Had the TWU and RTBU been similarly influential in winning work we would have trains, trams and buses running every 5 to 10 minutes across the network all week. But they haven't been and we don't.     

As for the established Christian churches, their influence dropped in both major political parties and the general community.

Jeff Kennett's 'work hard play hard' free-market Liberals were not the same party as the disparate but effective coalition (which included socially conservative womens' groups who won what we would today call quotas in organisational party positions) that Robert Menzies assembled in the 1940s.

Religious influence in Victorian Labor waned when the party split in the 1950s, and again in the 1970s when secular 'new left' voices within it became louder. There was some revival of Catholic influence when ex-Grouper unions (like the SDA) were readmitted to Labor in the '80s. But electorally and in the composition of the parliamentary parties, secularism continued its march through the Labor ranks in the 1990s while Catholics (eg Tony Abbott and Malcolm Turnbull) and evangelicals (eg Scott Morrison) were replacing previously dominant mainline Protestants and Anglicans in the Liberals. 

Meanwhile falling and ageing congregations caused many neighbourhood churches to close or merge. The Methodists and Presbyterians who most opposed Sunday morning transport were not immune, with these amalgamating into the Uniting Church in 1977. 

The rise of mega-churches and religious diversity has made it decreasingly probable that adherents walk to their chosen place of faith. Church, mosque and temple car parks are huge, sometimes getting government grants to expand. Also buying more land than the building strictly needs, with the balance used for parking, may also assist land-banking, contributing to the church's long-term asset base. 

It is now much more likely that faith communities would support rather than oppose better public transport on Sunday mornings, although their use of sites in often unserviced fringe or industrial areas can make providing this harder. 

Conclusion

There have been some Sunday morning service improvements on some tram and train routes. However their roll-out has been snails' pace, with per capita service still generally in decline, especially for trams. This decline comprised actual cuts to frequencies in the 1950s and 60s as the MMTB battled falling usage and rising wages, then a general stagnation in service for most decades since. 

No Sunday timetable improvement this century has matched Kennett's big 1999 service boosts for network reach across metropolitan train and tram. The only rival were the 2013 Metro upgrades which doubled Sunday (and for that matter Saturday also) train frequencies from 20 to 10 minutes to Ringwood, Dandenong and Frankston. However, like the 1999 changes these were only in the 11am to 7pm timeslot, leaving service outside those times infrequent. This is unlike the 2017 Sydney train timetable upgrade which delivered all-week 15 minute frequencies between 4am and midnight at most stations. 

The long-running bugbear of late Sunday morning starts was partly addressed in 2016 when Night Network started, especially for the train network. However early trains still skipped Southern Cross (essential for Skybus and other connections) and frequencies were still atrociously low with up to 70 minute gaps. All Good Friday and most Christmas Day timetables were not improved, with some made worse. As for trams, most routes did not gain Night Network service so their late Sunday starts and 30 minute gaps remained. 

It is unlikely that Commissioner Bell, who designed the basic Melbourne Sunday morning tram service pattern of an 8am start with 30 minute frequencies, would have envisaged that his six month trial in 1936 would still be determining tram times nearly 90 years later. Many buildings have had shorter lives than service frequencies on a timetable, even though (in theory) it should be possible to more easily adjust the latter based on community needs. 

With there now no organised opposition to improved Sunday morning public transport service, the only barrier to this is the government's political priorities. Which in public transport has been to value large infrastructure builds more highly than working it harder to provide a useful service all week, particularly evenings and weekends.

Some tram routes do now operate every 20 minutes from first tram on Sundays. But at the current rate of progress it is possible, even probable, that some 30 minute Sunday morning tram frequencies might remain in 2036, marking a century of a trial frequency only intended to be for six months.    

Index to Timetable Tuesday items

Thursday, July 10, 2025

Today's Big Bus Strike - What have the politicians said?



Today, Thursday July 10, is the bus strike that TWU Vic/Tas is claiming will be Australia's biggest.

Unlike previous strikes, it involves not just CDC but also Kinetic. That is two of Melbourne's biggest three bus operators. Ventura being the third big operator but its drivers are not striking. 

Something near half of Melbourne's bus routes will either not run or be on a (typically) much reduced Saturday or Sunday timetable with longer waits and shorter operating hours. There will also be substantial bus disruptions in Geelong and Ballarat. Although, partially mitigating its effects, it is school holidays so bus ridership will be less than during school days. 

Striking drivers will march from Trades Hall to State Parliament. Though it not being a sitting day I'm not sure how many politicians will see or hear them. 

What do we normally hear from politicians when there's a big transport strike? 

It depends on who they are and how big the strike is. 



The minister and government

In the strike has just started or is small the minister will want to stay out. The minister will typically say that it is a matter between the transport operator and the workers and express hopes for a quick resolution. 

This will continue for a while. The department's only involvement is likely to be in advising which services are and are not running, such as has been published on the PTV website

If there is sufficient community and media pressure, and strikes prolong (rather than just being a day here and there) then calls might grow for the government to step in. Initially that might just be some harsher exhortations to reach an agreement. Both CDC and Kinetic have sought the assistance of the Fair Work Commission in reaching an agreement.

If that fails there may be calls for even more activity from the government. For example having its own go at trying to broker an agreement. In extreme cases, if the government is really desperate, it's not inconceivable that they they tip in public money so the operators can meet union demands. 

Strikes that are really high profile may involve intervention from not just the minister but also the premier. Today's bus strike will cause significant inconvenience but, especially in Melbourne, it's less important to demographics seen as politically important than (say) pilots or even train or tram strikes. 


The shadow minister

An enterprising opposition wishing to win the 2026 state election might be seeking to frame the strike as a failure on the government's part to ensure reliable service delivery. They might go through the motions of requesting intervention from the government to make the latter look ineffectual. Even though if the strike occurred when they were in office their initial reaction - of leaving it to the parties to sort out - would likely be similar. 

Non-government MPs might post pictures of queues of stranded passengers and crush-loaded buses on their social media to further their desired message. This could be aided by them listening to passengers  and talking to media media, filling a gap given the likely absence of comment from the government side. Or, even just reposted FYI information from PTV advising commuting constituents about the strike. The sort of thing an engaged local member might do as a service, with no political point scoring involved. 

Features of an effective opposition include an ability to hold the government to account, an appetite for hard work and a will to win. This involves all shadow ministers pulling their weight in their portfolios, especially ones with as much opportunity as transport to contest the government's record. 

A particular opportunity exists for shadow Transport Minister Matthew Guy. His seat of Bulleen is possibly the only metropolitan seat entirely dependent on buses for its public transport. Not only that but all buses are operated by Kinetic, one of the operators whose drivers are striking today. He needn't even leave his seat to be at the centre of today's strike disruptions. Strikes are also easier for a Liberal opposition to oppose than a Labor opposition due to the latter's union affiliations. 

As at 3pm today the shadow minister had not posted on his Facebook page about the strike. 

What about the old-fashioned media release handy to get your head on the TV news? Nothing on the party website there. The last, dated 21st May, was just the second release for 2025 in the public transport portfolio. The year so far has seen a slow-down on 2024, which saw twelve releases from the Liberals on public transport, and especially 2023 with twenty releases (though to be fair there were more in the transport infrastructure and major projects portfolios - see graph below). Also it may be that this opposition prefers parliament to press (as evidenced by the large number of questions asked) when airing issues.  

 

Other members of parliament

I looked at Facebook pages for many (though not all) MPs. Especially representing heavily affected seats. As might be expected there was little coverage from government MPs (at least some of whom might be factionally sympathetic to the TWU). 

There was also quietness from non-government MPs' pages I checked. 

If you've come across an MP who has said anything about today's bus strike, please let me know in the comments below. The same goes if you see them on TV or in the papers, possibly arising from a release sent to a limited audience. 


Conclusion

The political reaction to today's big bus strike has so far been very quiet. Partly as buses are a much lower profile transport mode in Melbourne than in other cities. Had it been on a school day it might have got more attention. 

Reticence is possibly understandable from the government side whose members would just point people to the PTV website for service information. 

But silence is less understandable from the opposition. Especially when it's a significant public-facing service like transport.

On some days the current minister and government must feel thankful to have the loyal opposition they currently do. 

Tuesday, July 08, 2025

TT 207: When will we know how well our new bus contracts are going?


More a Timekeeping Tuesday than Timetable Tuesday today. 

New contracts for about a third of Melbourne's bus routes commenced a week ago today. This involved some shuffling of routes between operators and the exit of three smaller operators. Bus operators gaining new routes include CDC, Kinetic and Dysons (in order of number of routes gained). 

We know that CDC routes are going through a rough trot with unresolved industrial unrest stopping or severely curtailing services for several days in the last month. Not only that but further strikes loom not only for CDC but also Kinetic routes this Thursday 10 July 2025.

But what about services on other days and for other operators? 

There have been some critical social media posts but before rushing to conclusions I would rather first look at hard performance data after a settling-in period. The latter poses a risk because a switch to a different bus fleet is involved; this is far more than just a simple replacement of old senior managers with new senior managers like with (say) a Yarra Trams or Metro Trains changeover.  


More than just a few management changes

This work required included significant recruitment, driver training and familiarisation, as captured in this Kinetic Linked-in post below. 

Management teams and systems have had to have been integrated. Plus new buses, different depots and revised rosters. All happening while keeping existing services running (a full-time challenge in itself). So it's been a huge amount of work for all involved. 

Contract performance management

Given incoming operators gave assurances that they could do this, one hopes contract managers at DTP are keeping a close eye on performance.

Without such oversight there is no way of knowing whether the new contracts are delivering service equal to or better than what operated before July 1. That's important because driving performance improvement and better value should be their whole rationale. 

Vigilance is particularly required here given the varied history of contract management. Victoria has sometimes been a good place in which to be a low performer. Even if you lose a contract involvement in or around even a major crisis (such as the Transdev bus fleet safety affair of 2017) does not preclude your career or business bouncing back bigger than ever a few years later (like when Transdev won the tram franchise in 2024).

Transport operator chiefs often have life-long professional backgrounds in running transport but DTP executives often don't, leading to potential mismatches. The old saw about the person with money meeting the person with experience such that the person with experience gets the money while the person with money gets the experience springs to mind. 

DTP should be mindful of risks such as regulatory capture, perverse incentives, skill asymmetries, gold-plating, low-balling, special pleading and executives 'failing upwards' with effective safeguards erected against them. As well DTP may face pressures from others in government to cut cost, but if these go too far then there can be false economies. 

The stakes here are high, not just in providing an efficient transport system but also to the budget bottom line, as Victorian taxpayers pay out hundreds of millions per month in payments to transport operators.  I've said more about transport management here and here.  

Data reporting

Something that can help accountability is data transparency and reporting.

PTV reports daily performance here. You can see network performance for the past week or so by day. Metro Trains, Yarra Trams and V/Line trains are included. There isn't much lag between the day and when it is reported on. However, as the 'forgotten mode', daily bus performance is not reported. 

Monthly performance is here. This does include metropolitan bus. To get a fair idea you would need both June (previous operators) and July data (current operators). If processes are similar as for train and tram this is likely to come out around the 10th of July for June and the 10th of August for July. However to get a proper appreciation you'd need it to be broken down by route and preferably also by day so you can compare the performance of routes that changed operator and those that didn't. (Remember this as we'll unexpectedly return here)

The third approach is via the interactive dashboard . This provides route level data that you can view on graphs. Like with the daily data mentioned above, this only used to be available for Metro Trains, Yarra Trams and V/Line trains. However bus performance data by route was added in July 2021 with the government media release saying that it was part of the Bus Plan. 

This has data only up to June 2024 for buses, with a screenshot below.


What if you want 2025 data? Getting this is quite a chore. There's a little link on the bottom right. But instead of it taking you to a dashboard covering 2025 it loops you back to the monthly page (the same one we saw before). This is where it's important to read the fine print below. Because if you click where the arrow is (below) and you get a new format dashboard with bus as one of the selections. Save the rigmarole of the above by clicking the direct link and scrolling to the bottom. 


This takes you to a new-look dashboard, as below: 


Route numbers are there but are grouped by operator so you may need to select several before you find yours. It will be interesting how the presentation copes with the operator changes for some routes after July 1, especially if comparing before and after performance over a period that straddles the changeover. 

The latest data is up to May but June's is likely to appear soon.

We'll need July's for a fair comparison - that is a month's operation under the new arrangements. 

To conclude then, we are likely to know in early August how well the transition to the new arrangements has gone. At least initially.