ctmy:
I am not sure whether changing operator every year is a good thing. Viewing it from another angle, if it is good, why change?
I have confirmed with my spouse that the bus driver fetching my child is the same as per last year. When we called up the bus operator to enquire, we were asked to speak to the driver directly, probably reinforcing the belief that how much you pay depends on which driver u are assigned to.
The Hockminatrix: It will be good if I can pay 60% to 70% for 1 way. I paid $130 for one way last year as compared to $140 for 2 way (around 93%). However, judging from the situation, I think it would be rather difficult to achieve.
Count me in for the feedback. Like what u said, whether the situation will change or not, we do not know but at least we tried.
Hi ctmy,
I agree frequent change may not be a good thing - it's disruptive, and everyone has to go through learning curve all over again. But everything has both good and bad, and benefit of that is that it's supposed to keep the vendor bidding process \"competitive\" and ensure current vendors perform.
However, if like you (or someone else) mentioned before, the vendor \"change\" is in name only while everything else remains the same, then the bidding process (if there was one ... and there should have been especially for vendor changes since that's civil service protocol for procurement) seems like nothing but a farce.
$130 vs $140 is ridiculous. Providers will tell us it's industry practice ... but as you may have seen from some of the prices I got for comparison ... in reality it's highly dependent upon individual providers. So why is it OK for our provider to be inflexible? And if they don't hear customer feedback, then they will assume (rightly) that all is dandy.
I'll PM you shortly about the feedback.