Due to the lack of adequate financing of Municipal enterprise "Cherkassyelektrotrans" from the state budget, enterprise executives took unpopular steps and reduced the preferential transportation of citizens to a minimum what caused mass discontent of benefit recipients. After the innovation, preferential categories of citizens can’t use all electric transport on urban routes, but have the right for reduced fare only on certain vehicles which follow the strict schedule (every hour and a half).
Political forces brought citizens to a rally against the local government which allowed Municipal enterprise "Cherkassyelektrotrans" to implement this innovation. In fact, in the rally participated opposition as well as the party in power (The Communist party). Although organizers of the rally understand, that the city budget can't cover losses of the Municipal enterprise "Cherkassyelektrotrans", they take advantage of this possibility to rouse indignation amongst the citizens against the local government. Therefore, we may observe insincerity of opposition representatives, which deliberately rouse irritated benefit recipients against local political opponents to fit in with their own political interests. As long as representatives of opposition knew that problem is caused not by the local government, but due to the insufficient state funding, we can make conclusions about deliberate mass manipulations.
It’s interesting, that the most active organizer of the rally was the Communist party, which is a current member of the majority in parliament coalition. As long as this party is involved, we may assume that it could be planned mechanism for letting off the steam of public discontent, and direct it against the local government in order to divert attention from the president, government and parliament. If it’s really true, what role is played by some other representatives of local opposition (not only the Communist Party of Ukraine (CPU), but also the other parties)?
Of course, actions of Municipal enterprise "Cherkassyelektrotrans" executives also provoke many questions, because it seems that they intentionally facilitated the maximum level of public dissatisfaction. The amendments were implemented by quite harsh means, with no adaptation period and sufficient informational campaign. During the first days we could see that citizens were not familiar with the schedule of preferential electro transport, because information boards appeared only after some days and were placed at a height of two meters (not all benefit recipients are tall or have good eye site). Moreover, a very strange method was chosen for distinguishing paid trolleybuses – all plates with the number of route were removed. Now all local trolleybuses are called “special” and people run to and fro on the bus stop in order to read start and end points of a route through smudgy windows. Instead of this, preferential trolleybuses could be marked, for example, by a yellow rectangle, or some other symbol for distinction. On this point, forms general impression of a low-quality management. Such costumer policy can afford only communal or state enterprises, which don’t have to fight for clients, because they will get budget funds in any case.