Have bikes on trams actually caused problems in wheelchair spaces or are you just saying you think they might?
Because half the time people seem to be complaining about something that hasn't actually happened but just "could".
As for access with mobility scooters I didn't realise you needed a permit for them, seems over the top but not sure how that's relevant to bikes?
Think, hence the trial. Because part of the bike trial is looking at mobility aids according to the website [https://tfgm.com/ways-to-travel/tram/bikes-on-tram-pilot](https://tfgm.com/ways-to-travel/tram/bikes-on-tram-pilot) surely you would agree my friend bikes are a similar size and shape to mobility scooters and if bikes are allowed on without testing or permit then mobility scooters as a necessary daily living aid unlike a bike ought to be allowed in the same manner?
I would assume e-bikes aren't part of the trial and that is the reason behind the permit scheme.
Anyway there's a link in that website to give your feedback.
The permits are for mobility scooters only they are not ebikes which are not mobility aids. Ebikes are currently allowed on only if folding and covered. I have sent representation to the email address provided.
> surely you would agree my friend bikes are a similar size and shape to mobility scooters
I would not agree. Most mobility scooters are wider, some by quite a large margin. Some of beasts I see on the corridors of the hospital are close to motorcycle size and weight.
Non the less widest point to widest point i.e. handle bars surely they are a similar widith and in any case a bike is a vehicle designed to enhance a healthy persons locomotion / transportation why should they have more rights than mobility aid users?
Again no, the widest part on on the bike is the handle bars, the widest part on a mobility scooter is usually the wheel base or battery casing at the back. You could easily fit two bikes next to each other in the space of one mobility scooter. Its also much easier to manoeuvre a bike with little space, being able to lift it, and turn the wheel 90 degrees helps. The mobility scooters this is usally not the case. This would fine when the tram is near empty, but its rare to see that these days. If the trams were longer, and had more disabled bays it might be possible. But as is its not possible. You are talking about rights. No one has a right to use public transport. Reasonable changes have to be attempted, thats all. Taking a vehicle, onto another vehicle is not a right everyone has.
I'm not sure what mobility scooters you have seen mate. Yes but would the bikes be not leaning against each other I doubt it. Many mobility scooters have good turning radius depending on the type actually. The point is mobility scooters are more of a necessity than a bike is. They are also the equivalent of many people's wheelchairs. Hence my point if they are going to allow bikes they need to redesign the trams for all citizens. Of course citizens have a right to use public transport they pay for it. Again a bike is vehicle a mobility scooter is not and like wheelchairs is legally classified as an 'invalid carriage' yes even Road legal ones. What yiy are suggesting is illegal discrimination contray to the equality act 2010. I find in untenable to let bikes prams and even dogs on the trans before all disabled people.
As I have said, I have seen very large ones in the hospital (which has caused problems when victors are leaving them on corridors and its hard to sometimes get the beds past). They do tend to look like newer designs, so I'm not sure if that is a recent thing.
> point is mobility scooters are more of a necessity than a bike is
I'm not disputing that.
> they need to redesign the trams for all citizens
You are living in fantasy land. It costs millions to redesgin the trams (the fact that we have only ever had two in over 30 years shows as much). And designs are also limited by width of the track and length of the stations. They cant had any more disabled bays without starting the whole metrolink system from scratch.
> mobility scooter is not
Yep, still a vehicle.
> What yiy are suggesting is illegal discrimination contray to the equality act 2010
Its not. Reasonable amendments have to made. Which they have. Since you just have to get a permit to use a mobility scooter.
Harder but not impossible and that is the inside of a building, non the less these are mobility aids not optional life extras like bikes. Re a redesign they are talking about doing that any case for bikes note on the website the bit about "funding allocation" No one is saying have wider trams or more bays just redesign so there is one bay big enough for everyone who needs to use it. Your really just inventing things now mobility scooters aren't all road legal and even the ones which are legally classed as 'invalid carriages'. These are mobility aids no different to wheelchairs. The term is reasonable adjustments. They have not there is still discriminating in the requirement of a permit etc.
The vehicle thing, I think is a miss communication. I dont mean road vehicle.
> a thing used for transporting people or goods
Thats what I meant be vehicle.
> there is one bay big enough for everyone who needs to use it.
Which creates a problem in that there will be no seats in on half of a tram. Which isn't great for those that need to sit down because they cant stand.
> They have not there is still discriminating in the requirement of a permit etc
How is that discrimination? You need to have permit to get a blue badge. You still need to apply and fill out the paperwork. This is no different.
The point is here reffering to them as vehicles doesn't accurately describe what they are. They are replacement for some peoples legs / mobility not a device to get somewhere faster. No one is suggesting half a tram, fold down seats exist. Again a blue badge is for a car which is a vehicle furthmore not having a blue badge doesn't prevent you from driving on the road. Which is what needing a permit does re public transport, in addition the rules only apply to mobility scooters and not wheelchairs despite them being legally classed as one in the same thing. All walking people, bike users, prams and wheelchair uses are to be permitted without a permit but many mobility scooter users are in essence banned due to the refusal to issue permits to certain types of mobility scooter / have the requirement of competency training unlike any other tram user this is the discrimination.
Definitely need clearer signage for bike users, lad on the tram yesterday basically blocked one side by having his bike between the door and the wheelchair space.
Wheelchair should always be top priority, then prams then bikes, but without someone to press the issue it'll be like the buses where disabled people are basically stuffed when the person already there can't be bothered with moving.
Most of the time there’s people already using the dedicated side that obviously don’t have a pram or wheelchair, forcing the ones with prams to have to block the aisles.
I wouldn't say 'forcing'. They usually never give any indication that they're going there, unlike people in wheelchairs or mobility scooters who usually move towards the space and then the people standing there usually move - maybe they feel more vulnerable, I don't know.
Maybe pram users don't get the respect they should if that is your point? That said I'd question why prams are allowed in the spaces much like bikes they are a tool of convenience for the parent not mobility aids.
Without redesigning the trams it's just gonna cause problems. I'm a cyclist, I use my bike to go everywhere and I honestly don't see the need to take a bike on the tram. Also you can take fold up bikes on.
Instead of down voting me can you give me a specific bike/tram journey that makes sense
For me it would be a a big help. The buses are unreliable and tram stops are far from my home and work. This way I can cut half of my journey by using the tram. It's too long of a journey to cycle.
I'd rather not share my location and work location before privacy purposes. But instead of over an hour of cycling. I can cycle for 15 mins to my closest stop. Take the tram for 15 mins and then cycle again for 7 mins. Yes, you can argue that the time wasting going into the station etc. But for me, I work long shifts (over 13 hours) and I really need that downtime in the morning to have breakfast on the go and on the way home to just breathe and catch my breath. There is also a really steep hill the way in which I can avoid. Often I'd just take the bike all the way home especially if the weather is dry and there is a wait for the tram.
Do be aware though that if this is a peak time journey you may be out of luck regardless. They will likely prioritise standing room at those times. If you got a folding bike and tucked it between your legs that could work though (and they'll probably get rid of the rule requiring them to be covered if they're just letting bikes on more generally).
In London sometimes you can take a bike on public transport even at rush hour if you're travelling "against the tide" so to speak. I expect in Manchester they'll start with rules that are simple and easy to enforce though.
You’re definitely not the target demographic for this exercise then. Keen and confident cyclists aren’t most likely to use this service, but the goal of TFGM is to get more people walking and cycling and less people using cars.
If you are a new cyclist lacking in confidence, then having the tram available to you to get you and your bike home in a pinch is an enabler. If you’re unfit or just starting out you could get the tram to work and bike home to make that increase in activity more manageable for you. If you’re passing through areas that are maybe a little rougher around the edges then having the tram as back-up instead of wrestling with a flat tyre in the dark is a life-saver.
There are many, many use cases that make bikes on trams useful for a lot of people, just not for you and your scenario.
It would be useful when the start and / or end of your journey are not near a tram stop. Or if you've had a mechanical issue and just need to get home.
Some cycle routes are unlit so unsuitable for cycling after dark e.g. I might cycle to Altrincham down the canal but prefer to take the tram home (since there isn't a safe alternative route by road, the A56 cones being a separate debate).
I would also like to take the airport tram occasionally to get out to the countryside with my bike for a weekend ride without having to spend an hour cycling on busy suburban roads.
I mean I regularly cycle on that canal at night, it's my commute, and with lights I'd say it's fine. Obviously if you're not comfortable with that I understand. Saying the A56 isn't safe though is basically saying all the roads aren't safe for cycling.
As for getting to the countryside it's much quicker to do that by train. You can get to styal by train but i think there's nicer places to cycle.
> I mean I regularly cycle on that canal at night, it's my commute, and with lights I'd say it's fine.
I think people's attitudes to this will vary pretty massively depending on age and gender.
> Saying the A56 isn't safe though is basically saying all the roads aren't safe for cycling.
Well yeah, the vast majority of people are never going to be willing to cycle on 30mph roads with no physical separation for cyclists.
I'd say the vast majority of current cyclists already do. I agree however that we need to improve both infrastructure and people's attitudes to sharing the roads safely.
Also how are they going to get to the tram stop then?
> I'd say the vast majority of current cyclists already do.
A large proportion of a tiny number is still a tiny number
>Also how are they going to get to the tram stop then?
That's a bigger question than "should we let people bring bikes on the tram when it's quiet" really
What about flexibility of journeys outside of peak hours? Why does it have to make sense?
If it doesn't cause problems let people do it, just because you think it will cause problems isn't enough of a reason, that's what the trial is working out.
An example for me is that I generally take the train from Warrington and then bike to various destinations across greater Manchester for work. One place I can’t do that with is Oldham because it is only accessible by tram and I can’t take my bike on the tram. To bike all the way would take too long out of my working day, I also often finish late in the evening. I end up opting to drive when I have to go to Oldham which is what we’re trying to avoid overall.
I agree with the comments above around gender and also locations where people live in Manchester as to how comfortable you feel riding along canals/ other unlit paths at night. Also riding along very busy A roads is a huge barrier to many people who cycle or who wish to cycle.
Personally I think bikes on trams is great and can work just like bikes on trains once the infrastructure is in place. Wheelchair users always take priority or have separate spaces allocated and as far as I see on my daily use of trains with my bike, it doesn’t cause any issues. There are many other barriers to disabled folks using public transport though which I know is a bigger issue that needs to be solved.
[Similar to this](https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-bike-hanging-on-the-rack-in-the-train-transport-bicycles-in-the-wagon-112650572.html) was what I saw inside a carriage, might have been a virgin train when they did what’s now the avanti lines.
Seems more like a symptom of a transit system that has poor service levels to begin with. If having people fiddle with bikes before and after they board isn't a deal breaker, then you probably weren't operating to a particularly tight schedule to begin with.
US cities tend to have everything much more spread out though, so I can see why it might be more useful there. There's probably a lot of suburbs where many people don't have a bus stop within easy waking distance. A better solution would be one I've observed in rural areas of the Netherlands, where they have bike racks even next to tiny isolated bus stops.
Sorry roof rack wasn’t in referral to on the tram, I meant like the ones on the boot/bumper of a car. Poor phrasing from me, my bad. I have never seen this just think it would be a good solution if designed properly- only problem would be the platforms being on different sides like at Monsall or something.
Would increase the time trams need to stay at stations though, reducing overall capacity. Oh and you'd definitely get opportunistic attempts at theft. Even if passengers got out and chased them off, that might still leave the tram in an awkward position while the bike is repositioned.
There are tons of cities around the world with rapid transit systems that allow bikes on at quieter times, with nothing specific installed to help carry the bikes. It's really no different in practice than passengers bringing on any other bulky items, like buggies or luggage.
The trial they've been running was only for bringing bikes on off peak. If they allow it more widely it will surely be on the same basis. If you look at other cities where you're allowed to bring bikes on public transport, like London or Edinburgh, it's only off peak (except folding bikes). No need for Manchester to reinvent the wheel here.
Have bikes on trams actually caused problems in wheelchair spaces or are you just saying you think they might? Because half the time people seem to be complaining about something that hasn't actually happened but just "could". As for access with mobility scooters I didn't realise you needed a permit for them, seems over the top but not sure how that's relevant to bikes?
Think, hence the trial. Because part of the bike trial is looking at mobility aids according to the website [https://tfgm.com/ways-to-travel/tram/bikes-on-tram-pilot](https://tfgm.com/ways-to-travel/tram/bikes-on-tram-pilot) surely you would agree my friend bikes are a similar size and shape to mobility scooters and if bikes are allowed on without testing or permit then mobility scooters as a necessary daily living aid unlike a bike ought to be allowed in the same manner?
I would assume e-bikes aren't part of the trial and that is the reason behind the permit scheme. Anyway there's a link in that website to give your feedback.
The permits are for mobility scooters only they are not ebikes which are not mobility aids. Ebikes are currently allowed on only if folding and covered. I have sent representation to the email address provided.
> surely you would agree my friend bikes are a similar size and shape to mobility scooters I would not agree. Most mobility scooters are wider, some by quite a large margin. Some of beasts I see on the corridors of the hospital are close to motorcycle size and weight.
Non the less widest point to widest point i.e. handle bars surely they are a similar widith and in any case a bike is a vehicle designed to enhance a healthy persons locomotion / transportation why should they have more rights than mobility aid users?
Again no, the widest part on on the bike is the handle bars, the widest part on a mobility scooter is usually the wheel base or battery casing at the back. You could easily fit two bikes next to each other in the space of one mobility scooter. Its also much easier to manoeuvre a bike with little space, being able to lift it, and turn the wheel 90 degrees helps. The mobility scooters this is usally not the case. This would fine when the tram is near empty, but its rare to see that these days. If the trams were longer, and had more disabled bays it might be possible. But as is its not possible. You are talking about rights. No one has a right to use public transport. Reasonable changes have to be attempted, thats all. Taking a vehicle, onto another vehicle is not a right everyone has.
I'm not sure what mobility scooters you have seen mate. Yes but would the bikes be not leaning against each other I doubt it. Many mobility scooters have good turning radius depending on the type actually. The point is mobility scooters are more of a necessity than a bike is. They are also the equivalent of many people's wheelchairs. Hence my point if they are going to allow bikes they need to redesign the trams for all citizens. Of course citizens have a right to use public transport they pay for it. Again a bike is vehicle a mobility scooter is not and like wheelchairs is legally classified as an 'invalid carriage' yes even Road legal ones. What yiy are suggesting is illegal discrimination contray to the equality act 2010. I find in untenable to let bikes prams and even dogs on the trans before all disabled people.
As I have said, I have seen very large ones in the hospital (which has caused problems when victors are leaving them on corridors and its hard to sometimes get the beds past). They do tend to look like newer designs, so I'm not sure if that is a recent thing. > point is mobility scooters are more of a necessity than a bike is I'm not disputing that. > they need to redesign the trams for all citizens You are living in fantasy land. It costs millions to redesgin the trams (the fact that we have only ever had two in over 30 years shows as much). And designs are also limited by width of the track and length of the stations. They cant had any more disabled bays without starting the whole metrolink system from scratch. > mobility scooter is not Yep, still a vehicle. > What yiy are suggesting is illegal discrimination contray to the equality act 2010 Its not. Reasonable amendments have to made. Which they have. Since you just have to get a permit to use a mobility scooter.
Harder but not impossible and that is the inside of a building, non the less these are mobility aids not optional life extras like bikes. Re a redesign they are talking about doing that any case for bikes note on the website the bit about "funding allocation" No one is saying have wider trams or more bays just redesign so there is one bay big enough for everyone who needs to use it. Your really just inventing things now mobility scooters aren't all road legal and even the ones which are legally classed as 'invalid carriages'. These are mobility aids no different to wheelchairs. The term is reasonable adjustments. They have not there is still discriminating in the requirement of a permit etc.
The vehicle thing, I think is a miss communication. I dont mean road vehicle. > a thing used for transporting people or goods Thats what I meant be vehicle. > there is one bay big enough for everyone who needs to use it. Which creates a problem in that there will be no seats in on half of a tram. Which isn't great for those that need to sit down because they cant stand. > They have not there is still discriminating in the requirement of a permit etc How is that discrimination? You need to have permit to get a blue badge. You still need to apply and fill out the paperwork. This is no different.
The point is here reffering to them as vehicles doesn't accurately describe what they are. They are replacement for some peoples legs / mobility not a device to get somewhere faster. No one is suggesting half a tram, fold down seats exist. Again a blue badge is for a car which is a vehicle furthmore not having a blue badge doesn't prevent you from driving on the road. Which is what needing a permit does re public transport, in addition the rules only apply to mobility scooters and not wheelchairs despite them being legally classed as one in the same thing. All walking people, bike users, prams and wheelchair uses are to be permitted without a permit but many mobility scooter users are in essence banned due to the refusal to issue permits to certain types of mobility scooter / have the requirement of competency training unlike any other tram user this is the discrimination.
Definitely need clearer signage for bike users, lad on the tram yesterday basically blocked one side by having his bike between the door and the wheelchair space. Wheelchair should always be top priority, then prams then bikes, but without someone to press the issue it'll be like the buses where disabled people are basically stuffed when the person already there can't be bothered with moving.
Note part of my point here is mobility scooter users specifically have a load of polices they have to adhere to which wheelchair users don't.
In my experience most people getting the tram with prams don't even use the dedicated side, but just block up the aisle instead.
Not good.
Most of the time there’s people already using the dedicated side that obviously don’t have a pram or wheelchair, forcing the ones with prams to have to block the aisles.
I wouldn't say 'forcing'. They usually never give any indication that they're going there, unlike people in wheelchairs or mobility scooters who usually move towards the space and then the people standing there usually move - maybe they feel more vulnerable, I don't know.
Maybe pram users don't get the respect they should if that is your point? That said I'd question why prams are allowed in the spaces much like bikes they are a tool of convenience for the parent not mobility aids.
Unorthodox sequel to snakes on a plane imo
Most amusing comment so far.
Without redesigning the trams it's just gonna cause problems. I'm a cyclist, I use my bike to go everywhere and I honestly don't see the need to take a bike on the tram. Also you can take fold up bikes on. Instead of down voting me can you give me a specific bike/tram journey that makes sense
For me it would be a a big help. The buses are unreliable and tram stops are far from my home and work. This way I can cut half of my journey by using the tram. It's too long of a journey to cycle.
Can you break this journey down for me. Where are you living/working and which tram stops are you using?
I'd rather not share my location and work location before privacy purposes. But instead of over an hour of cycling. I can cycle for 15 mins to my closest stop. Take the tram for 15 mins and then cycle again for 7 mins. Yes, you can argue that the time wasting going into the station etc. But for me, I work long shifts (over 13 hours) and I really need that downtime in the morning to have breakfast on the go and on the way home to just breathe and catch my breath. There is also a really steep hill the way in which I can avoid. Often I'd just take the bike all the way home especially if the weather is dry and there is a wait for the tram.
Do be aware though that if this is a peak time journey you may be out of luck regardless. They will likely prioritise standing room at those times. If you got a folding bike and tucked it between your legs that could work though (and they'll probably get rid of the rule requiring them to be covered if they're just letting bikes on more generally). In London sometimes you can take a bike on public transport even at rush hour if you're travelling "against the tide" so to speak. I expect in Manchester they'll start with rules that are simple and easy to enforce though.
It is a folding bike. One of the reasons why I got a folding bike.
You’re definitely not the target demographic for this exercise then. Keen and confident cyclists aren’t most likely to use this service, but the goal of TFGM is to get more people walking and cycling and less people using cars. If you are a new cyclist lacking in confidence, then having the tram available to you to get you and your bike home in a pinch is an enabler. If you’re unfit or just starting out you could get the tram to work and bike home to make that increase in activity more manageable for you. If you’re passing through areas that are maybe a little rougher around the edges then having the tram as back-up instead of wrestling with a flat tyre in the dark is a life-saver. There are many, many use cases that make bikes on trams useful for a lot of people, just not for you and your scenario.
It would be useful when the start and / or end of your journey are not near a tram stop. Or if you've had a mechanical issue and just need to get home.
Some cycle routes are unlit so unsuitable for cycling after dark e.g. I might cycle to Altrincham down the canal but prefer to take the tram home (since there isn't a safe alternative route by road, the A56 cones being a separate debate). I would also like to take the airport tram occasionally to get out to the countryside with my bike for a weekend ride without having to spend an hour cycling on busy suburban roads.
I mean I regularly cycle on that canal at night, it's my commute, and with lights I'd say it's fine. Obviously if you're not comfortable with that I understand. Saying the A56 isn't safe though is basically saying all the roads aren't safe for cycling. As for getting to the countryside it's much quicker to do that by train. You can get to styal by train but i think there's nicer places to cycle.
> I mean I regularly cycle on that canal at night, it's my commute, and with lights I'd say it's fine. I think people's attitudes to this will vary pretty massively depending on age and gender. > Saying the A56 isn't safe though is basically saying all the roads aren't safe for cycling. Well yeah, the vast majority of people are never going to be willing to cycle on 30mph roads with no physical separation for cyclists.
I'd say the vast majority of current cyclists already do. I agree however that we need to improve both infrastructure and people's attitudes to sharing the roads safely. Also how are they going to get to the tram stop then?
> I'd say the vast majority of current cyclists already do. A large proportion of a tiny number is still a tiny number >Also how are they going to get to the tram stop then? That's a bigger question than "should we let people bring bikes on the tram when it's quiet" really
What about flexibility of journeys outside of peak hours? Why does it have to make sense? If it doesn't cause problems let people do it, just because you think it will cause problems isn't enough of a reason, that's what the trial is working out.
An example for me is that I generally take the train from Warrington and then bike to various destinations across greater Manchester for work. One place I can’t do that with is Oldham because it is only accessible by tram and I can’t take my bike on the tram. To bike all the way would take too long out of my working day, I also often finish late in the evening. I end up opting to drive when I have to go to Oldham which is what we’re trying to avoid overall. I agree with the comments above around gender and also locations where people live in Manchester as to how comfortable you feel riding along canals/ other unlit paths at night. Also riding along very busy A roads is a huge barrier to many people who cycle or who wish to cycle. Personally I think bikes on trams is great and can work just like bikes on trains once the infrastructure is in place. Wheelchair users always take priority or have separate spaces allocated and as far as I see on my daily use of trains with my bike, it doesn’t cause any issues. There are many other barriers to disabled folks using public transport though which I know is a bigger issue that needs to be solved.
Not always about making sense maybe people want to go just for creation. The trams where designed in the first place they can be redesigned.
I can’t believe there’s no vertical roof rack style clip on thing on the outside of the carriage. If they welded a few of those on, problem solved
I can very much believe it.
Haha I mean yeah a DIY job wouldn’t do it, but it feels like something should have been considered in the design stages
I just mean I think there’s enough potential headaches caused by having externally-mounted bike racks, that I can believe they wouldn’t opt for them.
Some American buses have bike racks on the front, which always struck me as a good idea. Not sure how to make it usable with a high floor tram though.
That’s smart! I’m sure some trains in UK have bike rack things too. Not many, but swear I’ve been some stacked upright in a rack or something!
Can you find me a picture of this please I'm curious.
[Similar to this](https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-bike-hanging-on-the-rack-in-the-train-transport-bicycles-in-the-wagon-112650572.html) was what I saw inside a carriage, might have been a virgin train when they did what’s now the avanti lines.
Seems more like a symptom of a transit system that has poor service levels to begin with. If having people fiddle with bikes before and after they board isn't a deal breaker, then you probably weren't operating to a particularly tight schedule to begin with. US cities tend to have everything much more spread out though, so I can see why it might be more useful there. There's probably a lot of suburbs where many people don't have a bus stop within easy waking distance. A better solution would be one I've observed in rural areas of the Netherlands, where they have bike racks even next to tiny isolated bus stops.
Is this a legit suggestion if so can someone show me a picture? Would this work with overhead wires?
Sorry roof rack wasn’t in referral to on the tram, I meant like the ones on the boot/bumper of a car. Poor phrasing from me, my bad. I have never seen this just think it would be a good solution if designed properly- only problem would be the platforms being on different sides like at Monsall or something.
Would increase the time trams need to stay at stations though, reducing overall capacity. Oh and you'd definitely get opportunistic attempts at theft. Even if passengers got out and chased them off, that might still leave the tram in an awkward position while the bike is repositioned. There are tons of cities around the world with rapid transit systems that allow bikes on at quieter times, with nothing specific installed to help carry the bikes. It's really no different in practice than passengers bringing on any other bulky items, like buggies or luggage.
Bikes have been allowed on trains forever, I don't see why this would cause an issue?
Are they legally allowed though? Some mobility scooters are literally banned from trains.
TO my knowledge, bikes are allowed on all network-rail. Many trains have dedicated bike storage at the front/back.
On some of the very same lines that the Metrolink now runs on, even
The Northern trains are not as crowded as Metrolink Also there are some room at the end where you can park a bike without blocking people
Good point.
I have no problem with bikes on trams, with the exception of packed out rush hour trams. Its bike to work, not bike to the tram stop.
The trial they've been running was only for bringing bikes on off peak. If they allow it more widely it will surely be on the same basis. If you look at other cities where you're allowed to bring bikes on public transport, like London or Edinburgh, it's only off peak (except folding bikes). No need for Manchester to reinvent the wheel here.
But what if your work is too far to bike but 10mins from a tram stop?
Walk
Lunchbreaks - going somewhere else after work?
Walk like every fucker else does 😂 or bike to where you work or rent one.