Dublin Bus and Bus Éireann to reduce services & cut jobs.

Leon08

Sand wrote: »

dirty vehicles, ignorant drivers, loads of scumbags and much slower...

Unions dont operate from the point of view of offering the best service at the lowest cost to the public. They operate from the point of view of offering the least possible service at the highest possible wage.

You have encapsulated every aspect of dublin bus into a few sentences, and you're bang on the mark. Bravo.

djpbarry

Sand wrote: »

Mortons offered value for money - 2 euro from Celbridge into the city. In exchange you got clean buses, friendly drivers [ if you were running for a stop theyd actually wait for you instead of driving off, if they were stopped theyd let you on the bus instead of ignoring you], no scumbags and several of the services avoided the traffic deathtrap that is Lucan village. Into the city in 30-45 minutes most mornings. It also stuck quite efficiently to the time tables it issued. It did well and was expanding services on the route.

But again, if the service was so fantastic, then surely no number of Dublin Bus services is going to change the fact that their service is inferior (in the opinion of posters here), increased frequency aside? There must be some other reason why Morton’s lost customers, no?

Time Magazine

djpbarry wrote: »

But again, if the service was so fantastic, then surely no number of Dublin Bus services is going to change the fact that their service is inferior (in the opinion of posters here), increased frequency aside? There must be some other reason why Morton’s lost customers, no?

Several allegations of anti-competitive practices have been levied at the two CIÉ bus companies. Things like drivers parking the buses at the pick-up point and leaving for their break so that rival companies have nowhere to physically pick up passengers.

I should point out that these are unproven allegations. That said, even if they were true, it's unlikely such actions would quite pass as "anti-competitive" in a court case. However they could very well adversely impact on competition and would generally be considered "dirty tactics" unbecoming of a State-funded service.

thebman

djpbarry wrote: »

But again, if the service was so fantastic, then surely no number of Dublin Bus services is going to change the fact that their service is inferior (in the opinion of posters here), increased frequency aside? There must be some other reason why Morton’s lost customers, no?

He also said DB was cheaper. People might upt up with all the problems for a cheaper service.

I wouldn't be there you go.

A case of a private company working is Kearns.
http://www.kearnstransport.com/

I used to get Bus Eireann from Maynooth to back home because I could get a student ticket on it. One time it didn't turn up so I went up to get Kearns.

Worked out cheaper even without a student ticket and got me home an hour faster. To top it off, if a Kearns bus is full, they send a mini-bus to Maynooth to ensure nobody is stranded even if there are only two people at the stop. They bus driver radio's in from the CC to ensure the mini-bus arrives on time at Maynooth. Now that is fooking service!!!

Never stepped on a Bus Eireann bus since and have been appalled when I've heard stories from people of what they put up with from Bus Eireann because there is no choice in their area.

antoinolachtnai

The Economist wrote: »

Several allegations of anti-competitive practices have been levied at the two CIÉ bus companies. Things like drivers parking the buses at the pick-up point and leaving for their break so that rival companies have nowhere to physically pick up passengers.

I should point out that these are unproven allegations. That said, even if they were true, it's unlikely such actions would quite pass as "anti-competitive" in a court case. However they could very well adversely impact on competition and would generally be considered "dirty tactics" unbecoming of a State-funded service.

I think you are quoting about the most anodyne of the allegations made.

Even this amounts to 'abuse of a dominant position'. The allegations that I have heard would certainly 'pass' as being 'abuse of a dominant position' and are backed up by statements from the general public and DoT officials.

A dominant operator is not entitled to operate 'dirty tactics'.

Look at some conext:

In 2007, Dublin Bus got cash transfers from the government of about eur 100m. That means that for every euro they collected in fares, they got another 50c from the government.

Added to that is the fact that Dublin Bus has a lot of 'spare' buses, which can be deployed in a fairly arbitrary way. (Dublin Bus has over 1150 buses, but only 1032 of them are deployed at peak time.)

The private operator has no subsidies and few spare buses. Put these factors together and you will see that Dublin Bus has vast power, and it is impossible for a private operator to go up against them and not be run out of business.

Time Magazine

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

I think you are quoting about the most anodyne of the allegations made.

I'm staying very much on the safe side for the safety of the site.

Even this amounts to 'abuse of a dominant position'. The allegations that I have heard would certainly 'pass' as being 'abuse of a dominant position' and are backed up by statements from the general public and DoT officials.

Unfortunately, this just may not be the case. Competition law is notoriously hard to prove. If I am not mistaken there has never been a successful case of abuse of dominance in Ireland. Certainly there have been very few. Some cases that look like out-and-out breaches (Competition Authority v. ILCU, HB v. Mars, Meridian v. Eircell) were all conclusively rejected by Irish courts.

A dominant operator is not entitled to operate 'dirty tactics'.

Again, see above. Due to burdens of proof that are so important for society, a distinction between abuse of a dominant position and a dirty tactic must exist.

Look at some conext:

In 2007, Dublin Bus got cash transfers from the government of about eur 100m. That means that for every euro they collected in fares, they got another 50c from the government.

Added to that is the fact that Dublin Bus has a lot of 'spare' buses, which can be deployed in a fairly arbitrary way. (Dublin Bus has over 1150 buses, but only 1032 of them are deployed at peak time.)

The private operator has no subsidies and few spare buses. Put these factors together and you will see that Dublin Bus has vast power, and it is impossible for a private operator to go up against them and not be run out of business.

I agree with this. This is why I call for institutional reform rather than thinking this can be simply solved by someone like the Competition Authority.

CDfm

Surely the Luas has taken a lot of passengers and thats what happens - but I miss the horse and trap

antoinolachtnai

The Economist wrote: »

I'm staying very much on the safe side for the safety of the site.

Unfortunately, this just may not be the case. Competition law is notoriously hard to prove. If I am not mistaken there has never been a successful case of abuse of dominance in Ireland. Certainly there have been very few. Some cases that look like out-and-out breaches (Competition Authority v. ILCU, HB v. Mars, Meridian v. Eircell) were all conclusively rejected by Irish courts.

Again, see above. Due to burdens of proof that are so important for society, a distinction between abuse of a dominant position and a dirty tactic must exist.

I agree with this. This is why I call for institutional reform rather than thinking this can be simply solved by someone like the Competition Authority.

The competition authority doesn't necessarily have a lot to do with it. The current case with Morton's doesn't have anything to do with the Competition Authority.

In general, you are right that it is difficult to litigate this stuff, but Dublin Bus have made it a little too easy. Whatever the outcome, Dublin Bus will undoubtedly be the loser when things reach Court.

It's not quite true to say that Mars/HB was rejected by the Irish Courts. Mars won this case (eventually).

There are now very few people left who do not think that major reform is required in Dublin transport. But this is a sea-change. Six months ago, many people involved felt that the problem was a shortage of money rather than a structural problem.

CDfm

I live in Swords and would love the idea of a regular Dart Feeder service to Malahide then the Luas or an Express to the City like the Swords express and collecting from all bus stops would be useful and cool.

Who is co-ordinating public transport - the Fat Controller from Thomas the Tank Engine?

I was told by someone connected with Iarnrod Eireann that there was no reason why the Luas Couldnt operate with the vTunnel Heuton to Connolly but it was too handy for testing to give it up?

How come in 1900 more trains operated from Bray then today?

Sand

But again, if the service was so fantastic, then surely no number of Dublin Bus services is going to change the fact that their service is inferior (in the opinion of posters here), increased frequency aside? There must be some other reason why Morton’s lost customers, no?

As I noted, most people will take the first bus that comes along. CIE simply had more vehicles on the route to scoop up every passenger to squeeze Mortons and offered a cheaper service. Which is fine, except CIE had the state's coffers behind them, whereas Mortons didnt [ they probably got some sort of subsidy [?], but you wouldnt see the government handing them 30 million euro every year to cover operating losses].

Now personally, I would ignore a CIE bus and take the mortons that *would* come along as scheduled and pay the extra 15 cents so I could get a proper service. Most obviously wouldnt.

Now CIE are increasing charges, but youll never see an increase in the standards of service to match. Mortons charged slightly more, but you saw the difference.

Time Magazine

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

The competition authority doesn't necessarily have a lot to do with it. The current case with Morton's doesn't have anything to do with the Competition Authority.

I know. However even if they win the case, the most that will be achieved is compensation and Paul starting up that route again. Nobody in Dublin Bus will be punished and there won't be a taxi-like reform of the situation, and that's if it isn't settled out of court.

This is what I mean by "people like the Competition Authority" can only do so much -- the role for competition law/authorities are extremely limited here. Competition law can only go so far when transport law is so pathetic.

In general, you are right that it is difficult to litigate this stuff, but Dublin Bus have made it a little too easy. Whatever the outcome, Dublin Bus will undoubtedly be the loser when things reach Court.

Fingers crossed, but I wouldn't be as confident as you. Supreme Court unanimously over-ruled ILCU because they thought lobbying the government was not a distinct product from deposit insurance. Really. Nothing would surprise me from that bench. I would not be a bit surprised if they judged public provision of transport is the same market as private provision, in which case Dublin Bus probably aren't dominant in the first place. They concluded Eircell and Digifone (as they were then) weren't even jointly-dominant with 95% market share between them. As I said, fingers crossed, but I'm not hopeful.

It's not quite true to say that Mars/HB was rejected by the Irish Courts. Mars won this case (eventually).

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the case was rejected by the High Court and it had to go to Europe for clarification? If there's no inter-state trade, as there wouldn't be in a Dublin transport case, it's unlikely to go to Europe and would be dealt with exclusively under the Competition Acts, by Irish courts. I'm almost certain that it was Mr Justice Kearns who ruled in the High Court on both ILCU and Masterfoods. Given that the Supreme Court over-turned ILCU (and could thus be considered "less competition-friendly" than himself) and that he turned down Masterfoods, I am in no way convinced that Paul Morton will be a lucky man.

There are now very few people left who do not think that major reform is required in Dublin transport. But this is a sea-change. Six months ago, many people involved felt that the problem was a shortage of money rather than a structural problem.

I hope you're right, but again, alas, I think you might be wrong. You may be seeing a biased sample (those who aren't against private transport in the first place.)