Irish Rail strike days

devnull

SpaceTime wrote: »

Also, there are *still* no sockets on the MK4 trains. I know that seems trivial, but if you're going to take a public transport journey between Cork and Dublin having the ability to charge your laptop and mobile is a huge deal.

The bus can offer you that now, pretty much all Aircoach services offer that and a few GoBE ones too!

Aren't there very few MK4's operating now? I've only used the train twice in the past year or so but I've never been on an MK4

smellmepower

Hilly Bill wrote: »

That would make train travel that little bit safer.

Lovely.

LXFlyer

SpaceTime wrote: »

There are two factors to this:

1) The economic slow down and reduction in train travel generally.
2) The massive improvement in motorway infrastructure on long distance routes. This is competing directly with Irish Rail who, despite fleet replacements, did nothing to improve speed and thus make the service more attractive.

I also *still* find a major problem with consistency of service on board around really basic things like cleaning and hygiene. I recently got the train to Dublin from Cork and the toilets were absolutely filthy, you could actually smell them in the corridor and in the coach of the train.

That kind of thing is inexcusable and from my point of view it means I won't be taking the train again.

Also, there are *still* no sockets on the MK4 trains. I know that seems trivial, but if you're going to take a public transport journey between Cork and Dublin having the ability to charge your laptop and mobile is a huge deal.

Catering on board is still inadequate too. It wouldn't kill them to put a proper espresso machine into the dining cars of the MK4 and start serving a few decent coffees. Irish consumers expect a lot more than instant coffee and a hang-sangwich these days.

devnull wrote: »

The bus can offer you that now, pretty much all Aircoach services offer that and a few GoBE ones too!

Aren't there very few MK4's operating now? I've only used the train twice in the past year or so but I've never been on an MK4

Fitting sockets to the Mark 4 sets would require a refurbishment programme to the entire fleet, something there may not be the money to do at the moment.

There are three Mark 4 sets in daily use with the maintenance spare called up as and when required. They operate the key business trains from Cork in the morning and the evening return services from Dublin, and additional trains between Friday and Sunday.

end of the road

devnull wrote: »

I've never been on an MK4

i've been on one once. there nothing special to be honest

Infini

suicide_circus wrote: »

Perhaps the state should increase the subvention to IR? Maybe close a few hospitals? Sack a few special needs care assistants? While we're at it, drivers should be on 100k basic.

Should reread some of the thread you'd see drivers only get €56k max but thats before tax and other charges which people forget about which can erode that significantly. Besides if the goverment didnt waste €30mil+ giving away taxpayers money to road developers every year just cos not enough people use them thered be enough money to cover the €17mil shortfall + hire a few more assistance. Just so you know! :rolleyes:

corktina

smellmepower wrote: »

Lovely.

t would actually render train travel almost extinct. As correctly pointed out, without the subvention for the free passes the services would cost exactly the same to run and be even more untenable than they already are.

devnull

end of the road wrote: »

i've been on one once. there nothing special to be honest

I have been on one, I just meant that it was not in the last year or so, normally I go by bus all of the time, but went by train a couple of times when bus was not an option.

devnull

Infini2 wrote: »

Should reread some of the thread you'd see drivers only get €56k max but thats before tax and other charges which people forget about which can erode that significantly. Besides if the goverment didnt waste €30mil+ giving away taxpayers money to road developers every year just cos not enough people use them thered be enough money to cover the €17mil shortfall + hire a few more assistance. Just so you know! :rolleyes:

Everybody has to pay tax and other charges, it's not unique to Irish Rail staff.

Many people are on less than that, including myself and I also have to pay tax.

I can't believe anyone can come on here and say €56k is a poor wage, before or after tax. It beggars belief.

mickydoomsux

devnull wrote: »

Everybody has to pay tax and other charges, it's not unique to Irish Rail staff.

Many people are on less than that, including myself and I also have to pay tax.

I can't believe anyone can come on here and say €56k is a poor wage, before or after tax. It beggars belief.

Not everyone in the company is a driver and/or earning that kind of money.

steveblack

lxflyer wrote: »

We have paid a far higher price in terms of our transport costs than any staff member on terms of payroll cuts.

You can take advantage of a tax saver ticket, no use to CIE workers.
Staff must make there way to work early in the morning before public transport starts and then home at night after it has finished.
To do this you must have a car and as we all know petrol aint cheap. No tax saver petrol deal to be had.

cdebru

lxflyer wrote: »

I think you'll find that if passenger numbers dropped that dramatically again that the NTA would be drafting revised timetables that reflected demand which would equate to service cuts.

You can dress it up all you like, but the core problem is that the companies' business collapsed. That's the reason for the losses.

The companies were left with a cost base that was too high and which was based on the previous demand levels. The business dropped almost 10% in one year, but costs didn't. That's a total mismatch that left the companies in dire straits.

You can believe in your own world that the FTS is to blame, but that's only a small part of this. The fundamental fact is that the business collapsed but costs were not paired back fast enough.

I'd also argue that the paying customer has paid a far bigger price than anyone (including employees) in all of this in terms of the percentage annual fare increases which have been the main source of the shortfall in PSO subsidy. We have paid a far higher price in terms of our transport costs than any staff member on terms of payroll cuts, plus anyone working in the private sector has had to pay a higher percentage pay cut on top of that.

I think you will find that the NTA will be dealing with contracts with private companies not semi states that can just be told do this or that, even if the contract allows them to reduce service levels then any company bidding for contracts will have to price that in to their tender unless you believe private companies are going to take on the costs of redundancies etc upon themselves.

What the drop in customers did was just increase the burden already being carried by the fare paying passengers onto a smaller group so fewer people were carrying a heavier burden,

You can believe in your world that 1.1 million people can be given the right to travel by train, coach or bus anywhere in the country as much as they like when ever they like and it will only cost €60 odd per person and that you can freeze the total amount paid while increasing the number of people entitled every year.


Yes fare paying passengers have been screwed but the state still pays the same money they were paying five years ago for free travel despite the fact that the numbers entitled has fallen, so fares have gone up costs have been reduced but more people are entitled to free travel and the payment for that is at the same level for 5 years.

Just for the record IR costs in 2008 were €441m in 2013 they were €312m that is pretty massive cost cutting by anyone's standards, but you think you can keep going back to the well and looking for more and more, and increasing fares, but the one constant the paltry amount paid for free travel is not the issue.

Infini

devnull wrote: »

I can't believe anyone can come on here and say €56k is a poor wage, before or after tax. It beggars belief.

Only because some think they actually HAVE €56k a year outright but they dont and that money is only before tax and only if your at the top of the scale in the driving. Point Im making is by the time taxes etc are out of the way people expecially those with families have little to nothing left at the end of it. Cost are going up in dublin expecially with the housing and that. A €10 a week can make a huge difference for some its sink or swim. And while someone earlier said that the water charges wasnt relevant when your taxed to the hilt through the back and front door eventually it gets to the point enough is enough.

SpaceTime

lxflyer wrote: »

Fitting sockets to the Mark 4 sets would require a refurbishment programme to the entire fleet, something there may not be the money to do at the moment.

There are three Mark 4 sets in daily use with the maintenance spare called up as and when required. They operate the key business trains from Cork in the morning and the evening return services from Dublin, and additional trains between Friday and Sunday.

I doubt it would require a full refurb. I've seen them retrofitted very rapidly in the UK using surface mounted ducts that ran across the skirting area.

As you can see it's quite doable : http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/731/2301/1600/04042006107.jpg

If the seats are some standard design, that's also a possibility (just with Irish style sockets rather than German ones)

http://www.bahn.de/vareo/view/mdb/vareo/konzept/mdb_138853_dbag_coralint_innen_klappti_704x328_hq.jpg
I'd also add that they could be limited to a few amps rather than 13amps. A lot of the continental trains only deliver about 6amps to each socket if you go above that the power's tripped off. This obviously avoids bulky wiring but it's more than adequate for portable devices.
You're hardly going to be boiling a kettle or plugging in your portable tumble dryer !

They'll often have a warning that they're for 200W MAX or something like that.

CatFromHue

Infini2 wrote: »

Only because some think they actually HAVE €56k a year outright but they dont and that money is only before tax and only if your at the top of the scale in the driving. Point Im making is by the time taxes etc are out of the way people expecially those with families have little to nothing left at the end of it. Cost are going up in dublin expecially with the housing and that. A €10 a week can make a huge difference for some its sink or swim. And while someone earlier said that the water charges wasnt relevant when your taxed to the hilt through the back and front door eventually it gets to the point enough is enough.

56K is a pretty good to very good wage.

We all pay tax and other charges too.

devnull

Infini2 wrote: »

Only because some think they actually HAVE €56k a year outright but they dont and that money is only before tax and only if your at the top of the scale in the driving. Point Im making is by the time taxes etc are out of the way people expecially those with families have little to nothing left at the end of it. Cost are going up in dublin expecially with the housing and that. A €10 a week can make a huge difference for some its sink or swim. And while someone earlier said that the water charges wasnt relevant when your taxed to the hilt through the back and front door eventually it gets to the point enough is enough.

Even if you are on say 50k before tax, that is still above the average industrial wage, and something a lot of people hit in the recession would LOVE to be on.

If people cannot live on 50k then quite frankly they need to examine their outgoings and their lifestyle since I know plenty of people on less than that in the private sector with families who can cope. It just requires cutting back on the wants, less holidays and less going out several times a week.

When you are paid little over 20k, or on minimum wage, have to bring up a family, that is when you can talk about sink and swimming, and not being able to live, that is true hardship for you. Anyone who is on over 50k even before tax saying they have it so bad really needs to get a grip on reality.

Most countries charge for water, it's not like Ireland is a one off. Irish people waste water like there is no tomorrow and someone has to pay for it. At least this way there is an incentive not for Mary and John not to leave the taps running all through winter for days on end incase they freeze over.

LXFlyer

steveblack wrote: »

You can take advantage of a tax saver ticket, no use to CIE workers.
Staff must make there way to work early in the morning before public transport starts and then home at night after it has finished.
To do this you must have a car and as we all know petrol aint cheap. No tax saver petrol deal to be had.

It is still a much larger % increase in cost for public transport users, taxsaver or not. And perhaps I am now self-employed and can't avail of taxsaver, or my employer won't facilitate it.


You're making a lot of assumptions there.


I'd wager that the vast majority of people using bus/rail to/from work will still have at least one car to operate, so they will still be hit by fuel increases too.

end of the road

devnull wrote: »

Even if you are on say 50k before tax, that is still above the average industrial wage, and something a lot of people hit in the recession would LOVE to be on.

If people cannot live on 50k then quite frankly they need to examine their outgoings and their lifestyle since I know plenty of people on less than that in the private sector with families who can cope. It just requires cutting back on the wants, less holidays and less going out several times a week.

When you are paid little over 20k, or on minimum wage, have to bring up a family, that is when you can talk about sink and swimming, and not being able to live, that is true hardship for you. Anyone who is on over 50k even before tax saying they have it so bad really needs to get a grip on reality.

maybe they have a larger mortgage then the person on 20 k, it isn't always because of holidays and going out that they may have little left you know.

devnull wrote: »

Most countries charge for water, it's not like Ireland is a one off. Irish people waste water like there is no tomorrow and someone has to pay for it. At least this way there is an incentive not for Mary and John not to leave the taps running all through winter for days on end incase they freeze over.

i don't waste water not that i will be paying for it anyway as i take my water from my land via my pipes via my pump into my house. i agree people leaving the taps on incase of the pipes freezing over isn't a good thing to do but i do understand why they do it.

LXFlyer

cdebru wrote: »

I think you will find that the NTA will be dealing with contracts with private companies not semi states that can just be told do this or that, even if the contract allows them to reduce service levels then any company bidding for contracts will have to price that in to their tender unless you believe private companies are going to take on the costs of redundancies etc upon themselves.

What the drop in customers did was just increase the burden already being carried by the fare paying passengers onto a smaller group so fewer people were carrying a heavier burden,

You can believe in your world that 1.1 million people can be given the right to travel by train, coach or bus anywhere in the country as much as they like when ever they like and it will only cost €60 odd per person and that you can freeze the total amount paid while increasing the number of people entitled every year.


Yes fare paying passengers have been screwed but the state still pays the same money they were paying five years ago for free travel despite the fact that the numbers entitled has fallen, so fares have gone up costs have been reduced but more people are entitled to free travel and the payment for that is at the same level for 5 years.

Just for the record IR costs in 2008 were €441m in 2013 they were €312m that is pretty massive cost cutting by anyone's standards, but you think you can keep going back to the well and looking for more and more, and increasing fares, but the one constant the paltry amount paid for free travel is not the issue.

Nowhere have I said that the FTS is not an issue, but to suggest that it is the primary one is just not the case.


The primary issue is that the business dropped by 20%, with most of that in the 2008 and 2009, and while costs have fallen (and are now significantly lower), they've not done so anywhere near as rapidly as revenue, therefore there is a large shortfall to make up, which still needs to be addressed - hence the pay cuts. As I've said above, payroll is usually the single biggest cost. Otherwise you won't have a company to work for. That's what that Balance Sheet screams out to me.


We don't know what the current FTS review will produce, it may yet see some changes implemented in the operation of the scheme.

Jamie2k9

We don't know what the current FTS review will produce,

We do whatever is best for vote buying. :rolleyes:

markpb

steveblack wrote: »

You can take advantage of a tax saver ticket, no use to CIE workers. Staff must make there way to work early in the morning before public transport starts and then home at night after it has finished. To do this you must have a car and as we all know petrol aint cheap. No tax saver petrol deal to be had.

I don't think its reasonable to take a job with a public transport company and then complain that public transport won't take you to work. When taking the job, the cost of getting to work should have been a factor in your decision. You can't come along now and complain about something that always was and always will be.

The same thing applies to any shift worker, anyone who lives a long way from where they work or anyone else that public transport cannot serve.

devnull

steveblack wrote: »

You can take advantage of a tax saver ticket, no use to CIE workers.

Of course it isn't, since on their days off and when they are not working, they can travel for free, cheaper still than a tax saver ticket.

Staff must make there way to work early in the morning before public transport starts and then home at night after it has finished.

I doubt there are many, if any staff that start early morning and finish late at night, maybe one of those, but not both, or do you really have staff who start at 6 in the morning and finish after midnight?

may06

devnull wrote: »

Of course it isn't, since on their days off and when they are not working, they can travel for free, cheaper still than a tax saver ticket.



I doubt there are many, if any staff that start early morning and finish late at night, maybe one of those, but not both, or do you really have staff who start at 6 in the morning and finish after midnight?

You do have staff that start at 4.30am though.

Kamik

Havent used Irish Rail in Years, and hopefully never need to rely on them ever again!

Copyerselveson

Kamik wrote: »

Havent used Irish Rail in Years, and hopefully never need to rely on them ever again!

Glad to hear the strike won't interfere with the inner tranquility of your being so.

devnull

may06 wrote: »

You do have staff that start at 4.30am though.

I don't deny that some staff start very early or finish very late, but it was being painted that staff do both.

dublinman1990

We have known for years now that IE has been in a large deficit for years (i.e. in the tens of millions of euro right now) the problems for the deficit are not to going to go away when they don't properly address the issues of the company.

The practice of hiring people who is related to someone with a IE senior manager is really not a good image for a rail company that is trying to make ends meet and to fundamentally survive in the long term. That sort of management philosophy reeks of gross self entitlement in which apparently from IE terms cannot be stopped. How much money from the practice of hiring these new so called 'managers' affecting their balance year on year. The general consensus of the public hearing about these people being hired to do a job they know very little or with no experience of running an actual railway at all must be highly questioned.

The people who hear this are the taxpayers who have to bail them out for their inappropriate fallacies on actually trying to provide a service for themselves, the public. They along with the frontline workers of IE are the biggest losers in all of this. They in an ideal world should to have the collective responsibility to take on the senior management for addressing these failures. The truth is sadly they would never do this because it is not in some of the culture of IE to do it at all because of a so called militant arm that apparently so far streches to within all of CIE.

This pay issue with IE is a albeit a small one will not solve their finances overnight not by a long shot. Costs like their large fuel bill, the lack of real proper recruitment opportunities for existing staff and for new people coming in (this does include the eradication double or triple jobbing on existing employees btw) or trying to solve the problem of current employees who sit around doing next to nothing still need to be gradually addressed with the company over time.

My current problems as a student in Dublin is that when I do go back to college on Monday. If college is open that day, I only have the situation of getting squeezed onto a bus for nearly the entire journey or have the realistic option of walking to it from my own home if traffic is at a standstill. No one will ever estimate the scale of the negative impact that this strike will hit Dublin Commuters on Monday morning.

From a connectivity and business point of view, whenever the rail strikes take place may cripple Dublin and other cities to the point of part or complete failure.

end of the road

Kamik wrote: »

Havent used Irish Rail in Years, and hopefully never need to rely on them ever again!

why is that, tell us your story

cdebru

lxflyer wrote: »

Nowhere have I said that the FTS is not an issue, but to suggest that it is the primary one is just not the case.


The primary issue is that the business dropped by 20%, with most of that in the 2008 and 2009, and while costs have fallen (and are now significantly lower), they've not done so anywhere near as rapidly as revenue, therefore there is a large shortfall to make up, which still needs to be addressed - hence the pay cuts. As I've said above, payroll is usually the single biggest cost. Otherwise you won't have a company to work for. That's what that Balance Sheet screams out to me.


We don't know what the current FTS review will produce, it may yet see some changes implemented in the operation of the scheme.

The balance sheet screams out to me that

1 costs have been cut from €441m to €312m since 2008
That fare paying passengers have been hit by successive increases.
That the subvention has been cut year after year.
And that the money for free travel has stayed the same.




So it is untrue and unfair to pretend that costs have not been addressed, it is also true that fare paying passengers have played their part as have the staff you don't cut your costs by over 25% without the staff being severely affected. Who hasn't stepped up to the plate is the government, they have cut subvention and froze the FTS block payment, so the burden has fallen on the staff and the fare paying passengers to pick up pieces .
Personally I think the staff and the fare paying passengers have given more than enough, so if the government want to have a third of the adult population travel for free they have to pay for it. That is the issue only the unions are too afraid and niave to make it the issue.

The model is unsustainable that is why it is closed to new entrants because private operators won't take that block grant nonsense and if and when tendering comes in and the NTA has to balance the books rather than just pass the buck to CIE to balance the books free travel will end or have to be financed properly.

may06

devnull wrote: »

I don't deny that some staff start very early or finish very late, but it was being painted that staff do both.

No it wasn't painted that way, you just understood it to be that way. Re-read the post in question.

mickydoomsux

cdebru wrote: »

That is the issue only the unions are too afraid and niave to make it the issue.

This is the one point i disagree with.

The unions have brought the insanity that is the Free Travel Scheme to attention in letters sent to the management in the company and it was ignored a few times and then they were basically told that the government won't tolerate any change to the scheme so it isn't any kind of bargaining chip for either employees or the company when they go to the Dept of Transport.

Kamik

end of the road wrote: »

why is that, tell us your story

Long story concerning me with a buggy occupying Wheelchair space in dining carriage and asked to leave to another carriage. ended up standing in entrance from Athlone to Dublin.

devnull

may06 wrote: »

No it wasn't painted that way, you just understood it to be that way. Re-read the post in question.

The original poster said:
"staff must make there way to work early in the morning before public transport starts and then home at night after it has finished.

The key part in bold. If he said OR instead of AND I'd agree with you.

Definition of and: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/and?s=t
Definition of then: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/then?s=t

flyingsnail

The problem with attacking the free travel scheme is that it would be seen by many as an attack on the vulnerable in society. I don’t have a problem with the principal of the free travel scheme, giving it to over 65s and those that genuinely need it but I think the real problem with it is in the second part, those that genuinely need it, but it seems to be given to just about anybody for any reason and you also have the fraud element.

These are the subvention levels from the IE annual reports, so it oblivious that there have been cuts and cost savings to match but what does the actual passenger get, higher fares, less services, shorter trains, less frontline staff, one line closed and two others under a very real threat.

(000)
2014 = ???
2013 =127,029
2012 = 135,751
2011 = 148,683
2010 = 155,137
2009 = 170,624
2008 = 181,152

Are we going to be in the same position again next year, looking at a rail strike when there are more cuts? And what’s going to be left of the rail system when it’s all done and dusted?

devnull

Subvention levels decreased yes, but no transport business should expect to carry 10-15% less passengers and still get paid the same amount. In real times, that would be a rise in subvention.

The facts are that it is true that some subvention was cut to cut costs when the country was crippled, but also some subvention was cut simply because the number of passengers was decreasing.

cdebru

mickydoomsux wrote: »

This is the one point i disagree with.

The unions have brought the insanity that is the Free Travel Scheme to attention in letters sent to the management in the company and it was ignored a few times and then they were basically told that the government won't tolerate any change to the scheme so it isn't any kind of bargaining chip for either employees or the company when they go to the Dept of Transport.

Sorry letters to management? if the unions want to put it on the agenda then put it out there when Dermot O'Leary is on morning Ireland or news talk etc, no they keep schtum and let the management and government set the agenda, labour court recs, unavoidable, independent assessments, etc etc,

Why because one the unions are afraid that they will come off as scrooge trying to rob the pensioners and second there is a niave belief amongst some that if you make public transport funding unattractive that the private sector will just say thanks but no thanks and CIE can avoid privatization, of course the tendering model that the NTA is following means that the FTS is not an issue for the private sector it will be the NTAs problem to balance the books.


The unions don't have to argue for the scrapping of free travel just for the proper funding of the scheme, they are failing their members by not highlighting how poorly the scheme is funded or how differently it is funded for the private sector where private companies are getting 30% of each ticket when a free travel pass is used.

devnull

cdebru wrote: »

The balance sheet screams out to me that

1 costs have been cut from €441m to €312m since 2008
That fare paying passengers have been hit by successive increases.
That the subvention has been cut year after year.
And that the money for free travel has stayed the same.

So you agree that
- Costs have been cut in areas of the business
- Passengers have had to pay higher fares

So therefore it's only right that with costs being brought down and passengers being paid more, the staff should do their bit and take a hit on their wages?

During that time, the average cost per employee has stayed around the same, despite the fact there have been large cost savings and large increases to passengers. All it screams out is that everyone else has to take the brunt of it except for the staff.

cdebru

devnull wrote: »

Subvention levels decreased yes, but no transport business should expect to carry 10-15% less passengers and still get paid the same amount. In real times, that would be a rise in subvention.

The facts are that it is true that some subvention was cut to cut costs when the country was crippled, but also some subvention was cut simply because the number of passengers was decreasing.

But the tendering model the NTA is offering does exactly that, they get paid on a Km serviced nothing to do with how many if any passengers travel, they get paid the same if there is a 100% drop.

devnull

cdebru wrote: »

But the tendering model the NTA is offering does exactly that, they get paid on a Km serviced nothing to do with how many if any passengers travel, they get paid the same if there is a 100% drop.

This model is open to all operators, both public and private, Dublin Bus and Bus Eireann etc can all bid for these tenders. It's not like it's going to be restricted to only one type of operator.

If you think though it's unfair that it will apply on only the tendered routes and not existing DB PSO routes which will not be tendered, I guess you will be in support of a tendering o all routes asap then?

end of the road

Kamik wrote: »

Long story concerning me with a buggy occupying Wheelchair space in dining carriage and asked to leave to another carriage. ended up standing in entrance from Athlone to Dublin.

i'm sorry for your experience. however a wheelchair space is just that, a wheelchair space. if it was needed for a wheelchair then you being asked to move is fair enough i'm afraid

mickydoomsux

cdebru wrote: »

Sorry letters to management?

Internal memos/letters sent to the CEO in the early days of all this nonsense with a number of cost saving/revenue generating ideas.

Roundly ignored because a few of them would be "politically unpopular".

mickydoomsux

Kamik wrote: »

Long story concerning me with a buggy occupying Wheelchair space in dining carriage and asked to leave to another carriage. ended up standing in entrance from Athlone to Dublin.

Wheelchair spaces are exactly that and are labelled as such.

Having children isn't a disability.

Copyerselveson

devnull wrote: »

I have been on one, I just meant that it was not in the last year or so, normally I go by bus all of the time, but went by train a couple of times when bus was not an option.

So would you rather the railways were scrapped and long distance public transport handed over to private bus operators on the motorways?

end of the road

devnull wrote: »

Subvention levels decreased yes, but no transport business should expect to carry 10-15% less passengers and still get paid the same amount. In real times, that would be a rise in subvention.
The facts are that it is true that some subvention was cut to cut costs when the country was crippled, but also some subvention was cut simply because the number of passengers was decreasing.

thats all well and good but cutting the subvention has led to short carrige darts where long carrige darts are needed, trains in storage because the company can't afford to use them meaning overcrowding on busy services, this isn't simply a cut in subvention because of lower passenger numbers, this is is a continuous cycle of undermining any cost savings made by continuously cutting subsidy every time costs savings are made until eventually something will have to give, most likely services meaning passengers leave. frankly i believe this is a deliberate attempt to try undermine our railway and it discusts me. we can find money for private companies to do this and that yet we can't find it to keep our transport system running or to invest in it to bring it up to scratch so future generations can hopefully have it to use. the lot is about politics and i'm sick of it. if we are going to have public transport in this country then it needs to be payed for. people find the fares to high and also the subsidy to high. so the companies can't win. what gives and who pays? those are the questions

end of the road

devnull wrote: »

So you agree that
- Costs have been cut in areas of the business
- Passengers have had to pay higher fares

So therefore it's only right that with costs being brought down and passengers being paid more, the staff should do their bit and take a hit on their wages?

During that time, the average cost per employee has stayed around the same, despite the fact there have been large cost savings and large increases to passengers. All it screams out is that everyone else has to take the brunt of it except for the staff.

the staff have taken a lot of cuts via various means. how much more should they agree to? until they are on either minimum or below minimum wage? what happens if they take more cuts and thats not enough?

mickydoomsux

end of the road wrote: »

thats all well and good but cutting the subvention has led to short carrige darts where long carrige darts are needed, trains in storage because the company can't afford to use them meaning overcrowding on busy services, this isn't simply a cut in subvention because of lower passenger numbers, this is is a continuous cycle of undermining any cost savings made by continuously cutting subsidy every time costs savings are made until eventually something will have to give, most likely services meaning passengers leave. frankly i believe this is a deliberate attempt to try undermine our railway and it discusts me. we can find money for private companies to do this and that yet we can't find it to keep our transport system running or to invest in it to bring it up to scratch so future generations can hopefully have it to use. the lot is about politics and i'm sick of it. if we are going to have public transport in this country then it needs to be payed for. people find the fares to high and also the subsidy to high. so the companies can't win. what gives and who pays? those are the questions

Essentially people want a public transport system that isn't paid for from the public purse that somehow manages to keep running on God knows what.

Save money through running the smallest possible sets, cut wages/conditions of employees and increase fares to paying customers to allow us to keep providing 1.1 million people with All-Island Free Travel all while paying the company who is running the entire show less every year to do that.

Copyerselveson

There comes a point at which one has to ask what the objective of cutting the railway subvention is. Clearly it isnt just to save money.

If capital expenditure is being moved away from the railways and onto motorways rather than having a sensible balance of the two the question has to be asked "who benefits" and I am not taking about the taxpayer here, I am talking about the benefit of the stakeholders.

Who are the financial stakeholders? Is it the landowners who sell their land for a new road? Is it the oil companies who will benefit from less rail and more road? Is it the lobbyist who pockets a few bob from his or her paymasters for putting the right words in the right ears? Maybe someone who gave a nice political donation and now wants payback?

Ireland is not the most open or transparent of countries when it comes to lobbying and when some of those lobbyists become journalists then you can smell opinion being "shaped" in the media.

I believe there are savage and mostly unnecessary rail cuts being planned and the media are softening up public opinion for the inevitable. And we of course will take that like sheep like we always do.

cdebru

devnull wrote: »

So you agree that
- Costs have been cut in areas of the business
- Passengers have had to pay higher fares

So therefore it's only right that with costs being brought down and passengers being paid more, the staff should do their bit and take a hit on their wages?

During that time, the average cost per employee has stayed around the same, despite the fact there have been large cost savings and large increases to passengers. All it screams out is that everyone else has to take the brunt of it except for the staff.

The staff have already taken cuts in 2012 on the promise that they wouldn't be asked again, but the company was back looking for more 12 months later.

cdebru

devnull wrote: »

This model is open to all operators, both public and private, Dublin Bus and Bus Eireann etc can all bid for these tenders. It's not like it's going to be restricted to only one type of operator.

If you think though it's unfair that it will apply on only the tendered routes and not existing DB PSO routes which will not be tendered, I guess you will be in support of a tendering o all routes asap then?

You think they are going to the bother of tendering to just give them to DB and BE anyway ?


I think the method of payment is much more advantageous to operators than the model currently operates with CIE where the NTA just make a decision and CIE have to just do it and absorb any costs involved, the new leapcard child fares is the latest example where people now up to 19 years of age are entitled to school fares even if not in school, and the CIE companies have to absorb the lost revenue.

Kamik

end of the road wrote: »

i'm sorry for your experience. however a wheelchair space is just that, a wheelchair space. if it was needed for a wheelchair then you being asked to move is fair enough i'm afraid

I would naturally have moved if a wheelchair appeared on the train, that goes without saying.
But the space remained vacant all the way to dublin on a crowded train and i was the only man with a buggy on board AFAIK.

devnull

Copyerselveson wrote: »

So would you rather the railways were scrapped and long distance public transport handed over to private bus operators on the motorways?

No, I don't want the railways scrapped at all, but thanks very much for putting words into my mouth. I use the DART every day and even commuter trains from time to time as well,

It's clear though that the rail fans have a serious chip on their shoulder about buses, I only mention the fact that I use the bus more than the train to Cork and straight away that apparently makes me want to scrap the railways.

Talk about going over the top.

end of the road wrote: »

thats all well and good but cutting the subvention has led to short carrige darts where long carrige darts are needed, trains in storage because the company can't afford to use them meaning overcrowding on busy services, this isn't simply a cut in subvention because of lower passenger numbers, this is is a continuous cycle of undermining any cost savings made by continuously cutting subsidy every time costs savings are made until eventually something will have to give, most likely services meaning passengers leave

In case you hadn't noticed, the country hasn't been in the best of states over the last few years and all elements of the pubic sector and semi-states have had to take cuts in subvention and funding because of that. It's not like the country is in an economic boom and there is cash flowing around like there is no tomorrow unlike any other time in the countries history like there was 10 years ago.

Staff need to take more of a cut, I don't think 1.7% is unreasonable for someone on 56k. Many people in their jobs on far lower pay have had to face bigger cuts than that. Less staffing costs means more money to be spent elsewhere. The average staffing costs is still the same as it was several years ago, even just before the financial crisis. That cannot be right.

I haven't seen much dart overcrowding recently and eight car rains are plentiful in peak now, the only bad overcrowding I've seen was on Wednesday and that was down to the fact that there was serious line disruption caused by a broken down train and there being about 45 minutes between peak northbound trains which caused three trains worth all cramming onto one.

But I agree with you about the never ending circle, if the staff don't take a fair share of the cuts we will end up with a never ending circle of reduction of passengers, fare rises and service cuts which will go round and round and round since the company will have no choice but to do this since the staff are not willing to take any of the hit themselves.

A friend of mine worked for a company where the staff refused to take cuts. They increased prices to their customers and made wholesale cuts to many departments and within 6 months everyone was on the dole as the company went bust. Turns out on that a large customer were going to make a big order that could save the company the following week. However by that time the company was insolvent, the banks had called in the receivers, and it was too late.

It later turned out that had the 5% cuts for just one of the divisions been accepted rather than rejected after months and months of talks, the company would have gained some breathing space for another short while, would have got the deal, and everyones jobs would have been secure for a few years. Sadly the staff were too busy looking at the short term and everyone lost out big style because of it. Now some of the staff are either working in a different industry or the same one on wages up to 30% less - a far bigger cut than the 5% they turned down.