Can't make work because of strike

KomradeBishop

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

What is proposed is not privatisation of the services, the NTA will issue a tender for the supply for services under PSO for a set period and companies bid for it. The NTA will set the standards of operational performance, customer service and penalties for non-performance and the company who requires the lowest subsidy will be awarded the contract, as currently with M&A Coaches. DB can bid but know they cannot compete with private operators paying market rates - screw them, we will get a similar level of service but it will be cheaper (not cheaper fares but less subsidy from the taxpayer). Ignore the misinformation coming from DB, they present this as state assets being handed over to private companies but that is not the case. Its up to DB to compete, thankfully the EU is making the government end their monopoly.

That's exactly a process of privatization of the service - getting in private subsidized companies, to do the bus routes.

Past precedent of tendering like this shows the opposite results, to what you claim - with the claims of any benefit from tendering/privatization, being based on ideology alone.

KomradeBishop

John Mason wrote: »

As i said i bought a car years ago because of the lack of services.

I live in Finglas, it is a hugely populated area. I had the misfortune of having to use the bus last year for 8 weeks and it was impossible to get on due to crowding issues.

I would use the bus if it was feasible but really the excuse of being late to work every morning of well 4 buses didnt show up would wear thin pretty quickly.

Also it takes about 90 minutes to walk from town home i have waited for buses on Westmoreland street for 40/50 mins (they are supposed to be every 10 mins). i can walk home quicker than waiting on a bus.

the last time i phoned to complain, i was told "i cant tell you if your bus will turn up tomorrow morning, i dont know if i will be alive tomorrow morning. I cant see the future" :mad:

Then you have the guys who just decide they are not going to follow the route without telling anyone and you get left miles away from your bus stop.

Dublin Bus need a good kick up the arse, they have had for too cushy for far too long.

I am more than happy to support the privatisation of public buses - we might even start to get clean ones, that dont smell of mould and breakdown every other day.

That's what happens when you starve a bus service of money...you seem to think privatization is a magic bullet that will fix the money problem, when past precedent shows it makes services even more crapified and costly.

KomradeBishop

phantom_lord wrote: »

Private companies can do the same routes and service for less of a subsidy than Dublin Bus.

Again...you're ignoring the past evidence of previous tendering/privatization attempts, that shows the opposite results. Your claim is based on free market myths.


It's simple: You want a good public bus service, you have to pay for it. When your government starts defunding it and pushes for privatization, and you don't defend the public bus service (and start blaming the defunded service for the government cuts and inevitable reduction in quality service...), then you've only got yourself to blame then really when it gets worse, for not being more politically knowledgeable/active about it.

jimmycrackcorm

BeatNikDub wrote:

I'm buggered as well. I live 15km from work and don't have a bike or car. Here are my options; the strike affects me work wise 3 days, as for any leisure activity I had planned that will just have to be cancelled but I can live with that.

I cycle this distance to work every day and it's quicker than getting the bus. Get a bike on the bike to work scheme which comes out of your salary over the year and tax free and you'll be sorted.

EB_2013

KomradeBishop wrote: »

What they're striking for is more important than a weeks disruption really - people should publicly back them to fight the tendering off of bus routes, because as more privatization rolls in our bus services are going to become even more expensive than they are now, with worse quality and routes.

Supporting their disruption now, will save you more bother/disruption and money in the long run.

The service is so bad at the moment, could it really get any worse under privatization. If the service improves I would think about using buses again but at the moment there's no chance.

The service is only going to continue to get more expensive and unreliable if things are left as they are.

Pete_Cavan

Komrade, I was making the point that by having a tender competition means the company willing to operate the service at the lowest subsidy will get the contract. That obviously means the lowest cost to the taxpayer. The quality of service will stay the same because the successful company be contractually obliged to operate the same route, the same number of services, the same stops, the same times, etc. as DB would. You on the other hand are making out that the private operator will make the service “more crapified and costly”, its up to you to prove that.

Nobody is making claims based on “free market myths”. Tendering will mean the operator at the lowest cost to the taxpayer will operate the service, that operator can be a public or private operator. The result will be a lower cost to the taxpayer and an operator being compelled to provide set services with a proportion of payment withheld each month and is only paid if the performance targets are met. That is an improvement to the current situation where DB are automatically awarded contracts with no competition and nothing to ensure value for money. You are the one bringing ideology into it (private operators bad).

And it is not “privatisation” in that the ownership or control of something is not being sold/given to private companies, this is a tender for a contract to be awarded to the preferred bidder (be they public or private or a joint venture of both) to operate set services for a fixed period. At best it is the possibility of temporary privatisation (DB can win contracts) based on a tender competition open to multiple bidders rather than the traditional single bidder, where the winner cannot determine the services they provide as these are specified under the contract.

Finally, the point has to be made that this stems from an EU directive and failure to comply will result in penalties for the country.

BeatNikDub

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

I cycle this distance to work every day and it's quicker than getting the bus. Get a bike on the bike to work scheme which comes out of your salary over the year and tax free and you'll be sorted.

I quite honestly would prefer not to be forced into having to do that!

My partner cycles because he couldn't cope with the poor quality of the bus service in our area, but is extremely fit. Also a lot of it is uphill and I honestly can't think of anything more hellish tbf. i have honestly considered it a number of times though because of how unreliable the service is, but the thought of doing 30km a day is just too much!

I think in a capital city though its not too much to ask to have a functioning bus route to the centre of the city within walking distance of your home.

KomradeBishop

EB_2013 wrote: »

The service is so bad at the moment, could it really get any worse under privatization. If the service improves I would think about using buses again but at the moment there's no chance.

The service is only going to continue to get more expensive and unreliable if things are left as they are.

If you want the service to improve, then campaign for increased government funding of it - anything short of that, and your out of luck.

Things can get a lot worse with privatization - just do a bit of research on how this went down elsewhere.

Penny Tration

I don't drive and cant cycle. I normally commute two hours each way to and from work.

Unless I can convince someone to bring me to and from work (I'm working every day of the strike), my only other option is to leave my house at 6.30am, walk into town for 8am, get a Luas and then a 40 minute walk from the Luas.

Joy.

timetogo

KomradeBishop wrote: »

Again...you're ignoring the past evidence of previous tendering/privatization attempts, that shows the opposite results. Your claim is based on free market myths.

I used to get the 41X in Swords. I wrote to Dublin Bus one day as at that time the express buses were extremely popular and filled after the first couple of stops. One morning I counted 30 people left behind on stops we passed. They replied saying there was nothing they could do.

Swords Express (a private company) opened a few years ago and became popular. When they noticed people being left behind they got a temporary smaller bus and picked up the stragglers and then rejigged the timetable. They kept doing this until they got a system that worked.

Now we have a situation where the 41X timetable has barely changed from the time I used it (about 9 years ago) and loads of SwordsExpress buses.

I know Swords is a popular route and probably profitable but it begs the question why couldn't Dublin Bus rejig their timetables to accommodate paying customers. It was as if they didn't care about the money they were leaving behind. The private operator did seem to care.

It's ironic that the bus companies are going on strike to totally annoy their customers which depend on them and is going to get most people thinking we need more private operators. It's like here's my foot, take aim, fire.

KomradeBishop

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

Komrade, I was making the point that by having a tender competition means the company willing to operate the service at the lowest subsidy will get the contract. That obviously means the lowest cost to the taxpayer. The quality of service will stay the same because the successful company be contractually obliged to operate the same route, the same number of services, the same stops, the same times, etc. as DB would. You on the other hand are making out that the private operator will make the service “more crapified and costly”, its up to you to prove that.

Nobody is making claims based on “free market myths”. Tendering will mean the operator at the lowest cost to the taxpayer will operate the service, that operator can be a public or private operator. The result will be a lower cost to the taxpayer and an operator being compelled to provide set services with a proportion of payment withheld each month and is only paid if the performance targets are met. That is an improvement to the current situation where DB are automatically awarded contracts with no competition and nothing to ensure value for money. You are the one bringing ideology into it (private operators bad).

And it is not “privatisation” in that the ownership or control of something is not being sold/given to private companies, this is a tender for a contract to be awarded to the preferred bidder (be they public or private or a joint venture of both) to operate set services for a fixed period. At best it is the possibility of temporary privatisation (DB can win contracts) based on a tender competition open to multiple bidders rather than the traditional single bidder, where the winner cannot determine the services they provide as these are specified under the contract.

Finally, the point has to be made that this stems from an EU directive and failure to comply will result in penalties for the country.

That doesn't mean the lowest cost to the taxpayer, it can easily result in higher costs, because costs are:
Subsidies from Taxes + Fares.

You're looking at only one factor of costs, to make a political argument for tendering/privatization.

The quality of the service is a factor of how much money you pay for it as well; you're talking purely theory, that tendering will magically improve service while costing less - it is up to you to prove that, and past precedent shows that claim is wrong. Research the studies linked from the earlier article:
http://www.irishleftreview.org/2015/04/21/racing-public-transport-bottom/

You've got your facts wrong in multiple places - you also repeated the debunked EU directive claim - and in general, like others, you don't cite your claims.

Pete_Cavan

KomradeBishop wrote: »

That doesn't mean the lowest cost to the taxpayer, it can easily result in higher costs, because costs are:
Subsidies from Taxes + Fares.

You're looking at only one factor of costs, to make a political argument for tendering/privatization.

The quality of the service is a factor of how much money you pay for it as well; you're talking purely theory, that tendering will magically improve service while costing less - it is up to you to prove that, and past precedent shows that claim is wrong. Research the studies linked from the earlier article:
http://www.irishleftreview.org/2015/04/21/racing-public-transport-bottom/

You've got your facts wrong in multiple places - you also repeated the debunked EU directive claim - and in general, like others, you don't cite your claims.

Fares are set by the NTA so not determined by DB or any future private operator.

I am not making a political argument or talking theory, I am stating facts. If the contract is awarded to the operator requiring the lower subsidy then present, then the costs to the taxpayer are reduced. The tender will be based on set terms of service (times, frequency, etc.) so the service to be provided will be the same regardless of whether the operator is public or private. Failure to comply with the terms of service will result in penalties under the terms of the contract for the operator (be they public or private). I am not claiming that this will improve services This is not privatisation, this is regulated competition.

Details on EU directive here; https://www.nationaltransport.ie/public-transport-services/public-service-obligation-contracts/

BeatNikDub

Jenny Thalia wrote: »

I don't drive and cant cycle. I normally commute two hours each way to and from work.

Unless I can convince someone to bring me to and from work (I'm working every day of the strike), my only other option is to leave my house at 6.30am, walk into town for 8am, get a Luas and then a 40 minute walk from the Luas.

Joy.

That really is tough Joy. Unfortunately they don;t care. The response is just "get a taxi or cycle or something". If only it was that easy!
Best of luck, i hope you get a lift sorted.

KomradeBishop

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

Fares are set by the NTA so not determined by DB or any future private operator.

I am not making a political argument or talking theory, I am stating facts. If the contract is awarded to the operator requiring the lower subsidy then present, then the costs to the taxpayer are reduced. The tender will be based on set terms of service (times, frequency, etc.) so the service to be provided will be the same regardless of whether the operator is public or private. Failure to comply with the terms of service will result in penalties under the terms of the contract for the operator (be they public or private). I am not claiming that this will improve services This is not privatisation, this is regulated competition.

Details on EU directive here; https://www.nationaltransport.ie/public-transport-services/public-service-obligation-contracts/

You're wrong about the EU directive:

Ms Graham also confirmed that there was no obligation from EU legislation forcing their hand.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2015/0422/695916-nta-bus/

"If the contract is awarded to the operator requiring the lower subsidy then present, then the costs to the taxpayer are reduced."
I've just stated how this is wrong in my previous post, since actual costs are Taxes + Fares, so you're just talking past me now.

BeatNikDub

I've enquired about whether my place does the bike to work scheme, I don't think cycling 30km everyday could be much worse tbh!

larrymickdick

Anyone going to Slane or Forbidden Fruit need to consider how to get to gigs too
No public transport those days from Dublin Bus either
They are going to lose a packet!

phantom_lord

I'd forgotten about the Swords Express; another good example of a private bus service outperforming the public transport system.

Stheno

phantom_lord wrote: »

I'd forgotten about the Swords Express; another good example of a private bus service outperforming the public transport system.

It's an excellent service I chose it over the 41 all of the time

triple nipple

KomradeBishop wrote:

It's simple: You want a good public bus service, you have to pay for it. When your government starts defunding it and pushes for privatization, and you don't defend the public bus service (and start blaming the defunded service for the government cuts and inevitable reduction in quality service...), then you've only got yourself to blame then really when it gets worse, for not being more politically knowledgeable/active about it.

For about as long as i can remeber, DB has been an awful service with no accountability. Even during boom times when the country was awash with money. So your argument dosnt fly here

lucernarian

timetogo wrote: »

I used to get the 41X in Swords. I wrote to Dublin Bus one day as at that time the express buses were extremely popular and filled after the first couple of stops. One morning I counted 30 people left behind on stops we passed. They replied saying there was nothing they could do.

Swords Express (a private company) opened a few years ago and became popular. When they noticed people being left behind they got a temporary smaller bus and picked up the stragglers and then rejigged the timetable. They kept doing this until they got a system that worked.

Now we have a situation where the 41X timetable has barely changed from the time I used it (about 9 years ago) and loads of SwordsExpress buses.

I know Swords is a popular route and probably profitable but it begs the question why couldn't Dublin Bus rejig their timetables to accommodate paying customers. It was as if they didn't care about the money they were leaving behind. The private operator did seem to care.

It's ironic that the bus companies are going on strike to totally annoy their customers which depend on them and is going to get most people thinking we need more private operators. It's like here's my foot, take aim, fire.

The 41X buses and specifically their not using the Port Tunnel is precisely because the NTA refused Dublin Bus licencing to have more services going through the tunnel.

Also, about begging the question... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question

ps3man

El Inho wrote: »

With the impending dublin bus strike, it occurs to me this is the first time I'm dependant during a strike.

I depend on db to get across dublin for work, approx a 40 euro round trip in taxis.

Can I expect work to sub me this cost? Or what are the laws?

Cycle, the money you would spend on buses in a year would buy you a top of the line road bike plus all the gear, if your employer does the bike to work scheme then you are laughing

timetogo

lucernarian wrote: »

The 41X buses and specifically their not using the Port Tunnel is precisely because the NTA refused Dublin Bus licencing to have more services going through the tunnel.

Also, about begging the question... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question

The reason for the 41Xs initially not using the port tunnel was because Swords Express applied for the license first I thought. At the time, a brand new company that didn't even exist saw an opportunity while Dublin Bus slept (at the wheel). Anyway it's moot now as the 41X uses the tunnel.

My point was that the private operator is constantly improving their service while the DB one is pretty much the same as it was years go. Does the private operator have different rules about their timetable. I.e. Swords Express made their service much better over the last few years to accommodate customers. Dublin bus didn't change their competing service much in 9 years.

Penny Tration

BeatNikDub wrote: »

That really is tough Joy. Unfortunately they don;t care. The response is just "get a taxi or cycle or something". If only it was that easy!
Best of luck, i hope you get a lift sorted.

My name isn't Joy :pac: I was sarcastically saying 'joy' at the prospect :P

I've managed to sort lifts for the first weekend, by offering a family member plenty of money.

BeatNikDub

Jenny Thalia wrote: »

My name isn't Joy :pac: I was sarcastically saying 'joy' at the prospect :P

I've managed to sort lifts for the first weekend, by offering a family member plenty of money.

Ha!
I have properly copped that now. I am some eejit!

Glad you got sorted JENNY! :P

Penny Tration

BeatNikDub wrote: »

Ha!
I have properly copped that now. I am some eejit!

Glad you got sorted JENNY! :P

Name isn't Jenny either, but that'll do :P

Lux23

The 41x goes through the tunnel in the morning and I think the Glen Ellen one is a great service. I moved back to Swords in January and I think the bus service is vastly improved and I think that has to do with competition with Swords Express. We desperately need more choices in public transport across the board, but I am not sure privatizing route is the way to go.

Maybe some sort of state programme to encourage private companies to enter the space would be better. A tender of some sort like the luas.

lucernarian

timetogo wrote: »

The reason for the 41Xs initially not using the port tunnel was because Swords Express applied for the license first I thought. At the time, a brand new company that didn't even exist saw an opportunity while Dublin Bus slept (at the wheel). Anyway it's moot now as the 41X uses the tunnel.

That isn't quite true. The 41X services that Dublin Bus did have going through the Port Tunnel were taken away from it to give Swords Express a chance. They had some (evening) 41X services in the Port Tunnel and these were rerouted via Drumcondra and Whitehall I thought?

Stheno

Lux23 wrote: »

The 41x goes through the tunnel in the morning and I think the Glen Ellen one is a great service. I moved back to Swords in January and I think the bus service is vastly improved and I think that has to do with competition with Swords Express. We desperately need more choices in public transport across the board, but I am not sure privatizing route is the way to go.

There are only three 41x in the evening though which is nuts

And even going through the tunnel in the morning it's slower than swordsexpress

Lux23

Stheno wrote: »

There are only three 41x in the evening though which is nuts

And even going through the tunnel in the morning it's slower than swordsexpress

Yea, but in fairness I find that it is rarely overpacked and I haven't found that the Swords Express is any quicker. In fact, it takes a good bit longer now on some of the SE routes.

LXFlyer

Just to clarify on the 41X.

Initially DB were restricted from operating the 41x via the Port Tunnel by the Department of Transport as Swords Express had got a licence to do so and objected to the 41x doing so as well.

After protracted talks involving local TDs a revised routing in Swords for both operators was settled upon that allowed both operators to use the Port Tunnel.

Dublin Bus have not been in a position to add capacity across the network in recent years, quite simply because they have not had any spare buses or drivers to do so. That requires funding from the NTA. It is only in 2015 that they are starting to increase capacity on routes.

Adding capacity on a PSO service that has a private operator in competition on the same or similar route is not straightforward, as the private operator could object on the grounds of unfair competition under EU legislation.

Swords Express is operated by Eirebus who may well have had spare buses available and applied to the NTA to operate additional services.