Bus Strike (read warning in post #1)

cdebru

hmmm wrote: »

The same way Ryanair broke the Aer Lingus monopoly, and the same way that the private bus companies have broken BE's monopoly on the routes they've been allowed to run. Anywhere that "public sector" companies have faced competition, they have struggled - and the unions know that unless the public are forced to travel with them, they will go on struggling.

If BE & DB are efficient services, they should have no fear of competition.

Apples and oranges, because the airline industry was deregulated, if you completely deregulated bus transport in Dublin you would have cherry picking of routes which is what BE face, it is not rocket science to make money from public transport, the hard part is delivering services where and when it is not economically viable.

There is no problem in competing, the problem is where companies start to compete on wages as that will just create the industrial relations problems we are witnessing in London.

J_Dublin15

Kopparberg Strawberry and Lime wrote: »

An extra hour and 15 mins on my trip depending on traffic ? No thanks. Would rather just fly into Paris itself

The previous poster claimed it would cost around 100 euro, it actually costs €15.90, but you know that, but disregard that part.

that's what I'm saying too, if the private lads get these routes its still going to be the same journey and times along with the same prices until they notice they aren't making as much money as hoped and throw in the towel on it

Why wouldn't they know how much money they are making? They are paid a set fee over the life of the contract? They would know exactly what they are getting every month? Explain to me what is going to be variable in that?

antoinolachtnai

Private contractors are already driving around all sorts of outlying locations providing bus services as it is. They do this as contractors of Bus Eireann. They must be making some sort of profit at it, or they wouldn't be doing it, surely?

J_Dublin15

cdebru wrote: »

Apples and oranges, because the airline industry was deregulated, if you completely deregulated bus transport in Dublin you would have cherry picking of routes which is what BE face, it is not rocket science to make money from public transport, the hard part is delivering services where and when it is not economically viable.

Nobody asked for de-regulation, because it would lead to cheery picking. That has never been proposed by anyone, despite what the poster on Liberty Hall wants to convince people.

Tendering doesn't lead to cheery picking in the same way that de-regulation would.

J_Dublin15

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

Private contractors are already driving around all sorts of outlying locations providing bus services as it is. They do this as contractors of Bus Eireann. They must be making some sort of profit at it, or they wouldn't be doing it, surely?

Well, it begs the question, if BE are so efficient and nobody can do any of these things for less, why are BE contracting out services left right and center for some of the runs you talk about?

Also why are BE thinking of teaming up with a certain BE friendly private operator to bid for some of the routes, if they are so efficient?

cdebru

J_Dublin15 wrote: »

You cannot compare a company being paid to operate a route, with a company who will not be paid to operate a route not operating it. The former will always have an advantage and make it impossible for anyone to compete.

The ironic thing is you moan about this, but tendering would allow a level playing field where private and public companies are both able to get the same conditions when it comes to operating unprofitable routes.

And tell me, if Bus Eireann are so great why are they removing stops from their Expressway services of small Towns because they are nonviable? After all, they are committed to such town's aren't they?

That is the problem, it is about creating the conditions for a level playing field where companies can compete for tenders but not at the expense of the people working in the industry, as someone has already pointed out most costs are fairly fixed like, fuel, buses, parts, tyres etc etc so that leaves you with labour costs, so you either cut employee numbers or wages, now maybe in the back end you can trim numbers but front line staff you can't trim staff numbers and provide the same service, so it leaves the obvious cut to trim wages to cut costs, and that just leads you into the spiral of the race to the bottom, and that leads you into 2 problems both of which London has encountered, one is staff shortages because you can't get staff at the price you tendered for but you can't pay more because the company is locked into a fixed price contract, the second is the industrial relations problems and strikes over equal pay which have happened this year in London.

The NTA appear to be blindly following the London model and not learning from the mistakes made there but doomed to repeat them.

cdebru

J_Dublin15 wrote: »

Nobody asked for de-regulation, because it would lead to cheery picking. That has never been proposed by anyone, despite what the poster on Liberty Hall wants to convince people.

Tendering doesn't lead to cheery picking in the same way that de-regulation would.

I never said they did I was pointing out what happened in the airline industry is completely different as it was deregulation which if done in the bus transport market would lead to cherry picking.

cdebru

J_Dublin15 wrote: »

Well, it begs the question, if BE are so efficient and nobody can do any of these things for less, why are BE contracting out services left right and center for some of the runs you talk about?

Also why are BE thinking of teaming up with a certain BE friendly private operator to bid for some of the routes, if they are so efficient?

I know people who have picked up work with BE contractors, it is not particularly well regulated, the observance of driving hours, tacographs, and even basic maintenance leaves a lot to be desired.

end of the road

hmmm wrote: »

The same way Ryanair broke the Aer Lingus monopoly, and the same way that the private bus companies have broken BE's monopoly on the routes they've been allowed to run. Anywhere that "public sector" companies have faced competition, they have struggled - and the unions know that unless the public are forced to travel with them, they will go on struggling.

If BE & DB are efficient services, they should have no fear of competition.

not an answer. how can BE and dublin bus run the busses more efficiently considering much of the routes they run are inefficient by their nature due to being routes of social benefit which have to serve as many places as possible to make up usership?

end of the road

hmmm wrote: »

90 million people don't agree with your sneering. I suppose you think we should still be paying Aer Lingus 500 quid for a trip to London to "keep air travel in public ownership".

means nothing. the airline industry cannot be compared to the bus industry.

end of the road

J_Dublin15 wrote: »

Nobody asked for de-regulation, because it would lead to cheery picking. That has never been proposed by anyone, despite what the poster on Liberty Hall wants to convince people.

Tendering doesn't lead to cheery picking in the same way that de-regulation would.

unless the routes to be tendered are cherry picked.. there is no guarantee that a future government may not decide to go the full step and de-regulate.

J_Dublin15

end of the road wrote: »

unless the routes to be tendered are cherry picked.

It doesn't make any difference what routes are picked, since the operators are paid to operate them and get paid a fee, they don't see any farebox revenue so the popularity or the quietness of the route is inmaterial.

there is no guarantee that a future government may not decide to go the full step and de-regulate.

There is no future guarantee that a future government won't do or not do anything, in any industry.

There is no guarantee the world won't end tomorrow. That's a strawmans argument.

end of the road

J_Dublin15 wrote: »

It doesn't make any difference what routes are picked, since the operators are paid to operate them and get paid a fee, they don't see any farebox revenue so the popularity or the quietness of the route is inmaterial.



There is no future guarantee that a future government won't do or not do anything, in any industry.

There is no guarantee the world won't end tomorrow. That's a strawmans argument.

its not a strawman argument.

hmmm

end of the road wrote: »

means nothing. the airline industry cannot be compared to the bus industry.

It's far more complicated than running a bus service, and the private sector are providing more options and cheaper prices than we had 20 years ago.

There's an awful lot of misinformation on this thread.
1. The NTA are setting the routes. No-one will get to cherrypick locations or skip locations.
2. The NTA will set the standards.
3. Dublin Bus & BE are not servicing uneconomic routes out of the goodness of their hearts. They are being subsidised to do this.

Peppa Pig

PSO contracts awarded by the NTA

Public Service Obligation Contracts
Each year funding is provided for socially necessary but financially unviable public transport services in Ireland. Dublin Bus, Bus Éireann and Iarnród Éireann and M&A Coaches Ltd provide these services, known as Public Service Obligation (PSO) services, under contract to the National Transport Authority.

How were M&A awarded their licence? Was it tendered the same way as the current proposals or just awarded to them as no one else wanted it?

The contract seems to be as onerous as BE but BE are reporting more performance data.

PutDownArtist

This is another example of Dublin vs Ireland.:mad:

KD345

I understand the vehicles needed to operate these routes are owned by the NTA, but I have heard it mentioned how the NTA will also have responsibility for the housing and maintenance of the vehicles. How do they plan to do this? The NTA don't own any bus depots - is it up to the operator to source premises to house, maintain and service 100 double decker buses (assuming all routes are awarded to one operator). Do they plan to use one of the Dublin bus depots?

If Dublin Bus do lose about 100 double deck buses from their fleet, what happens to their current maintenance teams?

Who will receive the advertising revenue on the displaced buses - will this go to the NTA or the operator? I think Dublin Bus currently receive the revenue for all advertising on their fleet.

Also, the NTA State:

We will pre- determine the routes, the schedules, the vehicle types and standards, the fares and the customer service requirements. A contracted operator will have no say in fares or routes or frequencies.

How does this work where increased passenger numbers require a greater frequency? For example, lets say there is additional capacity required in Swords and both Swords Express and Dublin Bus both apply to increase capacity and frequency on their routes. Does this decision lie with the NTA, if so, is there not a conflict here, considering the NTA now gets the revenue from the fare box for Dublin Bus routes?

LastStop

KD345 wrote: »

I understand the vehicles needed to operate these routes are owned by the NTA, but I have heard it mentioned how the NTA will also have responsibility for the housing and maintenance of the vehicles. How do they plan to do this? The NTA don't own any bus depots - is it up to the operator to source premises to house, maintain and service 100 double decker buses (assuming all routes are awarded to one operator). Do they plan to use one of the Dublin bus depots?

If Dublin Bus do lose about 100 double deck buses from their fleet, what happens to their current maintenance teams?

Dublin Bus have won the maintenance contract on those buses. So they will maintain them regardless of who is operating them.

As for housing them. I am sure I read in the tender process that if a successful tender doesn't have a depot to house the buses NTA will provide some.

monument

PutDownArtist wrote: »

This is another example of Dublin vs Ireland.:mad:

What are you talking about?

Kopparberg Strawberry and Lime

Nothing to do with tendering really but why is the head of the NTA paid 3 thousand euro a week ?

Bit extreme since when the NTA came in it gives the department of transport less to do but they all get to keep their jobs ?

Bearing in mind the NTA came in more or less the same time as fine gael !

KD345

LastStop wrote: »

Dublin Bus have won the maintenance contract on those buses. So they will maintain them regardless of who is operating them.

How will that work if buses are located at a different depot elsewhere in the city?

LastStop wrote: »

As for housing them. I am sure I read in the tender process that if a successful tender doesn't have a depot to house the buses NTA will provide some.

I have heard this too, but that would be quite an expense. It seems odd that the NTA would spend money building/providing a depot(s) for 100 buses already housed by DB. Wouldn't that money be better spent lowering fares or purchasing more buses?

antoinolachtnai

The NTA did not come in 'more or less the same time as fine gael'.

Have you established for certain that the relevant comparable headcount figures for the Department of Transport have increased? My experience is that at senior level they have decreased, but I look forward to your statistical exposition.

The important salary questions you raise could be applied to Dublin Bus, where the average non-driver salary is very high. For that matter, the question arises of why Bus Eireann and Dublin Bus need separate chief executives and boards? They are basically the same business, and they are both relatively small. Why haven't Dublin Bus and BE shed a large part of their planning and strategic staffs since they no longer have these functions? Questions could also be raised about salaries in the trade union sector, I suppose.

There are indeed many mysterious questions in the transport sector.

monument

Why are only the RPA and the NRA being merged together as Transport Infrastructure Ireland? Why are the NTA not in on this merging action?

If it's just about infrastructure, when will Irish Rail's infrastructure division be merged into Transport Infrastructure Ireland?

LastStop

KD345 wrote: »

How will that work if buses are located at a different depot elsewhere in the city?



I have heard this too, but that would be quite an expense. It seems odd that the NTA would spend money building/providing a depot(s) for 100 buses already housed by DB. Wouldn't that money be better spent lowering fares or purchasing more buses?

For maintenance they would just drive the bus to a specified DB depot and leave it there to be worked on. Collect it when ready.


As for providing somewhere to house the buses. All they need is a yard and portacabin. Or an alternative option would be to rent space in a DB yard.

Look at donnybrook. They could potentially lose 6 to 8 routes. Then they wouldn't need all that space. So either merge Ringsend with them and rent the full Ringsend depot to NTA or rent half the yard to in Donnybrook to NTA.

Dan_Solo

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

Questions could also be raised about salaries in the trade union sector, I suppose.

They could. If you didn't understand that trade union execs are private sector workers.

dublindiehard

Dan_Solo wrote: »

They could. If you didn't understand that trade union execs are private sector workers.

Anybody spot the irony here?

MOH

So the bus companies are going to sue the unions to recoup the money they've lost due to the strike, which they say is illegal because it's due to political matters beyond their control.

The NBRU say this is vexatious, it's a legitimate trade dispute.

Then they turn around and say they want the Taoiseach and Tanaiste to intervene.

Can they make their minds up?
If it's not a political issue and is purely an internal trade dispute, then why exactly should senior government figures be getting involved when there's already a process to follow through the LRC?

dublindiehard

There was one person who I heard on the radio recently who statd that the whole thing was down to "political interference in the running of public companies' and also added that there was too much interfering of the government with the running of the country in general which angered the unions.

For a moment I was confused as to if he understood what governments were for.

Dan_Solo

dublindiehard wrote: »

Anybody spot the irony here?

No. Care to show us?

dublindiehard

Dan_Solo wrote: »

No. Care to show us?

Think about certain peoples attitudes toward public vs private.

Dan_Solo

dublindiehard wrote: »

Think about certain peoples attitudes toward public vs private.

Who? Could you give us an example of somebody here who thinks we don't want or need a private sector? Or would you by any chance just be inventing a boogey-straw-man non existent Marxist looney leftie to have a go at for some reason?
In your own time...

schemingbohemia

Peppa Pig wrote: »

PSO contracts awarded by the NTA

How were M&A awarded their licence? Was it tendered the same way as the current proposals or just awarded to them as no one else wanted it?

The contract seems to be as onerous as BE but BE are reporting more performance data.

Why don't you google it? It was put out to tender and awarded. Do you think there was some kind of conspiracy?

Peppa Pig

schemingbohemia wrote: »

Why don't you google it? It was put out to tender and awarded. Do you think there was some kind of conspiracy?

I don't think there is a conspiracy. All I can find on google is that they were awarded a PSO route after tendering for it. With so much anger over the current NTA proposals, I'm curious to know was this one any different to the current proposals.

I'm asking a simple question. Excuse me for only looking at the first page of google results and not scouring every page on the internet.

LXFlyer

There are two PSO services currently operated by private operators, both of which went out to tender:

1) Cashel-Portlaoise - M & A Coaches
2) Longford-Cavan - Whartons

cdebru

LastStop wrote: »

For maintenance they would just drive the bus to a specified DB depot and leave it there to be worked on. Collect it when ready.


As for providing somewhere to house the buses. All they need is a yard and portacabin. Or an alternative option would be to rent space in a DB yard.

Look at donnybrook. They could potentially lose 6 to 8 routes. Then they wouldn't need all that space. So either merge Ringsend with them and rent the full Ringsend depot to NTA or rent half the yard to in Donnybrook to NTA.

Ahem you are over looking that the minister has promised growth in demand will mean DB will need the all the staff they have, so I'm guessing they would need all the buses they have and all the space to park them in.

Also kind of overlooking that buses that need maintenance aren't always drivable or road worthy so it may involve towing them across the city.

Also a yard and a portcabin is not going to be sufficient if you want the buses cleaned unless the portacabin is large enough to house a bus washing facility.

cdebru

Peppa Pig wrote: »

I don't think there is a conspiracy. All I can find on google is that they were awarded a PSO route after tendering for it. With so much anger over the current NTA proposals, I'm curious to know was this one any different to the current proposals.

I'm asking a simple question. Excuse me for only looking at the first page of google results and not scouring every page on the internet.

Because those two were done according to the deal the last government did that tendering was for expansion on new services not existing services, its all in the 2008 and 2009 acts.

cdebru

MOH wrote: »

So the bus companies are going to sue the unions to recoup the money they've lost due to the strike, which they say is illegal because it's due to political matters beyond their control.

The NBRU say this is vexatious, it's a legitimate trade dispute.

Then they turn around and say they want the Taoiseach and Tanaiste to intervene.

Can they make their minds up?
If it's not a political issue and is purely an internal trade dispute, then why exactly should senior government figures be getting involved when there's already a process to follow through the LRC?

I presume the matters to be decided are what is or isn't political striking, IMO the law is that you can't strike over things that dont directly affect the employees concerned, so a political strike would be bus drivers going on strike over water charges, or because the government paid bondholders for example, but political decisions that directly affect those employed would not be a political strike, like the teachers striking over changes to the junior cert, its a political decision but one that directly affects the teachers.

But we will see what the courts say.

KD345

LastStop wrote: »

For maintenance they would just drive the bus to a specified DB depot and leave it there to be worked on. Collect it when ready.


As for providing somewhere to house the buses. All they need is a yard and portacabin. Or an alternative option would be to rent space in a DB yard.

Look at donnybrook. They could potentially lose 6 to 8 routes. Then they wouldn't need all that space. So either merge Ringsend with them and rent the full Ringsend depot to NTA or rent half the yard to in Donnybrook to NTA.

That sounds quite complicated. What happens for refuelling, cleaning, cash dispensing etc.

I don't think it's as simple as a yard and a portacabin.

The suggestion of a Dublin Bus depot being leased is possibly workable except the routes being tenderd are scattered across the city from Balbriggan to Newtownmountkennedy. The amount of dead mileage would make it unworkable if the private operator was based in Ringsend or Donnybroook for example.

WomanSkirtFan8

[But we will see what the courts say.[/QUOTE]

yes we no doubt will indeed. but this legal action by both DB and BE is apparently been taken in relation to Section 8 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990 in particular the section below which very clearly states the following in relation to any basis for all forms of any industrial action:

Industrial Relations Act, 1990

Section 8.

PART II
Trade Union Law

Trade Disputes

“industrial action” means any action which affects, or is likely to affect, the terms or conditions, whether express or implied, of a contract and which is taken by any number or body of workers acting in combination or under a common understanding as a means of compelling their employer, or to aid other workers in compelling their employer, to accept or not to accept terms or conditions of or affecting employment;."

Now anyone can take whatever they will from that but it is very clearly that any industrial action is between the employees and their employer/s

Kopparberg Strawberry and Lime

Just out of curiosity

every time Dublin bus went on strike who was minister for transport and which party did they represent ?

Marhay70

Kopparberg Strawberry and Lime wrote: »

Just out of curiosity

every time Dublin bus went on strike who was minister for transport and which party did they represent ?

Well certainly the one that sticks in my memory was in 1974 and lasted for months and it would have been a FG/Labour government. Don't recall who was Transport minister but Liam Cosgrave was Taoiseach. Another extremely unpopular government which included Richie Ryan, the working man's favourite hate figure.

Kopparberg Strawberry and Lime

Marhay70 wrote: »

Well certainly the one that sticks in my memory was in 1974 and lasted for months and it would have been a FG/Labour government. Don't recall who was Transport minister but Liam Cosgrave was Taoiseach. Another extremely unpopular government which included Richie Ryan, the working man's favorite hate figure.

I think i would be right in saying that most strikes that happened were a result in some way of fine gael. This time is no different

I just wouldn't know the dates or who either myself but most of it was certainly because of fine gael or their policies.

CIARAN_BOYLE

WomanSkirtFan8 wrote: »

Now anyone can take whatever they will from that but it is very clearly that any industrial action is between the employees and their employer/s

and dublin bus are theit employer right? or ntma?

cdebru

=WomanSkirtFan8;95378421][But we will see what the courts say.

yes we no doubt will indeed. but this legal action by both DB and BE is apparently been taken in relation to Section 8 of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990 in particular the section below which very clearly states the following in relation to any basis for all forms of any industrial action:

Industrial Relations Act, 1990

Section 8.

PART II
Trade Union Law

Trade Disputes

“industrial action” means any action which affects, or is likely to affect, the terms or conditions, whether express or implied, of a contract and which is taken by any number or body of workers acting in combination or under a common understanding as a means of compelling their employer, or to aid other workers in compelling their employer, to accept or not to accept terms or conditions of or affecting employment;."

Now anyone can take whatever they will from that but it is very clearly that any industrial action is between the employees and their employer/s

But can you separate the shareholder in the company from the company as if they are 2 completely seperate unrelated bodies ? DB and BE are entirely owned by the state and must act on the Minister for transports direction, this is a decision ( through another body the NTA) by the sole shareholder in the company, if the sole shareholder in any other company took a decision that affected the employees would the shareholder be viewed as a separate entity to the company and the workers couldn't take any action ?

Like I said we will wait and see.

pmasterson95

Are they taking days off again this Friday & Saturday?

Infini

Kopparberg Strawberry and Lime wrote: »

I think i would be right in saying that most strikes that happened were a result in some way of fine gael. This time is no different

I just wouldn't know the dates or who either myself but most of it was certainly because of fine gael or their policies.

As one driver put it " whenever fine gael get into power they cause murder in the railway". Ironically this time its the buses but still its always when they come along that trouble starts.

stehyl15

Infini2 wrote: »

As one driver put it " whenever fine gael get into power they cause murder in the railway". Ironically this time its the buses but still its always when they come along that trouble starts.

Only because FF just sit back and give into trade unions

punisher5112

pmasterson95 wrote: »

Are they taking days off again this Friday & Saturday?

15th and 16th strike days.

Hope it doesn't come to that.

Stevek101

I'm surprised there has been so little in the media about the coming strike. Have their been any talks behind the scenes? Or will they head down the injunction route?

end of the road

stehyl15 wrote: »

Only because FF just sit back and give into trade unions

wrong. its because FG bury their heads in the sand and think that socially necessary public transport doesn't have to be payed for or at least can run on little.