Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Bust Éireann
Options
Comments
-
Would it help matters, financially, if Busaras was sold off?0
-
end of the road wrote: »i think you know what makes a PSO route a PSO route. if it isn't financially viable and requires a subsidy then it will be that whoever runs it. selling CIE off to the highest bidder would bring nothing to the table, little income could potentially be gained and there would be even less accountability. it must remain publically owned and funded for the greater good.
Even though we live on an island, we don't need public ownership of sea ferries nor airlines. Neither do we need CIE for the greater good. We simply need to provide PSO subsidies for routes that are not commercially viable, the private sector will run these more efficiently and cost effectively. That's the greater good.0 -
Boulevardier wrote: »Would it help matters, financially, if Busaras was sold off?
maybe, maybe not. would be a stupid thing to do though. the same with bits of inchicore works, which i believe were sold or set asside at least for DU, dispite them being a better location for taking care of everything that operates to and from dublin, then the current out of the way depot locations.jimmycrackcorm wrote: »Even though we live on an island, we don't need public ownership of sea ferries nor airlines. Neither do we need CIE for the greater good. We simply need to provide PSO subsidies for routes that are not commercially viable, the private sector will run these more efficiently and cost effectively. That's the greater good.
there is no evidence of that, but there seems to be evidence of the opposite in terms of subsidized routes, hence a public owned publically funded company is better. it's not my job to fund private businesses unless absolutely necessary, IE farmers.ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.
0 -
end of the road wrote: »i think you know what makes a PSO route a PSO route. if it isn't financially viable and requires a subsidy then it will be that whoever runs it. selling CIE off to the highest bidder would bring nothing to the table, little income could potentially be gained and there would be even less accountability. it must remain publically owned and funded for t̶h̶e̶ ̶g̶r̶e̶a̶t̶e̶r̶ ̶g̶o̶o̶d̶ the greedy workers good.
Corrected that for you EOTRSlava Ukrainii
0 -
jimmycrackcorm wrote: »Even though we live on an island, we don't need public ownership of sea ferries nor airlines. Neither do we need CIE for the greater good. We simply need to provide PSO subsidies for routes that are not commercially viable, the private sector will run these more efficiently and cost effectively. That's the greater good.
The latter claim is mere ideology. We have no idea how the private sector will these routes or if anybody even bothers.0 -
Advertisement
-
Non Expressway ones, you won't find out what Expressway ones are/not profitable. The cuts/reductions were the most obvious after that you could potentially see some merging/enhancing services.
One wonders did introducing the X7 do more harm than the regular 7 service
The old 7 service plodded along for decades. Anytime I used it pre M9 a lot of passengers used get on/off at Castlecomer and Athy- they were cut off from the new direct service so as you say did that effect numbers greatly?
Add in the addition of Dublin Coach from Kilkenny, it faced a double whammy.
The loss of commuters from Athy would have meant a big loss of paying customers.0 -
end of the road wrote: »selling CIE off to the highest bidder would bring nothing to the table, little income could potentially be gained and there would be even less accountability. it must remain publically owned and funded for the greater good.
What utter tripe EOTR. Pure and utter tripe. Apart from the obvious issues with your post, CIE couldn't be sold for an old pound note. It's an outdated failed brand that is viewed negatively. It has been that way for many many years. In business terms that's a big no no. Its only supporters are staff, unions, fanboys and members of the public that don't use it regularly.0 -
end of the road wrote: »
there is no evidence of that, but there seems to be evidence of the opposite in terms of subsidized routes, hence a public owned publically funded company is better. it's not my job to fund private businesses unless absolutely necessary, IE farmers.
Oh lord god. Why is it better? Bullet points please.
Private companies are already being subsidised on PSO routes. Flights to Donegal, Kerry and the Aran Islands are subsidised. Locallink bus services are all privately run.0 -
end of the road wrote: »i think you know what makes a PSO route a PSO route. if it isn't financially viable and requires a subsidy then it will be that whoever runs it. selling CIE off to the highest bidder would bring nothing to the table, little income could potentially be gained and there would be even less accountability. it must remain publically owned and funded for the greater good.
These glib, throwaway and baseless comments really should not be tolerated on this forum.
If you are willing to make a statement like that, then care to provide some follow up details? Greater good for whom?
If you think it is the staff (which you already have hinted at), then just come out and say.
About time too the union stopped hiding under the cloak of 'vulnerable elderly people stranded by the roadside with no bus' in the TV and Radio media to ratchet up their own pay and conditions. It leaves the passing interest members of the general public without the full picture.0 -
end of the road wrote: »none of that will happen at the expence of lowering terms and conditions. low terms and conditions lead to low staff morale which unfortunately passes down to the user.
But there already are bus drivers today working for much less the Bus Eireann drivers.
If any of these companies should happen to takeover Bus Eireann routes, why should the like of the NBRU care about lowered terms and conditions? The terms and conditions already exist in the sector.
The drivers don't join NBRU and so won't be paying the union subs. Why would NBRU even care ?0 -
Advertisement
-
These glib, throwaway and baseless comments really should not be tolerated on this forum.
I agree. It shouldn't be tolerated. However it appears that you can post BS like he does, avoid direct questioning and then its the likes of us that get banned once pure frustration sets in. I have no problem with opinions and debate, but once a poster starts avoiding certain questions that may affect their stance, it all gets somewhat tiresome. Opting for the ignore option, just lets them off the hook.0 -
But there already are bus drivers today working for much less the Bus Eireann drivers.
If any of these companies should happen to takeover Bus Eireann routes, why should the like of the NBRU care about lowered terms and conditions? The terms and conditions already exist in the sector.
The drivers don't join NBRU and so won't be paying the union subs. Why would NBRU even care ?
we don't know that said staff won't or will join the union. that is only something an individual person will know themselves.ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.
0 -
end of the road wrote: »we don't know that said staff won't or will join the union. that is only something an individual person will know themselves.
What ?!?!
There are no private sector drivers in the NBRU. I don't think it is even possible for private drivers to join them !0 -
That's kinda ridiculous in itself, opinions should ultimately be welcome on a forum unless they're obnoxious or abusive. It seems to me like you do have a problem with opinion, even if it is tiresome and one I don't really agree with. What I really don't like is someone's opinion being labelled bull****, or implying that it's not fair to be banned for lashing out at someone else (like for instance, calling their opinion bull****)I agree. It shouldn't be tolerated. However it appears that you can post BS like he does, avoid direct questioning and then its the likes of us that get banned once pure frustration sets in. I have no problem with opinions and debate, but once a poster starts avoiding certain questions that may affect their stance, it all gets somewhat tiresome. Opting for the ignore option, just lets them off the hook.
Bit of hypocrisy there...0 -
lucernarian wrote: »That's kinda ridiculous in itself, opinions should ultimately be welcome on a forum unless they're obnoxious or abusive. It seems to me like you do have a problem with opinion, even if it is tiresome and one I don't really agree with. What I really don't like is someone's opinion being labelled bull****, or implying that it's not fair to be banned for lashing out at someone else (like for instance, calling their opinion bull****)
Bit of hypocrisy there...
And with that, drop personal attacks/opinions on other's posting styles and move back to the topic..0 -
Boulevardier wrote: »Would it help matters, financially, if Busaras was sold off?
Bus Áras is leased, so it isn't BÉ/CIÉ's to sell.0 -
Username here wrote: »Bus Áras is leased, so it isn't BÉ/CIÉ's to sell.
An intermodal transport hub would be a good idea, but Busarus is not a great location. Perhaps somewhere near Docklands station would be better.0 -
What ?!?!
There are no private sector drivers in the NBRU. I don't think it is even possible for private drivers to join them !
As far as i know nobody can be stopped from joining a union. a company doesn't have to recognise or deal with a union but one cannot be stopped from joining one i believe. i would be surprised if there are no private sector drivers in any of the transport unions.ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.
0 -
-
Brendan Bendar wrote: »You could very well be right.
The transport unions spotted a weakness and aided and abetted by the usual 'present at every picket' lot Coppinger, Murphy, Smith et al went for the jugular at Luas, and Dublin bus.
Buoyed up by some success there they went for the hat trick .
If they succeed in fleecing the taxpayer, IE will be next.
Time to put a halt to this and ignore those populist voices who will never have to implement anything but have no problem advocating the waste of taxpayers money.If they had their way Aer Lingus would still be charging €250 for a one-way to London
Time to cry stop here.
Time to move on.
I'll preface this by saying I'm a proud progressive.
I've have consistently advocated for the FT pass here as our cheapest social welfare program that may even save as much as it spends, noting for example the sly trick by union reps and drivers (who then have the brass balls to ask for 'solidarity ' ) trying to make this about the FT pass when Aircoach, Swords Express and a dozen other private companies that get no subsidy accept the pass AND make a profit so it's hardly the issue.
It's important to keep in mind Barret et al have as their actual policy never to participate in coalition unless it's their fantasy far left coalition.
So they know full well they'll never be called on what they say, they never advocate anything that might be unpopular in any way - to anyone. That's not responsible political leadership. It gives the public the impression that there are no adult zero sum choices to ever be made and it's just the stingey govt of the day (whoever they may be) being mean
I've seen their supporters literally say just leaving the Euro and printing money is a way to solve things like this instead of generating revenue through growth or new taxes, they're bonkers and not to be taken seriously. They're useful idiots for SIPTU to use but you'll notice their PS members by their votes in the ballot box don't want to put them in charge as they know full well it would end in debt defaults , capital flight, ques for shops, shortages of basic consumer goods and bank runs
We know because just like the privatise and deregulate EVERYTHING and tax cuts are magic and get you MORE revenue brigade we've seen how this movie ends we've seen the film before and I've no interest in a crappy sequel
Only social democracy with a twist has been shown to work. What twist? What was social democracy's biggest flaw in the 70s etc? The one that allowed right wing parties to grow? It worked well from end of WWII until the 70s we had the golden age of capitalism AND social progress side by side.
The big flaw was then centre left govts let public sector unions run amok and it ended with unburied bodies and uncollected trash cans in the streets due to mass strikes
The big lesson learned in transport from that was the LUAS model / London bus model works best let the state own and strategic control but contracted management day to day.
Unions in BE have gone mad for too long and now they're killing the golden goose, willing to bring the company to bankruptcy OR divert state cash from education, health and social welfare to keep their f----g excessive premium pay and OTT sick rates down rather than just take a reduction in those premiums that's reflective of market reality
They're not learning the lessons of history all this does is further undermine the power and PR image of unions in the public mind which will lead to weaker worker rights overall in an era where they're once more undebattack (Facebook password requests at interviews etc) but they don't care, for all their talk of "solidarity " the PS unions don't care about the overall effect on workers generally this will have0 -
Advertisement
-
If we are talking about a company can we at least get their name right?
Bus Éireann (BÉ) whose parent is Córas Iompair Éireann (CIÉ) whose main bus station is Busáras.
It is nitpicky, sure, but are fáda's really that difficult to use? :pac::rolleyes:0 -
Brendan Bendar wrote: »Can I declare a vested interest, it's as a taxpayer it's trying to ensure I don't get "f*cked over" as I seem to be by goings on in BE.
You could try answering the question I asked of you - which you have not answered - as to what type of Bus services you would replace the ones currently operated by Bus Éireann, if Bus Éireann goes "to the wall", as you have advocated happening, but then a few hours later, denied that you said it.0 -
PUBLIC transport with it's associated subsidies from PUBLIC money should be run for the benefit of the PUBLIC. The current situation of running public transport companies for the benefit of employees is a social ill and I'd go so far as to say antisocial and unpatriotic. That said, the current Ts and Cs secured by staff should be bought out rather than stripped out. Compulsory purchase order if you will.0
-
end of the road wrote: »there is no evidence of that, but there seems to be evidence of the opposite in terms of subsidized routes, hence a public owned publically funded company is better. it's not my job to fund private businesses unless absolutely necessary, IE farmers.Yourself isit wrote: »The latter claim is mere ideology. We have no idea how the private sector will these routes or if anybody even bothers.
I think this is the issue, that was highlighted in the Oireachtas joint committee meeting.
It seems to me that no assurance at all could be given by the NTA, that locations currently served, for example intermediate stops as pick and drop off points, will continue to be served, if any company takes over a route that is currently operated by Bus Éireann.
I wonder, what sort of service will be put in place of the Derry Dublin route?
For example, I imagine after 28th May, I would guess that more pressure will be put on the 32 Letterkenny service, for space on the 32 Letterkenny Dublin bus services, at pick up and drop off points at intermediate towns, like Monaghan town. The X4 Ulster Bus service does not run services from Derry, as late or as early as the 33 bus service.
Would Bus Éireann, need set up a separate service to cover Monaghan, to and from Dublin and Dublin Airport?
Will the NTA organise a separate Dublin Monaghan service run by a private operator?
I don't think there is a Bus Éireann service that covers Monaghan to Dublin, other than the 32 Letterkenny and 33 Derry services, ever since the number 177 was stopped a few years ago?
McConnon's private coaches do services to and from Monaghan and Dublin, but are not frequent throughout the whole day to and from Dublin and Monaghan, and no services on the Sunday of a Bank Holiday.
It has two services Monday to Friday from Monaghan to Dublin at 6.15am and 8.30am, and one service from Monaghan to Dublin on Saturdays and Sundays - at 8.30am on Saturday and 6.30pm on Sunday.
It runs one bus from Dublin to Monaghan on Saturdays at 5pm, and according to its timetable, no service from Dublin to Monaghan on Sundays.
(It runs a 1pm and 5pm service from UCD, from September to May)
http://www.mcconnonsbuses.com/content/mcconnons_timetable_july_2013.pdf
http://journeyplanner.translink.co.uk/ext_webpdf_desk/TTB/20170220-145146/nir/EFA02__0700X4y15_TP.pdf
http://buseireann.ie/timetables/1470909505-33.pdf0 -
horseburger wrote: »You could try answering the question I asked of you - which you have not answered - as to what type of Bus services you would replace the ones currently operated by Bus Éireann, if Bus Éireann goes "to the wall", as you have advocated happening, but then a few hours later, denied that you said it.
the exact same services, merely run by a company capable of running said services within the confines of the PSO subsidy provided. Clearly there are a lot of payroll, (in)efficiency and legacy costs that non state owned, union controlled companies would not have to bear.0 -
Cookie_Monster wrote: »the exact same services, merely run by a company capable of running said services within the confines of the PSO subsidy provided. Clearly there are a lot of payroll, (in)efficiency and legacy costs that non state owned, union controlled companies would not have to bear.
The issue is, that there was no assurance given by the NTA in the Joint Oireachtas meeting on Wednesday 22nd February, that any other operator would run the exact same services, previously operated by Bus Éireann. There was no assurance given, that the bus services would be run the exact same way.
That is the point that Robert Troy Fianna Fáil TD and Imelda Munster TD Sinn Féin were making, in their interview on LMFM the following morning on Thursday 23rd February 2017.
Whether anyone thinks that Robert Troy or Imelda Munster know what they are talking about, or not, in terms of the overall Bus services in Ireland, they did ask Anne Graham specific questions about what results, if private bus companies take over routes that were previously operated by Bus Éireann, and she answered them. These exchanges are available to read and watch, in the video and transcripts, on Oireachtas.ie.
It is clear to me, that there is no clear indication from Anne Graham, in her statements in this Joint Committee Meeting, that locations currently served by Bus Éireann, on the routes that are under threat of being discontinued, would be served by any other bus company, if these bus companies take on these routes.
Here is the relevant text of the exchange between Robert Troy and Helen Graham.
Deputy Robert Troy: "Ms Graham has said the NTA's role in issuing licenses is to determine timetables and stopping places for licensed services. If somebody, be it Bus Éireann or a private contractor, gets a license based on certain timetables and stopping in certain locations, then goes back to the NTA and shows it is not commercially viable, what consequences can the NTA impose as an authority to ensure it carries out its obligations based on the application that it made? ".
Ms Anne Graham: "It is their decision to make. If the service is not commercially viable, they are not obliged to continue with that service. They may make a decision to withdraw or amend their licence by reducing the stopping points or they may make a decision to withdraw their licence altogether. We have no way to stop that under the legislation. That is a decision made by the private operator itself".
Deputy Robert Troy: "To be clear, there are no consequences for somebody who tenders for a particular route to service particular towns at particular times if they come back and say it is not commercially viable to continue. The NTA has no way of forcing them or penalising them. There are no consequences for them".
Ms Anne Graham: "I make the distinction that where services are tendered by us, any changes to the timetables are regulated by us and we make the decisions on that. Where there are licensed services, which are commercial services, that make a decision to withdraw, there are no consequences for the operator. There are consequences for us in terms of trying to ensure there are services to those communities if they are left without services. That is where we step in to try to ensure that, if there is a public service obligation in those areas, we provide the services for those communities".
Later in response to Imelda Munster, Anne Graham stated:
"The Deputy has asked me to address a number of issues. I indicated that a private operator which has a licence service is not obliged to continue that service if it is unviable on a commercial basis. It could be for other reasons that it would want to withdraw from the service. This is covered by the legislation under which we operate on behalf of the Government".
"There is no doubt that there is more protection for services that are subject to a PSO contract and any changes in regard to those services needs our approval. The only time we would want to consider that would be if we were not in a position to fund services. We try to protect as many public transport services as we can because it is in our interest to make sure there are as many people as possible using public transport, but we do not have the same level of control over a licence service as we do over a subsidised service".
http://www.oireachtas.ie/viewdoc.asp?DocID=34662&&CatID=127
http://oireachtasdebates.oireachtas.ie/Debates%20Authoring/DebatesWebPack.nsf/committeetakes/TTJ2017022200002?opendocument#C00100
https://www.lmfm.ie/on-air/shows/the-michael-reade-show/michael-reade-show-podcasts/the-michael-reade-show-thursday-february-23rd-2017/0 -
horseburger wrote: »The issue is, that there was no assurance given by the NTA in the Joint Oireachtas meeting on Wednesday 22nd February, that any other operator would run services, previously operated by Bus Éireann, the exact same way.
That is the point that Robert Troy Fianna Fáil TD and Imelda Munster TD Sinn Féin were making, in their interview on LMFM the following morning on Thursday 23rd February 2017.
Whether anyone thinks Robert Troy or Imelda Munster know what they are talking about, or not, in terms of the overall Bus services in Ireland, they did ask Anne Graham specific questions about what results, in private bus companies take over routes previously operated by Bus Éireann, and she answered them.
It is clear to me, that there is no clear indication from Anne Graham, in her statements in this Joint Committee Meeting, that locations currently served by Bus Éireann, on the routes that are under threat of being discontinued, would be served by any other bus company, if these bus companies take on these routes.
Here is the relevant text of the exchange between Robert Troy and Helen Graham.
Deputy Robert Troy: "Ms Graham has said the NTA's role in issuing licenses is to determine timetables and stopping places for licensed services. If somebody, be it Bus Éireann or a private contractor, gets a license based on certain timetables and stopping in certain locations, then goes back to the NTA and shows it is not commercially viable, what consequences can the NTA impose as an authority to ensure it carries out its obligations based on the application that it made? ".
Ms Anne Graham: "It is their decision to make. If the service is not commercially viable, they are not obliged to continue with that service. They may make a decision to withdraw or amend their licence by reducing the stopping points or they may make a decision to withdraw their licence altogether. We have no way to stop that under the legislation. That is a decision made by the private operator itself".
Deputy Robert Troy: "To be clear, there are no consequences for somebody who tenders for a particular route to service particular towns at particular times if they come back and say it is not commercially viable to continue. The NTA has no way of forcing them or penalising them. There are no consequences for them".
Ms Anne Graham: "I make the distinction that where services are tendered by us, any changes to the timetables are regulated by us and we make the decisions on that. Where there are licensed services, which are commercial services, that make a decision to withdraw, there are no consequences for the operator. There are consequences for us in terms of trying to ensure there are services to those communities if they are left without services. That is where we step in to try to ensure that, if there is a public service obligation in those areas, we provide the services for those communities".
Later in response to Imelda Munster, Anne Graham stated:
"The Deputy has asked me to address a number of issues. I indicated that a private operator which has a licence service is not obliged to continue that service if it is unviable on a commercial basis. It could be for other reasons that it would want to withdraw from the service. This is covered by the legislation under which we operate on behalf of the Government".
"There is no doubt that there is more protection for services that are subject to a PSO contract and any changes in regard to those services needs our approval. The only time we would want to consider that would be if we were not in a position to fund services. We try to protect as many public transport services as we can because it is in our interest to make sure there are as many people as possible using public transport, but we do not have the same level of control over a licence service as we do over a subsidised service".
http://www.oireachtas.ie/viewdoc.asp?DocID=34662&&CatID=127
http://oireachtasdebates.oireachtas.ie/Debates%20Authoring/DebatesWebPack.nsf/committeetakes/TTJ2017022200002?opendocument#C00100
https://www.lmfm.ie/on-air/shows/the-michael-reade-show/michael-reade-show-podcasts/the-michael-reade-show-thursday-february-23rd-2017/
I'm not talking about commercially viable services, but PSO ones. All of the above is irrelevant.0 -
Cookie_Monster wrote: »I'm not talking about commercially viable services, but PSO ones. All of the above is irrelevant.
It is not irrelevant. Bus Éireann is threatening that the company will be insolvent if it doesn't cut back on the services, that it has proposed discontinuing, which are the services to which I was referring.
In my earlier post, I asked if, in the case of Monaghan Town - if the Derry Dublin 33 service is discontinued on 28th May - would Bus Éireann need to start services linking intermediate towns to places like Dublin, which would include routes under the PSO heading, for example a route to and from Monaghan and Dublin, which might be operated under the PSO heading.
http://buseireann.ie/news.php?id=2248&month=Feb
https://www.rte.ie/news/2017/0111/844179-bus-eireann/
https://www.rte.ie/news/2017/0221/854155-bus-eireann-dispute-back-at-wrc/0 -
Cookie_Monster wrote: »the exact same services, merely run by a company capable of running said services within the confines of the PSO subsidy provided. Clearly there are a lot of payroll, (in)efficiency and legacy costs that non state owned, union controlled companies would not have to bear.
I would have to agree there CM.
You see, what some people seem to be overlooking is the cost base of BE.
I said it over and over, its way above its competitors and the uneconomical work practices and archaic management structure only amplify that.
That said I'm sure BÈ have very dedicated people amongst is staff, no doubt about that, however like other companies facing competition and challenges, they have to learn to react and change.
Given Mr O'Learys attitude that doesn't seem likely as he seems to banking on total transport chaos including IÈ and BAC.
What ever way they get out of the mess and Aer Lingus was in a very similar position but 'saw the light' as it were and got smart.
No use flogging a dead horse and certainly no use expecting the hardworking taxpayer to pump more money into a bloated inefficiently managed company which seem to have no will to accept that the practices of the last century no longer suffice.
The taxpayer cannot be asked to put his/her hand in their respective pockets again, to fund this concern.0 -
Advertisement
-
Cookie_Monster wrote: »the exact same services, merely run by a company capable of running said services within the confines of the PSO subsidy provided. Clearly there are a lot of payroll, (in)efficiency and legacy costs that non state owned, union controlled companies would not have to bear.
So, you want one private company, "a company" to operate all of Bus Éireann's services, "the exact same services"?
Would it not end up being just as expensive to run? Or quite possibly more expensive?0
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement