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
-
horseburger wrote: »It's interesting to observe the way people refer to older people in such an ignorant way.
Someone else on another boards.ie forum about Dublin Bus, recently referred to older people on buses, as "coffin dodgers", as if they shouldn't be taking up space on the bus.
It's as if they think they'll buck the trend and remain forever youthful.
The comment on this thread was hardly ignorant or disrespectful. It's well known that older people are more likely to engage with politicians0 -
end of the road wrote: »
so be it. who cares. fairness doesn't come into it, social benefit and social good does.
So the mask finally slips. You don't actually care about workers, since you would be happy to see unfair competition put other operators or of business. You don't care about the public either since you want a lesser, more expensive service as the only option available.
In fact all you care about is protecting a small cohort of union members from reality, at the expense of everyone else.
That's not solidarity, that's greed.0 -
oppenheimer1 wrote: »So the mask finally slips. You don't actually care about workers, since you would be happy to see unfair competition put other operators or of business. You don't care about the public either since you want a lesser, more expensive service as the only option available.
In fact all you care about is protecting a small cohort of union members from reality, at the expense of everyone else.
That's not solidarity, that's greed.
You got that from his quote?0 -
oppenheimer1 wrote: »Do you really think Free Travel Scheme will still be around when anyone in their mid 30's eventually becomes a pensioner at 85?
I doubt it.
Exactly, I am in my fifties and I dont expect it to be still around when i am eligible.
Student fares are way too high when you consider their situation in comparison to pensioners.
In my opinion there should be a student and pensioners fare at 50% of normal fare. The pensioner should have a facility to claim back this cost when they can demonstrate that they were attending a hospital appointment.0 -
oppenheimer1 wrote: »It's hard to see how the government could give state aid without falling foul of state aid rules - the same rules prevented a bailout of aer Lingus iirc.
But not the banks. Aer Lingus is private of course.They could perhaps use the free travel scheme to funnel money to BÉ but it's likely the commission would see the ruse for what it really is.
Europe is full of state and locally subsidised public transport. I can't imagine the commission intervening at all.0 -
Advertisement
-
Are you saying the grey lobby isn't powerful?horseburger wrote: »It's interesting to observe the way people refer to older people in such an ignorant way.
.0 -
Shurimgreat wrote:Unfortunately we don't live in a perfect world and pensioners have to be subsidised, sometimes by people who are worse off than them.Shurimgreat wrote:The free travel pass is great but ultimately it will undermine the survival of Bus Eireann.
No it's a Zionist archaic parochial zombieland where spin and populism wins out on truth and fact. The pensioners aren't being subsidised, they are budgeted in as the subsidy for public services. Truth of the matter is mismanagement and greed are collapsing our public transport system, Not the pensioners0 -
Yourself isit wrote: »But not the banks. Aer Lingus is private of course.
Europe is full of state and locally subsidised public transport. I can't imagine the commission intervening at all.
The bailout of the banks was allowed as it was considered extremely economically necessary. The same can't be said of a bus service which has alternates available.
Bus routes are subsidised on the basis of public service obligation. Expressway is commercial so a bailout wouldn't be permitted.
The commission could force the breakup of BÉ in order to allow the bailout of the PSO business. Even then the other operators could object.0 -
-
oppenheimer1 wrote: »He's not stating it as a threat, or a bargaining point. He's stating a reality.
There is a big difference, and you need to grasp that.
i think you will find he all ready has. it's you and others who seem to think everyone else hasn't because they have a different viewpoint or ask questions you don't like.oppenheimer1 wrote: »It's hard to see how the government could give state aid without falling foul of state aid rules - the same rules prevented a bailout of aer Lingus iirc.
They could perhaps use the free travel scheme to funnel money to BÉ but it's likely the commission would see the ruse for what it really is.
but they won't be able to prove it, so nothing could or would happen. all the government would need to say is "we have been underfunding the scheme" . . not that the commission will be interfering because state subsidized transport exists all over europe.oppenheimer1 wrote: »So the mask finally slips. You don't actually care about workers, since you would be happy to see unfair competition put other operators or of business. You don't care about the public either since you want a lesser, more expensive service as the only option available.
In fact all you care about is protecting a small cohort of union members from reality, at the expense of everyone else.
That's not solidarity, that's greed.
no that's what you think i want. you are incorrect of course.oppenheimer1 wrote: »The bailout of the banks was allowed as it was considered extremely economically necessary. The same can't be said of a bus service which has alternates available.
Bus routes are subsidised on the basis of public service obligation. Expressway is commercial so a bailout wouldn't be permitted.
The commission could force the breakup of BÉ in order to allow the bailout of the PSO business. Even then the other operators could object.
they could try force, but that is all. remember regardless of one's feelings about be, the EU is disliked a lot more by a lot more people, so it would be popular for the government to tell the EU to take a hike. it realistically doesn't matter anyway, because if any part of the company was to receive money it would only be the PSO part.ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.
0 -
Advertisement
-
The comment on this thread was hardly ignorant or disrespectful. It's well known that older people are more likely to engage with politicians
I think you are being very kind and charitable in your interpretation of what the person said.
Why don't the 'youngsters' engage with politicians?:)0 -
end of the road wrote: »i think you will find he all ready has. it's you and others who seem to think everyone else hasn't because they have a different viewpoint or ask questions you don't like
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insolvency
Insolvency is the state of being unable to pay the money owed, by a person or company, on time; those in a state of insolvency are said to be insolvent. Nobody decides that "today I'm going to make my company insolvent" because I cannot get my own way. Insolvency is not a voluntary choice, that is not how it works, if you really think it is then you really need to start studying basic economics and finance
Insolvency happens when a company cannot meet it's obligation. It's not something that they choose to do, it's something that happens when the company cannot service it's obligations, Nobody threatens anyone with insolvency, it's something that happens by itself if the business is unable to trade in a solvent fashion.
The more money the company saves, the longer they can stave off a situation where they become insolvent. So by saving money in some areas, the point at which insolvency is reached is pushed back further because it reduces the speed that cash is used up and therefore increases the amount of time they can meet their obligations for.
Insolvency happens when the business cannot meet it's obligations and nobody gets to decide if they are insolvent or not, they simply are when they can no longer meet it's obligations, if they cannot meet obligations they do not have a choice of insolvency or not, they simply are insolvent.
It's not a threat or a bargaining point, or even about opinions or viewpoints, it's just what the word means.0 -
end of the road wrote: »but they won't be able to prove it, so nothing could or would happen. all the government would need to say is "we have been underfunding the scheme" . . not that the commission will be interfering because state subsidized transport exists all over europe.
Personally I believe in a system ran for the greater good of the public of this country, not one frun for the unions to keep their ineffiecent business practices afloat.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.
bus eireann are more then capible of running said services within the confinds of the PSO subsidy provided. if they weren't then we would have had them wanting to bail out of PSO routes. there are no union controled companies in ireland state run or privately run.The correct way of saying it is.
There is no assurance that can be given by anyone, that intermediate stops as pick up and drop off point will continue to be served if any company takes over a route that is currently served by any other company. This is because they are commercial routes and a level playing field is in place. If the service is a PSO then it's a whole different ball game since the NTA set the timetable.
Still you imply that there is a different rule for Bus Eireann Expressway to that of other commercial operators, the constant repeating of the same thing and constant deception by omission is getting tiresome. I think the people of this board and the public deserve honesty rather than a false narrative.
That's three months in the future, for a service that was only confirmed to be ceasing a few days ago, give people the chance to actually put a plan into action, there is plenty of time to do so, wait and see and show a bit of patience, far too early to be scaremongering right now.
It's likely that Ulsterbus will add extra services, we will just have to wait and see what happens, either way throwing your toys out of the pram already about something that isn't going to happen in three months and a lot of changes can happen in that time is laughable.
Stop stoking fear into people.
So you admit there is services then?
I personally think Translink will add extra services.
As for the 32, having took these services myself, believe me buses are not running around full with no excess capacity as you seem to think they are, and in addition, because of the changes to other services there will be higher capacity vehicles freed up to put on there, if the worst should happen.
Do you know what a cost is? The expenditure of funds or use of property to acquire or produce a product or service. Because this is key to where a service is viable or not. The higher your costs are, the more income you need to make something viable, an operator with lower costs can make a route viable that an operator with higher costs deems nonviable
In addition an operator who has lower costs even for services that are losing huge amounts of money, can do a PSO route for less subsidy because their business is more efficient. Bus Eireann is not an efficient business that has been proven over the past few weeks without any doubt whatsoever.
Bus Eireann said in a full costed and written report that there are 1,378 drivers who work overtime each day which equals the cost of 1,636 drivers. It said if the company was to maximise driver efficiency, there would be a requirement for 986 full-time drivers. This alone is a shocking statistic and must be addressed.
Right now they are paying for the equivalent 650 more staff members than the company feels it needs at the moment and the average pay is €45,000 at the driver grade. You are saying that private operators have the same level of fat and excess in them that BE has?
Essentially the company is saying that with modern working practices and rotas that make the best use of resources, they can save over €25m before even talking about changing any terms and conditions or rates and any other cost measures. That is staggering.
the poster is asking legitimate questions, for which in return, he gets accused of all sorts by you for asking such as, scare mongering, deception, having a conflict of interest, and stoking fear. he is not guilty of any of those and he is entitled to ask questions. there is no evidence in my view that a company with a lower cost base can do a PSO route for less subsidy as they will have to make a profit for their shareholders, so that would have to be factored in on all sides. and by profit i don't mean a pittence as after all they aren't charities.Is it permissible to spam buses?
no, but handing out a leaflet isn't spamming. up to someone whether they take the leaflet or not, or take on board what it says or not.Shurimgreat wrote: »Not fast enough.
Efficiencies are slowly happening and resisted at every turn by the union.
Meanwhile the company is going out of business fast.
Ultimately for it to survive, there will need to be routes cut, drivers let go, wages cut and possibly free travel reduced.
Of course the unions will resist that, its only natural. But in the absence of a better plan from them, it either happens or the company goes bust.
the free travel scheme won't need to be cut for bus eireann to survive, it's actually irrelevant. only it's expressway routes will face some cuts, everything else remains as is . even driver levels may remain as there could be other work for them. only management and clerical staff are having numbers possibly cut. wages aren't being cut, but allowences.Exactly, I am in my fifties and I dont expect it to be still around when i am eligible.
Student fares are way too high when you consider their situation in comparison to pensioners.
In my opinion there should be a student and pensioners fare at 50% of normal fare. The pensioner should have a facility to claim back this cost when they can demonstrate that they were attending a hospital appointment.
the admin alone to sort that out would cost. student fares are high but that isn't the fault of, or the problem of, the pensionershttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insolvency
Insolvency is the state of being unable to pay the money owed, by a person or company, on time; those in a state of insolvency are said to be insolvent. Nobody decides that "today I'm going to make my company insolvent" because I cannot get my own way. Insolvency is not a voluntary choice, that is not how it works, if you really think it is then you really need to start studying basic economics and finance
Insolvency happens when a company cannot meet it's obligation. It's not something that they choose to do, it's something that happens when the company cannot service it's obligations, Nobody threatens anyone with insolvency, it's something that happens by itself if the business is unable to trade in a solvent fashion.
The more money the company saves, the longer they can stave off a situation where they become insolvent. So by saving money in some areas, the point at which insolvency is reached is pushed back further because it reduces the speed that cash is used up and therefore increases the amount of time they can meet their obligations for.
Insolvency happens when the business cannot meet it's obligations and nobody gets to decide if they are insolvent or not, they simply are when they can no longer meet it's obligations, if they cannot meet obligations they do not have a choice of insolvency or not, they simply are insolvent.
It's not a threat or a bargaining point, or even about opinions or viewpoints, it's just what the word means.
i'm well aware of what it means thanks, nor did i claim it was a bargaining point.ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.
0 -
end of the road wrote: »i
no that's what you think i want. you are incorrect of course.
Well you explain then how we should interpret your remark that "so be it" if unfair competition should put private operators and workers out of jobs?
So EU competition law is OK once it's only used against US corporates but not when it will impact the comrades in the NBRU?
Double standard much?0 -
oppenheimer1 wrote: »Well you explain then how we should interpret your remark that "so be it" if unfair competition should put private operators and workers out of jobs?
So EU competition law is OK once it's only used against US corporates but not when it will impact the comrades in the NBRU?
Double standard much?
the poster said subsidizing bus services was unfair on the privates. i told the poster so be it if it is . that isn't anything to do with competition nor is it unfair competition. commercial services aren't and won't be subsidized so therefore they aren't relevant to what the poster said or my responce.ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.
0 -
horseburger wrote: »You are still referring to people in such a way as if to suggest that you don't realise, that you too, will be grey some day.
I already am!0 -
end of the road wrote: »the poster said subsidizing bus services was unfair on the privates. i told the poster so be it if it is . that isn't anything to do with competition nor is it unfair competition. commercial services aren't and won't be subsidized so therefore they aren't relevant to what the poster said or my responce.
A bailout of BÉ directly or indirectly would be a subsidy for the commercial operations. That would be unfair competition.0 -
The pensioner should have a facility to claim back this cost when they can demonstrate that they were attending a hospital appointment.
__________________
Little know fact.
Doctors have a CIE free travel note.
It is like a check book. Just rip out a page and give to person.
In simple terms it is pre printed saying give free travel to the person, the Doctor fills in the date and it is valid for travel on that day.
There is zero reason the FTP should not have restricted hours of travel. Ban it from rush hour, if the FTP holder needs to get to a hospital appointment, the doctor can give them one of these free travel notes for the day.0 -
I think its finally time to let Bus Eireann go. The tax payer cannot be expected to prop up this white elephant any longer. Why should the taxpayer be willing to subsidise BE "on a special basis" with excesive wages and conditions that are not sustainable. There is no justifiable reason for this.
Let them have their strike, let the company go to the wall and then let the private operators get on with the job.
BE unions are playing a very dangerous game. My prediction is, if and when the strike goes ahead, many people will make alternative travel arrangements in the short term and the private operators will pick up the slack in the longer term.
Bus Eireann is nothing special. No longer holds the significance that it once did.Let it go. Good riddance.0 -
Advertisement
-
oppenheimer1 wrote: »A bailout of BÉ directly or indirectly would be a subsidy for the commercial operations. That would be unfair competition.
it wouldn't be a subsidy for the commercial operations. it would be a subsidy for the PSO operations. so no unfair competitionThe pensioner should have a facility to claim back this cost when they can demonstrate that they were attending a hospital appointment.
__________________
Little know fact.
Doctors have a CIE free travel note.
It is like a check book. Just rip out a page and give to person.
In simple terms it is pre printed saying give free travel to the person, the Doctor fills in the date and it is valid for travel on that day.
There is zero reason the FTP should not have restricted hours of travel. Ban it from rush hour, if the FTP holder needs to get to a hospital appointment, the doctor can give them one of these free travel notes for the day.
or they can simply continue to travel as is, meaning no doctor time wasted filling in more forms. not their job to be banned from rush hour services, those services are their services as well.I think its finally time to let Bus Eireann go. The tax payer cannot be expected to prop up this white elephant any longer. Why should the taxpayer be willing to subsidise BE "on a special basis" with excesive wages and conditions that are not sustainable. There is no justifiable reason for this.
Let them have their strike, let the company go to the wall and then let the private operators get on with the job.
BE unions are playing a very dangerous game. My prediction is, if and when the strike goes ahead, many people will make alternative travel arrangements in the short term and the private operators will pick up the slack in the longer term.
Bus Eireann is nothing special. No longer holds the significance that it once did.Let it go. Good riddance.
it's not time to let it go to the wall. the tax payer isn't proping up a white elephant, but socially necessary services. it's the job of the tax payer and our duty to fund said services for the greater good of society, insuring people can act on employment and educational opportunities, among many other benefits the service brings. be is not subsidized on a special anything. there is every justification to subsidize these socially necessary but uneconomically viable bus services. not let the company go to the wall, not let it go. it's a vital social service.ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.
0 -
end of the road wrote: »bus eireann are more then capible of running said services within the confinds of the PSO subsidy provided.
Bus Eireann said in a full costed and written report that there are 1,378 drivers who work overtime each day which equals the cost of 1,636 drivers. It said if the company was to maximise driver efficiency, there would be a requirement for 986 full-time drivers. This alone is a shocking statistic and must be addressed.
Right now they are paying for the equivalent 650 more staff members than the company feels it needs at the moment and the average pay is €45,000 at the driver grade. You are saying that private operators have the same level of fat and excess in them that BE has?
Essentially the company is saying that with modern working practices and rotas that make the best use of resources, they can save over €25m before even talking about changing any terms and conditions or rates and any other cost measures. That is staggering.there is no evidence in my view that a company with a lower cost base can do a PSO route for less subsidy as they will have to make a profit for their shareholders, so that would have to be factored in on all sides. and by profit i don't mean a pittence as after all they aren't charities.
You seem to think the profit margins that private operators run on are huge, they are nowhere near the level of bloat there is in Bus Eireann.even driver levels may remain as there could be other work for them. only management and clerical staff are having numbers possibly cut. wages aren't being cut, but allowences.
Bus Eireann said in a full costed and written report that there are 1,378 drivers who work overtime each day which equals the cost of 1,636 drivers. It said if the company was to maximise driver efficiency, there would be a requirement for 986 full-time drivers. This alone is a shocking statistic and must be addressed.
Right now they are paying for the equivalent 650 more staff members than the company feels it needs at the moment and the average pay is €45,000 at the driver grade. You are saying that private operators have the same level of fat and excess in them that BE has?
Essentially the company is saying that with modern working practices and rotas that make the best use of resources, they can save over €25m before even talking about changing any terms and conditions or rates and any other cost measures. That is staggering.the admin alone to sort that out would cost. student fares are high but that isn't the fault of, or the problem of, the pensioners.
Are you for real? It wouldn't cost that much in admin, no more than changing any other fare.0 -
horseburger wrote: »I think you are being very kind and charitable in your interpretation of what the person said.
Why don't the 'youngsters' engage with politicians?:)
What part of what the person said did you find to be ignorant or disrespectful?
I don't have the why but young Irish people are the least likely to vote in the European Union according to studies. In the 2011 general election turnout of the 18-24 age group was 20% below the national average.
The reality is that a politician's first job is to get elected so why would they bother with the concerns of people who are proven not to vote in large numbers?
88% of pensioners voted in the 2011 general election.
As for me being kind and charitable, you appear with most of your replies to be reading between the lines and trying to find meaning rather than simply sticking to what has been posted.
It is well known that older people engage with politicians in higher numbers than younger people. Countless studies and indeed the behaviour of politicians back it up. And it's exactly what the NBRU are hoping for with leaflets like the one posted earlier0 -
end of the road wrote: »it wouldn't be a subsidy for the commercial operations. it would be a subsidy for the PSO operations. so no unfair competition
Any potential of giving the taxpayer value for money and making sure that the company is run in a way which is making good use of such monies should be welcomed.
Any potential of making the company work in a way that is efficient and makes the most of its resources should be welcomed. Right now the company doesn't do that
Then we can talk about additional funding.0 -
oppenheimer1 wrote: »The bailout of the banks was allowed as it was considered extremely economically necessary. The same can't be said of a bus service which has alternates available.
Bus routes are subsidised on the basis of public service obligation. Expressway is commercial so a bailout wouldn't be permitted.
The commission could force the breakup of BÉ in order to allow the bailout of the PSO business. Even then the other operators could object.
And yet the commission doesn't ask the Irish government to open up Dublin bus to private competition. Or to privatise rail.
Given that precedent it looks like we could actually legally ban private operators.
Running the expressway service as a commercial service was something the Irish government decided, there is clearly no EU law forcing this.
And BE isn't a private company, if it makes any profit it either reinvests or returns a dividend to the taxpayer. I'm 90% sure that competition law won't apply here.0 -
Yourself isit wrote: »And yet the commission doesn't ask the Irish government to open up Dublin bus to private competition. Or to privatise rail.
Given that precedent it looks like we could actually legally ban private operators.
Running the expressway service as a commercial service was something the Irish government decided, there is clearly no EU law forcing this.
And BE isn't a private company, if it makes any profit it either reinvests or returns a dividend to the taxpayer. I'm 90% sure that competition law won't apply here.
I believe that providing good public transport services is the most important thing. Ultimately who provides the service doesn't bother me in the slightest. Many of the improvements that Bus Eireann have made over recent years have only been made because they have had no choice but to. We should always reward people who offer innovative new services.
This is why the NTA allows two operators per route on commercial routes and requires them to be at least 30 minutes apart from the competition. It rewards the first two operators who innovate, whilst at the same time protecting them from predators who just want to come after the service has been proven and cynically run buses at exactly the same time as the opposition who spend considerable money marketing and the up front costs of establishing a new service.
If a private proposes and starts operating an innovative new service that Bus Eireann say is not viable, as has happened on a number of occasions, why should we stop them? Public transport is supposed to be for the public not specified to the best interests of any other groups. No Monopoly is good no matter if it is a private company or a public company.
Indeed according to some, the NTA should should simply tell passengers who avail of services operated by private operators who put licenses in to operate later, faster, and more frequent services that Bus Eireann they must be canceled because Bus Eireann don't like it, since the interests of Bus Eireann are far more important than someone who wants to travel to the airport, on holiday or to work.
The problem in BE is that the staff have no commercial acumen on the front line whatsoever. They believe that the company is run for them as proven by the fact their company is struggling yet they are still asking for extra money. Just saying remove the competition is basically saying that the well being of their company is more important than the bigger picture and the service offered to the customers which should never be the case.
However in some respects I see the unions point. Their management has sold them down the river so to speak by not developing their products or services enough and management should take their share of the blame and their own mistakes as it is not only the staff to blame.0 -
However in some respects I see the unions point. Their management has sold them down the river so to speak by not developing their products or services enough and management should take their share of the blame and their own mistakes as it is not only the staff to blame.
This will turn - in some people's verbiage here - 'very nasty' (lol) very quickly cos there's no talking room at all that has a good union outcome. With Ross in the chair this will be let continue and so BE may be let go to prove a point. As for the politics its not water charges and its taking money from somewhere else to fix and Ross will want to let it play out . Unions drew a line far too quickly0 -
Will Bus Eireann get fined for not providing the service, like the Luas was? Presumably they will also have to refund weekly and return tickets as well.
Mind you this could be offset by the wages saved, which will be huge.0 -
This will turn - in some people's verbiage here - 'very nasty' (lol) very quickly cos there's no talking room at all that has a good union outcome. With Ross in the chair this will be let continue and so BE may be let go to prove a point. As for the politics its not water charges and its taking money from somewhere else to fix and Ross will want to let it play out . Unions drew a line far too quickly
nothing is guaranteed. ross may well not get a say or a choice in the matter.Will Bus Eireann get fined for not providing the service, like the Luas was? Presumably they will also have to refund weekly and return tickets as well.
Mind you this could be offset by the wages saved, which will be huge.
yes, bus eireann won't be paid for the days it doesn't run it's contracted servicesticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.
0 -
Advertisement
-
Little know fact.
Doctors have a CIE free travel note.
It is like a check book. Just rip out a page and give to person.
In simple terms it is pre printed saying give free travel to the person, the Doctor fills in the date and it is valid for travel on that day.
There was a warrant available from the HSE subject to certain restrictions and for certain purposes only, it was not available to all doctors, only some had it, it was discontinued a long time ago.
There were also travel warrants available from the likes of the prison service, the ESB and even for civil war veterens which pre-dated the FTS.0
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement