Bust Éireann

murphaph

end of the road wrote: »

the uk thought the same. the people now want re-nationalisation of the railway, and even the busses in many cases.

Forget the UK then. This is a country that's voluntarily destroying its future as we speak. We have tendered out routes in Germany and it all works just fine. If properly managed it's the way to go.

horseburger

Allinall wrote: »

You stated the company made a threat.

Why?

I was accused of saying that Bus Éireann would choose to make the company insolvent. I was accused of stating that Bus Éireann threatened that Bus Éireann would choose by itself to make the company insolvent if the proposed cutbacks were not implemented.

I did not say that.

I cited a press statement by Bus Éireann, and two RTE News items, when I said that Bus Éireann is threatening that if the proposed cutbacks are not implemented, that the company would become insolvent.

I did not say that Bus Éireann will choose to make the company insolvent, which is what was implied by devnull's response to my post

here is what I said, with reference to the Bus Éireann statement and two RTE News items:

"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".

I include links to posts in question, and the two RTE news items and Bus Éireann press release.

- my post which referenced the RTE news items and Bus Éireann statement

- devnull's response which attributed a statement to me which I did not state,

- my post earlier this evening where I wrote about my statement being misrepresented by devnull,

- devnull's response, which ignored my post about the misrepresentation of what I had written, where devnull again repeated the meaning of insolvency, which was just an attempt to distract from the fact that I was totally misrepresented, by devnull

- my response to devnull's post:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=102774131&postcount=869

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=102774346&postcount=873

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=102791709&postcount=1016

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=102791811&postcount=1020

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=102791868&postcount=1023

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/

Bass Reeves

end of the road wrote: »

i have saw no evidence from anywhere for that

.

And I have seen no evidence that it would cost extra which you are always hinting at.

end of the road wrote: »

the managers are managing the company. they haven't managed it well but they manage it.

The reason the managers are unable to manage the company is that like what is happening at present the unions refuse to negotiate work changes. As well workers have an exceptionally high sick rate which is equivlent to 6% of working hours/workers. You have drivers only driving less that 50% of the hours they are paid for etc etc etc. So when managment now try to manage the company the union's and workers throw the toys out of the pram

end of the road wrote: »

the unions would have to play greater hardball and deal with any attempt to sack workers for upholding their right not to be forced to cross a picket against their will. suspending the sick pay among other things had no effect at luas, the strikes continued until a deal was reached.

You are always on about transport workers rights. It is noticeable like a lot of the idiot left you never factor that other have rights too. Taxpayers have the right not to have to pay over the rate for a service. Commuters have the right to transport and that there transport systems should not be dragged into a third part dispute. IE, BE and DB have the right not to have there sick scheme abused. Other workers who benefit from such schemes have the right that the abuse of the scheme in BE should not be used as an excuse to withdraw theirs. IE and DB have the right for that there workers should turn up for work and not be drawn into another dispute.

And finally workers for other commercial operators are entitled that there jobs not be put at risk by Expressway receiving unfair state aid which will happen if the unions have there way.

end of the road wrote: »

he stated that it was the company stating a fact.

He implied that the company by issuing its statement and by the company management doing there job that they were threatening the workers

hytrogen

sofireland wrote:

IE confirmed to me they won't be honouring BE Leap Cards within the Dublin Zone, so not only am i paying for my annual pass, i've to fork out another €40 a week plus fuel for the 30 odd km each way trip to M3 Parkway.

Well that is their obligation as a company.. It's only if another service is incapacitated and they are directed to cater for said passes.

marienbad

horseburger wrote: »

I was accused of saying that Bus Éireann would choose to make the company insolvent. I was accused of stating that Bus Éireann threatened that Bus Éireann would choose by itself to make the company insolvent if the proposed cutbacks were not implemented.

I did not say that.

I cited a press statement by Bus Éireann, and two RTE News items, when I said that Bus Éireann is threatening that if the proposed cutbacks are not implemented, that the company would become insolvent.
/

Will you get out of it with your semantics , if we were face to face in a pub discussion you would have been laughed out of it hours ago .

This is why discussions on here become so tedious

hytrogen

end of the road wrote:

to sue them out of existence would be a waste of money, as they could likely have a number of ways around the issue. they could possibly refund the members and therefore have no money and cannot pay, and they could probably relaunch after a little bit and remove all liabilities of the former union. whatever would happen, the NBRU wouldn't be going anywhere.

Legal protection fees is one perk of being in a union, especially during industrial relations or incapacitation cases..

horseburger

marienbad wrote: »

Will you get out of it with your semantics , if we were face to face in a pub discussion you would have been laughed out of it hours ago .

This is why discussions on here become so tedious

Well then the people in the pub are unable to read and understand the meaning of words in a sentence, or understand and interpret what people are saying.

end of the road

Bass Reeves wrote: »

You are always on about transport workers rights. It is noticeable like a lot of the idiot left you never factor that other have rights too. Taxpayers have the right not to have to pay over the rate for a service. Commuters have the right to transport and that there transport systems should not be dragged into a third part dispute. IE, BE and DB have the right not to have there sick scheme abused. Other workers who benefit from such schemes have the right that the abuse of the scheme in BE should not be used as an excuse to withdraw theirs. IE and DB have the right for that there workers should turn up for work and not be drawn into another dispute.

And finally workers for other commercial operators are entitled that there jobs not be put at risk by Expressway receiving unfair state aid which will happen if the unions have there way.

i'm not of the left. i as a tax payer feel that i'm not paying over the rate in subsidy for the service. fares, sure. but either way i'm paying for the service and either fares or subsidy are going up whoever runs things. strike action sometimes has to happen for the greater good and i will respect the democratic decisian to go on strike by the relevant staff even if i don't agree with it as it's my duty to do so. workers for other commercial operators won't have their jobs put at risk, so they aren't relevant here. bus eireann expressway wouldn't be getting state aid so it's a non-issue. even if it was to happen and jobs were put at risk that is for those companies and any unions to sort out.

Bass Reeves wrote: »

He implied that the company by issuing its statement and by the company management doing there job that they were threatening the workers

he didn't at any stage do anything of the sort.

Grandeeod

Hey EOTR.

You go on about how crap IE are at running trains in other threads. Do you think BE run a good service? What's your opinion on DB? In fact whats your opinion on the CIE group in general? Its all relevant.

horseburger

Bass Reeves wrote: »

And I have seen no evidence that it would cost extra which you are always hinting at.



The reason the managers are unable to manage the company is that like what is happening at present the unions refuse to negotiate work changes. As well workers have an exceptionally high sick rate which is equivlent to 6% of working hours/workers. You have drivers only driving less that 50% of the hours they are paid for etc etc etc. So when managment now try to manage the company the union's and workers throw the toys out of the pram



You are always on about transport workers rights. It is noticeable like a lot of the idiot left you never factor that other have rights too. Taxpayers have the right not to have to pay over the rate for a service. Commuters have the right to transport and that there transport systems should not be dragged into a third part dispute. IE, BE and DB have the right not to have there sick scheme abused. Other workers who benefit from such schemes have the right that the abuse of the scheme in BE should not be used as an excuse to withdraw theirs. IE and DB have the right for that there workers should turn up for work and not be drawn into another dispute.

And finally workers for other commercial operators are entitled that there jobs not be put at risk by Expressway receiving unfair state aid which will happen if the unions have there way.





He implied that the company by issuing its statement and by the company management doing there job that they were threatening the workers

I rather suspect that you know full well that end of the road was making the point that my post was in reference to the press statement by Bus Éireann and that a completely incorrect interpretation of what I had written, was assumed by devnull, about my post.

The threat concerns the proposed cutbacks, not that Bus Éireann would choose to make Bus Éireann insolvent. That Bus Éireann would choose to make the company insolvent, was a statement incorrectly attributed to me by devnull, who didn't bother to take the time to read what I had written.

You completely miss the point again.

Brendan Bendar

end of the road wrote: »

i'm not of the left. i as a tax payer feel that i'm not paying over the rate in subsidy for the service. fares, sure. but either way i'm paying for the service and either fares or subsidy are going up whoever runs things. strike action sometimes has to happen for the greater good and i will respect the democratic decisian to go on strike by the relevant staff even if i don't agree with it as it's my duty to do so. workers for other commercial operators won't have their jobs put at risk, so they aren't relevant here. bus eireann expressway wouldn't be getting state aid so it's a non-issue. even if it was to happen and jobs were put at risk that is for those companies and any unions to sort out.



he didn't at any stage do anything of the sort.

How exactly is it "your duty to do so"?

I evaluate the issues involved and in this situation I see a bunch of Mavericks trying to gouge the taxpayer.

As a taxpayer I don't like to be gouged .

n97 mini

Grandeeod wrote: »

Hey EOTR.

You go on about how crap IE are at running trains in other threads. Do you think BE run a good service? What's your opinion on DB? In fact whats your opinion on the CIE group in general? Its all relevant.

Did you really need to ask that?
Woorkers: deserve every penny they get, and more. It is our duty to support them (no reason given as to why). Unions are great, everyone should be in one.
Management: useless wasters, know less about everything than the woorkers. (Though the odd time, when it suits the argument, the management is right).
Admin staff: even though it's an inverse pyramid it's unclear (so far) whether they're woorkers or management.

Allinall

horseburger wrote: »

I was accused of saying that Bus Éireann would choose to make the company insolvent. I was accused of stating that Bus Éireann threatened that Bus Éireann would choose by itself to make the company insolvent if the proposed cutbacks were not implemented.

I did not say that.

I cited a press statement by Bus Éireann, and two RTE News items, when I said that Bus Éireann is threatening that if the proposed cutbacks are not implemented, that the company would become insolvent.

I did not say that Bus Éireann will choose to make the company insolvent, which is what was implied by devnull's response to my post

here is what I said, with reference to the Bus Éireann statement and two RTE News items:

"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".

I include links to posts in question,

- my post which referenced the RTE news items and Bus Éireann statement

- devnull's response which attributed a statement to me which I did not state,

below that, my post earlier this evening where I wrote about my statement being misrepresented by devnull,

below that, devnull's response, which ignored my post about the misrepresentation of what I had written, where devnull again repeated the meaning of insolvency, which was just a attempt to distract from the fact that I was totally misrepresented, by devnull:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=102774131&postcount=869

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=102774346&postcount=873

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=102791709&postcount=1016

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=102791811&postcount=1020

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=102791868&postcount=1023

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/

All irrelevant to the fact that you said The company were threatening that if the proposed cutbacks were not implemented, then the company would be insolvent.

Once again, there was no threat there, yet you said there was.

Why?

Grandeeod

n97 mini wrote: »

Did you really need to ask that?
Woorkers: deserve every penny they get, and more. It is our duty to support them (no reason given as to why). Unions are great, everyone should be in one.
Management: useless wasters, know less about everything than the woorkers. (Though the odd time, when it suits the argument, the management is right).
Admin staff: even though it's an inverse pyramid it's unclear (so far) whether they're woorkers or management.

That made me laugh. Many thanks!

horseburger

Allinall wrote: »

All irrelevant to the fact that you said The company were threatening that if the proposed cutbacks were not implemented, then the company would be insolvent.

Once again, there was no threat there, yet you said there was.

Why?

Once again, you did not read what I have written.

The company, in the wording in the press release, is threatening that if the proposed cutbacks are not implemented, that the company will be insolvent.

Do you seriously expect them to employ a Public Relations agent that would use the term 'threat' in a press statement, where they are trying to appeal to the general public?

Do you not see that the wording of the press statement is attempting to shift responsibility?

I said, with reference to the press release and two RTE News items, that the threat was in reference to proposed cutbacks, not that the company would choose to make the company insolvent.

devnull said that I was stating that the company would choose to make the company insolvent.

That is not what I said.

marienbad

horseburger wrote: »

Well then the people in the pub are unable to read and understand the meaning of words in a sentence, or understand and interpret what people are saying.

whatever

horseburger

marienbad wrote: »

whatever

Splendid response, really persuasive.

devnull

SIPTU communication to members in Dublin Bus says they will defend anyone who does not pass pickets:

SIPTU is being contacted daily by members from within the other CIE companies, seeking clarification as to how they can support their colleagues in Bus Eireann.

We must advise that SIPTU is not presently engaged in an Official dispute in either Irish Rail or Dublin Bus and members in those companies are not in dispute with their employer. SIPTU is also advising that no member in these companies should prosecute or participate in any work that would normally be carried out by our members in Bus Eireann, while they are on Official Strike.

We note however, that Bus Eireann has shared locations with both Irish Rail and Dublin Bus in some areas and while our Irish Rail and Dublin Bus members are not in dispute, we are aware and understand that staff in these Companies may be reluctant, as a matter of conscience, to pass Official pickets, which may be at the entrance to their work places.

Where members make this individual decision, this Union will defend them going forward where necessary.

Idbatterim

i'm not of the left. i as a tax payer feel that i'm not paying over the rate in subsidy for the service. fares, sure. but either way i'm paying for the service and either fares or subsidy are going up whoever runs things. strike action sometimes has to happen for the greater good and i will respect the democratic decisian to go on strike by the relevant staff even if i don't agree with it as it's my duty to do so. workers for other commercial operators won't have their jobs put at risk, so they aren't relevant here. bus eireann expressway wouldn't be getting state aid so it's a non-issue. even if it was to happen and jobs were put at risk that is for those companies and any unions to sort out.

are you joking? where is my voice as a tax payer to say this joke, has gone too far, way too far! 2017, its time to take a stand once and for all! shut the bloody thing down, the only losers will be BE staff. Yet you EOTR claim to care about taxpayers and the BE users...

n97 mini

horseburger wrote: »

The company, in the wording in press release, is threatening that if the proposed cutbacks are not implemented, that the company will be insolvent.

Bit like saying that the company threatened that if you leave the window open and it rains, the carpet will get wet.

Allinall

horseburger wrote: »

Once again, you did not read what I have written.

The company, in the wording in press release, is threatening that if the proposed cutbacks are not implemented, that the company will be insolvent.

.

There is no threat in their press release, only a statement of fact.

The rest of your post is irrrelevant waffle.

Why do you keep using the word "threat"?

n97 mini

devnull wrote: »

SIPTU communication to members in Dublin Bus says they will defend anyone who does not pass pickets:

i.e. we didn't say don't pass the pickets, but if you don't pass the pickets we support your decision.

It's like living in a by-gone era. What a time to be alive!

horseburger

n97 mini wrote: »

Bit like saying that the company threatened that if you leave the window open and it rains, the carpet will get wet.

Perhaps, but the issue is I did not appreciate words being attributed to me, by someone who didn't bother to read properly what I had written.

This someone then posted from Wikipedia the meaning of insolvency, which had absolutely nothing to do with the post I had written and then smart assedly questioned whether or not I knew what insolvency was.

This, I can only presume, was done to divert the course of the discussion, or the person didn't bother reading what I had written.

Bass Reeves

end of the road wrote: »

[Q
i'm not of the left. i as a tax payer feel that i'm not paying over the rate in subsidy for the service. fares, sure. but either way i'm paying for the service and either fares or subsidy are going up whoever runs things. strike action sometimes has to happen for the greater good and i will respect the democratic decisian to go on strike by the relevant staff even if i don't agree with it as it's my duty to do so. workers for other commercial operators won't have their jobs put at risk, so they aren't relevant here. bus eireann expressway wouldn't be getting state aid so it's a non-issue. even if it was to happen and jobs were put at risk that is for those companies and any unions to sort out.

Bass Reeves wrote: »

He implied that the company by issuing its statement and by the company management doing there job that they were threatening the workers

he didn't at any stage do anything of the sort.

I am not of the right, I as a tax pay feel that I am paying over the rate in subsidy for the system. Fares as well are too high and if they were lower they would be no need of tax relief. And between fare, subsidy and tax relief we pay too much and it would be cheaper if it was put to tender. This strike need not happen it is not for the greater good and is an abuse of democratic rights of commuters and tax payers. As a worker it is my duty to point out when a strike is immoral and against the greater good. In this case if unions have there way workers in other companies will be effected and the rights of shareholders will be effected as well. Bus Eireann would be getting illegal state aid which is against EU competition law. I do not think that taxpayers money should be abused or put at risk of other bus companies take a ca

horseburger

Allinall wrote: »

There is no threat in their press release, only a statement of fact.

The rest of your post is irrrelevant waffle.

Why do you keep using the word "threat"?

I can only presume that you read press releases unquestioningly.

You don't seem to understand the true purpose of companies, issuing of press releases, companies who are in the middle of a dispute with their employees.

Do you really think that a press release would be issued by the management of a company, in a dispute with its employees, that would reflect negatively on that company management, by using a word like threat in the statement?

marienbad

horseburger wrote: »

Splendid response, really persuasive.

Glad you are convinced , and I didn't even have to threaten you

end of the road

Grandeeod wrote: »

Hey EOTR.

You go on about how crap IE are at running trains in other threads. Do you think BE run a good service? What's your opinion on DB? In fact whats your opinion on the CIE group in general? Its all relevant.

i find dublin bus a goodish service. bus eireann as well any time i have used them. have had the odd rude driver but most have been friendly in my experience. yes there is lots of room to improve, but both bus eireann and dublin bus do make an effort in my experience.
the parent CIE could go, it has no use.
you all ready know my views on irish rail but even then their issues are easily sorted in my view. and as this isn't relevant to this thread i can't say any more in relation to the other companies.

Idbatterim wrote: »

are you joking? where is my voice as a tax payer to say this joke, has gone too far, way too far! 2017, its time to take a stand once and for all! shut the bloody thing down, the only losers will be BE staff. Yet you EOTR claim to care about taxpayers and the BE users...

not shut it down, those relying on the service will lose for a long time unitil replacements are implemented, potentially costing jobs and the local economies. the only stand to take is to insure we have a publically owned, publically funded bus company now and into the future. if i didn't care about fellow tax payers and the be users then i wouldn't be wanting our publically owned publically funded company to remain, now and into the future.

Bass Reeves wrote: »

I am not of the right, I as a tax pay feel that I am paying over the rate in subsidy for the system. Fares as well are too high and if they were lower they would be no need of tax relief. And between fare, subsidy and tax relief we pay too much and it would be cheaper if it was put to tender. This strike need not happen it is not for the greater good and is an abuse of democratic rights of commuters and tax payers. As a worker it is my duty to point out when a strike is immoral and against the greater good. In this case if unions have there way workers in other companies will be effected and the rights of shareholders will be effected as well. Bus Eireann would be getting illegal state aid which is against EU competition law. I do not think that taxpayers money should be abused or put at risk of other bus companies take a ca

i have saw no evidence it would be cheeper if it was put to tender as profit has to be factored in for the other companies, who we have a duty to insure make a profit if they are given the tender for routes. the subsidy is one of the cheepist in europe i believe. i have all ready stated that i don't believe this strike should happen however i have to respect the decisian democratically made to go on strike by be staff, as per my duty. it is not an abuse of a democratic right, nor is it immoral, but it is simply unlikely to solve anything. there would be no illegal state aid as expressway won't be getting anything as it is a commercial service. the shareholders of other companies are not the problem of the state but those companies themselves and any unions that exist in those companies and as expressway won't be getting state aid then it is a non-issue.

marienbad

horseburger wrote: »

Hilarious response. Tommy Tiernan is quivering at the prospect of the competition he'll be up against.

You really don't know when to stop digging , do you ?

n97 mini

end of the road wrote: »

the only stand to take is to insure we have a publically owned, publically funded bus company now and into the future.

Why publicly owned? Bullet points please.

horseburger

marienbad wrote: »

You really don't know when to stop digging , do you ?

I'm not digging anything. I have stated clearly why I objected to what was attributed to me and you seem unable to understand that.