Transdev seeks to run Irish bus services

ct5amr2ig1nfhp · 16-05-2016 10:22AM #1

I read an article in the paper today detailing that the Luas operator Transdev is seeking to run some of the proposed bus routes. Irish Times article.

"A spokeswoman for Transdev said it would be bidding to operate routes as part of the tendering process which will be carried out by the National Transport Authority."

I do not believe Transdev should be considered given the ongoing strikes by Luas workers.
I would be interested in what others have to say.

Should Transdev be considered as an operator for any bus route given the current situation with the Luas?

gimli2112 · 16-05-2016 10:24AM

I think they should run everything

liamo · 16-05-2016 10:41AM

That link isn't working. Here's a working one.

I think that they've demonstrated that they are an excellent candidate for operating these routes.

They've shown themselves to be fair and to treat employees well and to pay them well. They've also shown that they can negotiate but will not be bullied or strong-armed by unions or militant employees.

I'd love to see them succeed in their bid. I think that a lot of operators of public services should take a leaf out of their book.

Why do you think that the workers' disgraceful actions should disqualify Transdev?

Jamie2k9 · 16-05-2016 10:45AM

I do not believe Transdev should be considered given the ongoing strikes by Luas workers.
I would be interested in what others have to say.

Should Transdev be considered as an operator for any bus route given the current situation with the Luas?

Of course they should, should DB and BE be allowed have a monopoly and bring the country to a haul whenever they go on strike?

Polo_Mint · 16-05-2016 10:45AM

Reina Proud Windburn wrote: »

I read an article in the paper today detailing that the Luas operator Transdev is seeking to run some of the proposed bus routes. Irish Times article.

"A spokeswoman for Transdev said it would be bidding to operate routes as part of the tendering process which will be carried out by the National Transport Authority."

I do not believe Transdev should be considered given the ongoing strikes by Luas workers.
I would be interested in what others have to say.

Should Transdev be considered as an operator for any bus route given the current situation with the Luas?

Yes they should be considered.

They dont let their workers call the shots like Bus Eireann, DB and Irish Rail.

howiya · 16-05-2016 10:48AM

Reina Proud Windburn wrote: »

I read an article in the paper today detailing that the Luas operator Transdev is seeking to run some of the proposed bus routes. Irish Times article.

"A spokeswoman for Transdev said it would be bidding to operate routes as part of the tendering process which will be carried out by the National Transport Authority."

I do not believe Transdev should be considered given the ongoing strikes by Luas workers.
I would be interested in what others have to say.

Should Transdev be considered as an operator for any bus route given the current situation with the Luas?

Should we take all of the routes from Dublin Bus/Bus Eireann because their employees have gone on strike?

Obviously we don't want disruption to services but workers are entitled to strike regardless of whether we agree with their grievance and their employers shouldn't be barred from tendering processes as a result

ct5amr2ig1nfhp · 16-05-2016 11:04AM

This is a private company and so cannot be compared DB/BE.

Anyone is entitled to strike. However there appears to be no end in sight to the current Luas dispute.

Transdev have shown that they are unable to keep their own house in order. The dispute is now going on months and is hurting our economy.

Why should any private company that is unable to provide a stable service be considered or contracted for another service?

howiya wrote: »

Should we take all of the routes from Dublin Bus/Bus Eireann because their employees have gone on strike?

Obviously we don't want disruption to services but workers are entitled to strike regardless of whether we agree with their grievance and their employers shouldn't be barred from tendering processes as a result

Jamie2k9 · 16-05-2016 11:07AM

Reina Proud Windburn wrote: »

This is a private company and so cannot be compared DB/BE.

Anyone is entitled to strike. However there appears to be no end in sight to the current Luas dispute.

Transdev have shown that they are unable to keep their own house in order. The dispute is now going on months and is hurting our economy.

Why should any private company that is unable to provide a stable service be considered or contracted for another service?

Why not, public or private makes not difference. CIE have also shown they cannot keep their houses in order either.

Dravokivich · 16-05-2016 11:11AM

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Of course they should, should DB and BE be allowed have a monopoly and bring the country to a haul whenever they go on strike?

This is up to the NTA, not DB nor BE. Your closing statement is the scare mongering going about with Luas right now, so can be pushed onto a Bus Service run by Transdev (or A.N. Other) where no other operator will be providing a service for any of these tendered routes.

CiboC · 16-05-2016 11:21AM

Reina Proud Windburn wrote: »

Transdev have shown that they are unable to keep their own house in order.

It's hard to keep your house in order when said house has been taken over by a troop of monkeys who follow only two of the 'speak / hear / see' proverb and appear to be happy to fling their ****e all over the walls.

foggy_lad · 16-05-2016 11:26AM

Reina Proud Windburn wrote: »

I read an article in the paper today detailing that the Luas operator Transdev is seeking to run some of the proposed bus routes. Irish Times article.

"A spokeswoman for Transdev said it would be bidding to operate routes as part of the tendering process which will be carried out by the National Transport Authority."

I do not believe Transdev should be considered given the ongoing strikes by Luas workers.
I would be interested in what others have to say.

Should Transdev be considered as an operator for any bus route given the current situation with the Luas?

Those strikes are not in any way the fault of Transdev, they can't give in to the drivers ridiculous claims and it is 100% the fault of the drivers and their union that this dispute has been drawn out so long. It feels like a deliberate attempt to blacken Transdev and to make it appear that privatisation of public transport does not work, but Transdev and the other luas operators have shown that it does work!

Reina Proud Windburn wrote: »

This is a private company and so cannot be compared DB/BE.

Anyone is entitled to strike. However there appears to be no end in sight to the current Luas dispute.

Transdev have shown that they are unable to keep their own house in order. The dispute is now going on months and is hurting our economy.

Why should any private company that is unable to provide a stable service be considered or contracted for another service?

The luas drivers are perfectly entitled to strike but to be taken seriously and regarded as genuine their demands must be reasonable.

Carawaystick · 16-05-2016 11:29AM

Will Dublin bus tickets work on the outsourced services?
What will the impact on passengers be?
If a 33a breaks down, will a following 33 be able to take passengers?

ct5amr2ig1nfhp · 16-05-2016 11:30AM

The whole point of opening up the routes is to allow private operators service these routes, reducing the DB/BE monopoly. It would also reduce the likely hood of strike action causing chaos to our transport system.

Transdev have provided a great service up until recently. Should we just look passed the chaos their workers are causing for commuters?

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Of course they should, should DB and BE be allowed have a monopoly and bring the country to a haul whenever they go on strike?

@foggy_lad - the strikes are 100% the responsibility of Transdev management. They continue to show that they are unable to negotiate a resolution to the situation.

foggy_lad wrote: »

Those strikes are not in any way the fault of Transdev, they can't give in to the drivers ridiculous claims and it is 100% the fault of the drivers and their union that this dispute has been drawn out so long. It feels like a deliberate attempt to blacken Transdev and to make it appear that privatisation of public transport does not work, but Transdev and the other luas operators have shown that it does work!

The luas drivers are perfectly entitled to strike but to be taken seriously and regarded as genuine their demands must be reasonable.

foggy_lad · 16-05-2016 11:33AM

Carawaystick wrote: »

Will Dublin bus tickets work on the outsourced services?
What will the impact on passengers be?
If a 33a breaks down, will a following 33 be able to take passengers?

Yes They should
none
Yes they should be able to

They will operate the same as Dublin bus with the fares going to the NTA and operator getting paid a set rate for the service.

CiboC · 16-05-2016 11:35AM

foggy_lad wrote: »

It feels like a deliberate attempt to blacken Transdev and to make it appear that privatisation of public transport does not work

Looking at the utter intransigence and ostrich like behaviour of SIPTU, at this stage my suspicion is that what they really want is for Transdev to be forced to / voluntarily withdraw from Ireland and leave a situation where one of the CIE group of companies 'has' to take over running the luas for the 'public good' and thereby bring everything back under the one cosy 'SIPTU, we're in charge of public transport and you're going to pay' umbrella.

liamo · 16-05-2016 11:55AM

Reina Proud Windburn wrote: »

@foggy_lad - the strikes are 100% the responsibility of Transdev management. They continue to show that they are unable to negotiate a resolution to the situation.

Successful negotiations require more than one party to them.

They also require that the terms under negotiation are reasonable and achievable and can be met (and are worth acceding to) by the other party.

LuckyLloyd · 16-05-2016 12:24PM

foggy_lad wrote: »

Those strikes are not in any way the fault of Transdev, they can't give in to the drivers ridiculous claims and it is 100% the fault of the drivers and their union that this dispute has been drawn out so long. It feels like a deliberate attempt to blacken Transdev and to make it appear that privatisation of public transport does not work, but Transdev and the other luas operators have shown that it does work!

Shown what exactly?

The LUAS to date has run along two distinct, dedicated, non complex and capacity over demand lines. And the operation is constrained by Public Overview and very specific and well structured operating agreements. Cross City will introduce greater challenges, but I'd caution against hailing the operation thus far as enough to turn over all Irish Transport services to a private operator - particularly when TransDev don't seem to have figured out a way to derive a consistent profit from it.

Moreover, the dispute has also demonstrated that TransDev have no magic when it comes to preventing loss of service due to strike action (a point that used to be made). As much as people on here laud their approach and hope they take it all the way up to and including sacking Drivers involved in the Dispute, this has quickly become the longest running and most disruptive Irish Transport strike in recent memory.

Ultimately I'm not seeing a huge amount in terms of facts to indicate that TransDev winning tenders for further contracts to be a good thing in of itself. If their tender radically blows competing offers from DB and others out of the water in terms of cost, etc then fair enough.

Infini · 16-05-2016 12:52PM

To be honest when I saw this I just kinda laughed. They aint gonna be in much shape right now till they sort out their own house in regards to the luas. Easy to blame the drivers but these issue had been brewing for 2 years before they spilled over and theres still no end to it.

Just very bad timing imo right now.

mahoganygas · 16-05-2016 02:07PM

Luas strike aside, I think there are synergies to having the same operator for Bus routes and tram routes.

If a LUAS line needs to close, for maintenance or due strikes etc, Transdev can leverage off their existing stock of buses to provide temporary cover.

ted1 · 16-05-2016 02:11PM

Reina Proud Windburn wrote: »

This is a private company and so cannot be compared DB/BE.

Anyone is entitled to strike. However there appears to be no end in sight to the current Luas dispute.

Transdev have shown that they are unable to keep their own house in order. The dispute is now going on months and is hurting our economy.

Why should any private company that is unable to provide a stable service be considered or contracted for another service?

It wasn't to long ago when we had DART strikes, when are the 10 minute DARTs coming ? What about when they increased the number if carriages.

ted1 · 16-05-2016 02:12PM

mahoganygas wrote: »

Luas strike aside, I think there are synergies to having the same operator for Bus routes and tram routes.

If a LUAS line needs to close, for maintenance or due strikes etc, Transdev can leverage off their existing stock of buses to provide temporary cover.

A private company won't keep spare busses lying around

ct5amr2ig1nfhp · 16-05-2016 02:12PM

If there was strike, you would more than likely see the entire workforce go on strike - either as part of industrial action or to show support.

You could be left with no tram or bus service, leaving no contingency option?

mahoganygas wrote: »

Luas strike aside, I think there are synergies to having the same operator for Bus routes and tram routes.

If a LUAS line needs to close, for maintenance or due strikes etc, Transdev can leverage off their existing stock of buses to provide temporary cover.

KomradeBishop · 16-05-2016 02:19PM

No thanks, I don't want to see the path being paved, for the gradual rolling-privatization of our public bus transport services...(or rather, the permanently-subsidized privatization of our public transport...)

We have to hold on to as much public control over subsidized transport as possible, especially when funding is tight (as that's the time that vested interests try to destroy/privatize it), so we can keep good services and beef it up properly later.

Jamie2k9 · 16-05-2016 02:21PM

Dravokivich wrote: »

This is up to the NTA, not DB nor BE. Your closing statement is the scare mongering going about with Luas right now, so can be pushed onto a Bus Service run by Transdev (or A.N. Other) where no other operator will be providing a service for any of these tendered routes.

The NTA have decided it's not and they want to allow the option for competitors to compete.

end of the road · 16-05-2016 02:29PM

Polo_Mint wrote: »

Yes they should be considered.

They dont let their workers call the shots like Bus Eireann, DB and Irish Rail.

bus eireann, dublin bus, and irish rail don't let their workers call the shots. your incorrect view is no good reason to consider transdev. transdev should be considered on the basis of the normal rules of contracting only.

foggy_lad wrote: »

It feels like a deliberate attempt to blacken Transdev and to make it appear that privatisation of public transport does not work, but Transdev and the other luas operators have shown that it does work!

what other luas operators. there is only 1 luas operator. they haven't shown privatization works, as luas is a bit different to the other transport sectors in this country such as rail and the socially necessary bus services. in reality, whether privatization works will depend on your viewpoint and what you are looking to gain from it. i will say however that in my view the uk gives the best examples of what can happen with privatization in various forms, and it doesn't work over all (again in my view)

Reina Proud Windburn wrote: »

The whole point of opening up the routes is to allow private operators service these routes, reducing the DB/BE monopoly. It would also reduce the likely hood of strike action causing chaos to our transport system.

those would be a couple of the reasons used to justify it to sell it to the public, but the real reasons are in my view.
1. remove the state from the equation, taking away the state's responsibility, meaning the state can fudge the blame to the operators when things go wrong.
2. the idea that the state can pay less over all for services, something that ultimately doesn't work out over all (in my view) but we will have to wait and see.

CosmicSmash · 16-05-2016 02:30PM

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Of course they should, should DB and BE be allowed have a monopoly and bring the country to a haul whenever they go on strike?

But yet you wouldn't have a problem with Transdev running all the services, kind of like a monopoly.

thomasj · 16-05-2016 02:30PM

ted1 wrote:

A private company won't keep spare busses lying around

It won't be up to private company on what to do with the fleet.

end of the road · 16-05-2016 02:37PM

mahoganygas wrote: »

Luas strike aside, I think there are synergies to having the same operator for Bus routes and tram routes.

If a LUAS line needs to close, for maintenance or due strikes etc, Transdev can leverage off their existing stock of buses to provide temporary cover.

as far as i know the NTA are providing the busses? in theory your suggestion could happen, but in practice i think it may not be able to work as simply as that. we will have to wait and see, but i suspect the NTA will expect transdev or whoever if that situation arose, to operate a full service on the bus routes.

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

The NTA have decided it's not and they want to allow the option for competitors to compete.

it's only competing to run a subsidized route though. it's not real competition in terms of having a choice of operator

Markcheese · 16-05-2016 02:39PM

CiboC wrote:

Looking at the utter intransigence and ostrich like behaviour of SIPTU, at this stage my suspicion is that what they really want is for Transdev to be forced to / voluntarily withdraw from Ireland and leave a situation where one of the CIE group of companies 'has' to take over running the luas for the 'public good' and thereby bring everything back under the one cosy 'SIPTU, we're in charge of public transport and you're going to pay' umbrella.

To be fair to the union, they negotiated a settlement with transdev, put it to the luas drivers and 90% reject the offer... doesnt really seem like an ulterior motive from the union..

Dravokivich · 16-05-2016 02:50PM

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

The NTA have decided it's not and they want to allow the option for competitors to compete.

The closest it is to competition is for an operator to win a tender for a selection of routes to provide the service. For the consumer they are stuck with whoever is running the service, nor does it really matter as NTA will determine everything about the service such as frequency and fares. You think that's competition?

hmmm · 16-05-2016 03:00PM

KomradeBishop wrote: »

We have to hold on to as much public control over subsidized transport as possible, especially when funding is tight (as that's the time that vested interests try to destroy/privatize it), so we can keep good services and beef it up properly later.

Public control? That's a laugh - the services are run for the staff by the staff and the public have little or no control. The unions have a monopoly and stranglehold over public transport.

At least with a private service the public can set targets, and if those targets are not met the service will be given to a different operator.

You can see the pressure that is being exerted on Transdev to sort out the LUAS strike because of the fines that are being imposed on them.

Peppa Pig · 16-05-2016 03:03PM

Reina Proud Windburn wrote: »

If there was strike, you would more than likely see the entire workforce go on strike - either as part of industrial action or to show support.

Luas workers are not even supporting the drivers in the current dispute so I don't know why you would think bus workers would go out in sympathy with tram staff.

end of the road · 16-05-2016 03:13PM

hmmm wrote: »

Public control? That's a laugh - the services are run for the staff by the staff and the public have little or no control. The unions have a monopoly and stranglehold over public transport.

yes, public control. the services are run for us all, they aren't perfect but never will be and changes are gradually happening. ourselves teh public will never have any real control whoever runs the services. the unions don't have a monopoly and strangle hold on public transport in ireland.

hmmm wrote: »

At least with a private service the public can set targets, and if those targets are not met the service will be given to a different operator.

incorrect, the general public have no say. it will be the national transport authority, who can all ready set targets (not that any can really be set in my view)

Phoebas · 16-05-2016 03:21PM

end of the road wrote: »

incorrect, the general public have no say. it will be the national transport authority, who can all ready set targets (not that any can really be set in my view)

Except...

NTA wrote:

In preparing certain policies, strategies and plans, the National Transport Authority is required under its establishing legislation, Dublin Transport Authority Act 2008 and Public Transport Regulation Act 2009, to consult with a number of government departments, public bodies, local communities, users and other affected groups.

KomradeBishop · 16-05-2016 03:36PM

hmmm wrote: »

Public control? That's a laugh - the services are run for the staff by the staff and the public have little or no control. The unions have a monopoly and stranglehold over public transport.

At least with a private service the public can set targets, and if those targets are not met the service will be given to a different operator.

You can see the pressure that is being exerted on Transdev to sort out the LUAS strike because of the fines that are being imposed on them.

This is just the usual anti-union bollocks - and, since it's just asserted without any backing, can just be discarded as waffle.

The workers in public transport, have every legal right to use unions, to protect their working conditions - as they should - they are totally within their rights, to use unions to beef up their negotiating position.

I personally don't have any faith in the tendering system, as being anything more than a cynical method of preparing the public transport services for future privatization - we've already seen the governments track record with trying to stealthily privatize other services, so they deserve no benefit of the doubt at all here.

The benefits of tendering are a fiction in my view - it has bugger all ability to provide true accountability - it is solely a tool to be used, for preparing services for privatization.

Infini · 16-05-2016 03:44PM

KomradeBishop wrote: »

This is just the usual anti-union bollocks - and, since it's just asserted without any backing, can just be discarded as waffle.

The workers in public transport, have every legal right to use unions, to protect their working conditions - as they should - they are totally within their rights, to use unions to beef up their negotiating position.

I personally don't have any faith in the tendering system, as being anything more than a cynical method of preparing the public transport services for future privatization - we've already seen the governments track record with trying to stealthily privatize other services, so they deserve no benefit of the doubt at all here.

The benefits of tendering are a fiction in my view - it has bugger all ability to provide true accountability - it is solely a tool to be used, for preparing services for privatization.

I'd agree with this you only have to look at the fudge they made of other sectors in the past to realise that privatisation usually means favours for someones political friends and not for the public interest as some people would love to believe. (Hint: Irish water and siteserv aka hai dinny!)

Even the luas dispute has blown the whole myth of privatisation is good argument if anything its the worst transport dispute in decades in this country and thats just a dublin area dispute.

Unions dont run the place either thats just a silly joke to think it is but at least with the state companies things got settled after a few days of strike not 3 months and counting with transdev.

hmmm · 16-05-2016 03:46PM

KomradeBishop wrote: »

The benefits of tendering are a fiction in my view - it has bugger all ability to provide true accountability - it is solely a tool to be used, for preparing services for privatization.

We have no "true accountability" at the moment, CIE produce stats and there is effectively nothing that can be done if they fail to hit their targets.

With a private company, you remove the contract and ward it someone else.

"Public" services are cushy numbers for those inside the tent, they offer little value to the wider public.

end of the road · 16-05-2016 03:53PM

hmmm wrote: »

We have no "true accountability" at the moment, CIE produce stats and there is effectively nothing that can be done if they fail to hit their targets.

they are punished for not hitting targets. we never will have true accountability.

hmmm wrote: »

With a private company, you remove the contract and ward it someone else.

doesn't work like that in practice.

hmmm wrote: »

"Public" services are cushy numbers for those inside the tent, they offer little value to the wider public.

incorrect. public services insure that people have access to them. private services will have access where it is viable, or where there is enough money to pay for them to be viable. privatization or tendering won't make the problems go away, even if they make some problems go away others will arise.

KomradeBishop · 16-05-2016 03:57PM

hmmm wrote: »

We have no "true accountability" at the moment, CIE produce stats and there is effectively nothing that can be done if they fail to hit their targets.

With a private company, you remove the contract and ward it someone else.

"Public" services are cushy numbers for those inside the tent, they offer little value to the wider public.

You don't run public services based on stats/targets - you cut the chaff where you can (and have someone responsible for this), and then pay what you need to, to make it run properly - the entire point of 'targets' is to set people up for failure politically, so you can make excuses for privatizing services later.

More myth-peddling about the public services...that's just a load of nonsense, talk to a low-level health service worker and ask how cushy their job is...being able to take a bus to get where I need to go, and go to hospital when I'm sick, gives me plenty of 'value', thanks...

When you spout nonsense like that, what you're really saying is you think private permanently-subsidized services in these areas provide more 'value' - well, I disagree - it's the privatized permanently-subsidized services, that get used as the cash-cow (for milking the public both directly in fees and from the governments hand in subsidies), and that's exactly what this country needs to avoid...

Vic_08 · 16-05-2016 04:00PM

foggy_lad wrote: »

Yes They should
none
Yes they should be able to

They will operate the same as Dublin bus with the fares going to the NTA and operator getting paid a set rate for the service.

Those are your made-up opinions, not facts.

NTA have not provided any details to the public about the service levels or ticketing arrangements.

Dublin Bus keep their fares so it is not the same arrangement.

Full cross-acceptance is not guaranteed, it has not happened on the handful of NTA tendered regional services.

Jamie2k9 · 16-05-2016 04:09PM

CosmicSmash wrote: »

But yet you wouldn't have a problem with Transdev running all the services, kind of like a monopoly.

Never suggested anything of the sort....would need to seek how they get on if successful before making a call on this.

CosmicSmash · 16-05-2016 04:53PM

Reina Proud Windburn wrote: »

I read an article in the paper today detailing that the Luas operator Transdev is seeking to run some of the proposed bus routes. Irish Times article.

"A spokeswoman for Transdev said it would be bidding to operate routes as part of the tendering process which will be carried out by the National Transport Authority."

I do not believe Transdev should be considered given the ongoing strikes by Luas workers.
I would be interested in what others have to say.

Should Transdev be considered as an operator for any bus route given the current situation with the Luas?

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Of course they should, should DB and BE be allowed have a monopoly and bring the country to a haul whenever they go on strike?

No, nothing of the sort, I don't know what gave me that idea.

end of the road · 16-05-2016 05:00PM

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Never suggested anything of the sort....would need to seek how they get on if successful before making a call on this.

there is no call to make in fairness. a private monopoly is worse then a public monopoly over all.

LXFlyer · 16-05-2016 05:08PM

It is pretty inevitable that some or all of the big global players such as Transdev, Arriva, Stagecoach, First etc. would make bids. Why this seems to be coming as a surprise to people here is beyond me.

The question is will they be on their own or tying up with local independents.

Another poster raised the issue of ticketing - and on this topic I do wonder whether the current Dublin Bus rambler tickets will continue to be available for all routes as these are specific DB designed products. The NTA may decide that capping is sufficient.

I would however expect full transferability to continue with monthly and annual tickets over all city bus routes - removing that would make a mockery of the whole process. I'd also expect that if passengers were on a bus that breaks down on one route that full transferability to another bus would be retained. Again not allowing that across a PSO funded city bus network would just be daft.

Wanderer78 · 16-05-2016 07:08PM

i can see, we re gonna have a few issues trying to get a public banking system going here then!

jimmycrackcorm · 16-05-2016 07:40PM

KomradeBishop wrote:

No thanks, I don't want to see the path being paved, for the gradual rolling-privatization of our public bus transport services...(or rather, the permanently-subsidized privatization of our public We have to hold on to as much public control over subsidized transport as possible, especially when funding is tight (as that's the time that vested interests try to destroy/privatize it), so we can keep good services and beef it up properly later.

Yes because as we have learned from the lessons of Aer Lingus and Ryanair, we should never have changed from Â£600 flights between the UK and Ireland

end of the road · 16-05-2016 07:49PM

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

Yes because as we have learned from the lessons of Aer Lingus and Ryanair, we should never have changed from Â£600 flights between the UK and Ireland

the air industry cannot be compared to subsidized public transport services, and it cannot be compared to rail.

Graham · 16-05-2016 07:54PM

end of the road wrote: »

the air industry cannot be compared to subsidized public transport services, and it cannot be compared to rail.

It's not that long ago that the air industry was a subsidised public transport service.

the groutch · 16-05-2016 08:29PM

Reina Proud Windburn wrote: »

I do not believe Transdev should be considered given the ongoing strikes by Luas workers.

Why not?
Is it too provocative for you?

end of the road · 16-05-2016 08:33PM

Graham wrote: »

It's not that long ago that the air industry was a subsidised public transport service.

yes but it is still irrelevant and cannot be compared to general public transport. back when the air industry was being subsidized it was still a relatively new industry. however there was always going to be room for multiple operators, unlike the routes being tendered (which require a subsidy to support 1 operator never mind multiple operators) as they aren't commercially viable

the groutch wrote: »

Why not?
Is it too provocative for you?

i'm not sure what your trying to get at exactly. how would it be provocative for him? transdev will have to go through the same process as other operators. any hint of "favoritism" (IE anything outside them being the best bid in terms of the contract ) would likely see a case taken by other bidders.

Carawaystick · 16-05-2016 08:39PM

lxflyer wrote: »

Another poster raised the issue of ticketing - and on this topic I do wonder whether the current Dublin Bus rambler tickets will continue to be available for all routes as these are specific DB designed products. The NTA may decide that capping is sufficient.

I would however expect full transferability to continue with monthly and annual tickets over all city bus routes - removing that would make a mockery of the whole process. I'd also expect that if passengers were on a bus that breaks down on one route that full transferability to another bus would be retained. Again not allowing that across a PSO funded city bus network would just be daft.

When I brought this up the last time this kite was flown 5-7 years ago, the genii at the nta hadn't considered the passenger side of things at all, only concern was some EU lads wanting to have a bit of competition.

I still don't think the nta has a decent customer/passenger focus. Especially when you provide a better source of information for free to us, than they do.

Transdev seeks to run Irish bus services

Comments