10%

A lot of what we have actually been delivered are knick-knacks, bells and whistles as you call them. RTPI signs are nice, but not really necessary with the advent of smartphones. This was a €25m project, and the RTPI doesn't really work that well. Wi-fi on buses is another item that is not as expensive but doesn't really bring any benefit for the vast majority of bus passengers. If it had been implemented 5 years earlier, it might have delivered on some sort of vision. Having such a young bus fleet is also nice, but is it really necessary?

A minimal level of late night services are not really bells and whistles in a city which operates 24 hours a day.

We are still paying more per kilometre of bus operations than anybody else in Europe (except maybe London, which has similar levels of cost, but that is a very exceptional situation)

If the cost per km could be reduced by just 10 percent, it would mean that the fleet could be increased in size by 10 percent. This would result in a massive practical improvement in comfort, capacity and frequency.

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Ah the EU.. is there anything they can't do screw up?

Orbital routes are needed yes, but I don't see why they need to get a new operator (which as posted above may not have the depot facilities - and which it seems the NTA/taxpayer? will fund in such cases??) to take them on.

you do realize i'm agreeing with this stance. all i stated was that apparently we had to do all this because of some pointless EU directives, not that i agree with tendering, i don't, as with the NTA most likely implementing all the ideas, i can't see what more it can deliver that couldn't be delivered with the current model and the NTA implementing them.

end of the road wrote: »

you do realize i'm agreeing with this stance. all i stated was that apparently we had to do all this because of some pointless EU directives, not that i agree with tendering, i don't, as with the NTA most likely implementing all the ideas, i can't see what more it can deliver that couldn't be delivered with the current model and the NTA implementing them.

No I know.. I was agreeing with you

Cost base will be DB/BE/CIE's biggest issue in a tender market. Despite the many free buses (supplied by the NTA at absolutely no cost), despite the subsidy, despite the free infrastructure (which they have been selling off in bits to shore up the subsidy deficit AFAIR) they will not be able to compete with lean efficient companies. Too many layers, way too much management - look at Victoria Coach Station for instance, handles multiples of the movements (from multiple operators) on a daily basis on Bus Aras, yet Bus Aras requires multiples of the the staff on a daily basis to run it on much higher packages.

I'm all for good pay and conditions but there has to be a line. We have a situation were most driving staff are paid more than many nursing grades and junior doctors, that is indefensible to me. Getting a bus licence costs approximately €1,500 - €2,000 on the private side at the minute (state funding available to unemployed in some cases) and takes very little time. Becoming a nurse takes years, loads of money and involves saving lives. Their package deserves to reflect that.

There has been 100's of applicants (if not 1000's) for the jobs in DB but most are being rejected along the line by the company not the other way around. That problem affects private sector too. Driving is not a first choice career for many and complex to get into (4-5 tests now including CPC etc but process is twisted as hell). Many have been flagging an increasing driver shortage. All that said I know of an applicant who recently failed DB driving assessment for missing a couple of mirrors and being "late" with signals. If they were so stuck they have an in house training division who should be able to address that - he was complimented on his all round drive otherwise! It should be noted they are only taking licenced drivers and not training new ones. I suspect part of the game is to hold vacancies for the displaced worked on any routes lost (if that happens) who don't want to go down the TUPE transfer route if that is invoked - simply move them into vacanices they "can't" fill. Also bear in mind that the vacancies, I beleive are primarily on nights and duties that are less desirable, with our cushy dole system that may not tempt many off the dole I reckon.

currins_02 wrote: »

Cost base will be DB/BE/CIE's biggest issue in a tender market.

apart from potentially the wage bill i can't see how.

currins_02 wrote: »

Despite the many free buses (supplied by the NTA at absolutely no cost), despite the subsidy, despite the free infrastructure (which they have been selling off in bits to shore up the subsidy deficit AFAIR) they will not be able to compete

and who's fault is it they have to sell off infrastructure. those who fail to realize public transport has to be payed for. i can't see any reason why they can't compete.

currins_02 wrote: »

lean efficient companies.

who apart from potentially the wage bill, will most likely have more or less the same costs. maintenence fuel and so on will remain the same most likely. so about as lean and efficient as dublin bus and the NTA implementing everything, which they will probably be doing even with a private operator if they win.

currins_02 wrote: »

Too many layers, way too much management - look at Victoria Coach Station for instance, handles multiples of the movements (from multiple operators) on a daily basis on Bus Aras, yet Bus Aras requires multiples of the the staff on a daily basis to run it on much higher packages.

well when i used to use Bus Aras i only saw staff a very odd time. i agree they're are a lot of management though much of which could be retired, or demoted to replace retiring staff.

currins_02 wrote: »

There has been 100's of applicants (if not 1000's) for the jobs in DB but most are being rejected along the line by the company not the other way around.

maybe they aren't suitable for the job. i don't know but it is a fair point to make, not everyone is cut out to drive a bus and deal with the public.

currins_02 wrote: »

That problem affects private sector too. Driving is not a first choice career for many and complex to get into (4-5 tests now including CPC etc but process is twisted as hell). Many have been flagging an increasing driver shortage.

hence why wages may rise within the private sector to encourage people to take it up
of course i couldn't say that for definite but if they're is a shortage that might be the only choice.

currins_02 wrote: »

It should be noted they are only taking licenced drivers and not training new ones. I suspect part of the game is to hold vacancies for the displaced worked on any routes lost (if that happens) who don't want to go down the TUPE transfer route if that is invoked - simply move them into vacanices they "can't" fill.

well in fairness its much better to take on qualified licenced drivers first and then if that isn't enough train up more. many businesses and companies look for qualified staff for a speciffic job or jobs.

currins_02 wrote: »

Also bear in mind that the vacancies, I beleive are primarily on nights and duties that are less desirable, with our cushy dole system that may not tempt many off the dole I reckon.

oh possibly. but then again it might be the case that the people you referr to who wouldn't do a job because of the dole, wouldn't do one no matter what.

Also, the issue of wages is key here. Any tendering process that will be fought and won on the basis of new companies offering lower wages needs to be resisted at all costs imo.

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Also, the issue of wages is key here. Any tendering process that will be fought and won on the basis of new companies offering lower wages needs to be resisted at all costs imo.

Whilst staff costs will be a relevant issue,I would not see it as being the major one.

The considerable upgrading of Bus & Truck driving to "Professional" status,complete with it's attendant Certificate,added to the significant increase in Driving Licence costs (€25 for a 10 Year Licence has now become €55 for a 5 year licence with a requirement for a Medical Report at each renewal).

Up to this year,the sourcing of qualified Drivers from the EU accession states was one of the most eagerly practiced in the Industry.

However,indications are that this supply is not as plentiful as heretofore,and also that these people are becoming more realistic about their wages and conditions.

Realistic to the worker = Greedy to the employer

Lower costs will,of course be an issue,but as has been shown by the inventor of the term in Europe,Ryanair,this does not necessarily equate with lower pay to staff.

The reality of operating any services on a 20/7/364 basis is that you will not get the staff if you don't pay reasonable rates...it has been attempted elsewhere and on many occasions,with the same result.

There is a corollary between lowering wage rates generally,and that lowering principle eventually reaching those in charge of the lowering process...:eek: smarter folks appreciate this,the rest just bellow about slashing wages,taxing the rich and so on....;)

As an infrequent boardie I am surprised that a story of last week seems to have been missed. Following challenges by Marion Harkin MEP (www.marionharkin.com) at EU level the cap on new services joining the free travel scheme has been lifted following been ruled uncompetitive. This was following lobbying at local and national level by representatives of McGonagle Bus Company in Donegal (who took over ex Lough Swilly route between Derry and Buncrana) and Leydon's Coaches of Cavan for their Swanlinbar services.

http://www.northernsound.ie/news/private-bus-operator-take-case-to-europe/
http://www.donegalnow.com/article/6756

Both operators had been offering a concession on free travel passes out of their own funds in the interim. To some extent that blows arguments around new services being subject to the caps wide open does it not?

With regard to Bus Aras, as someone who has driven in and out of it on many many occasions and also transit it at least once weekly I can assure anyone that inspector grade staff are often in the double figures. Many of those guiding reversing buses out of parking bays are inspector grade staff (a job that bottom level staff would do in any lean efficient company but we have senior high paid staff doing it) for instance. Victoria only has 2-6 inspector grade staff working at any one time but handles multiples of the people and vehicles Bus Aras controls. I fully agree Victoria is a depressing place but is efficient none the less.

With regard to why I don't consider DB/BE/CIE lean or efficient I will give some examples. Firstly, despite an ongoing moratorium on employment (recently lifted at DB), DB have retained a fully resourced and staffed training school. Yes they deal with a few mechanics annually but broadly speaking an absolute waste of money. Vehicle utilisation is poor by international standards across the companies in general (yes some vehicles are worked to death but in general they are not hard worked). Two of the reasons ex DB vehicles sell so well in the UK and beyond are a) few companies would be selling such vehicles at such a young age and b) the mileage is low compared with similar operators on a per annum average. I was told this personally by a UK based operator who runs a large number of ex DB vehicles. Look at trade press when a batch comes up they are far younger than anything else for sale from large companies.

Here is a recent real example a CIE group vehicle (not saying what, which company or what depot for fear of making trouble for some involved) had to go to a main dealer for a relatively minor mechanical/electrical repair. This is despite it's home depot having a fully equipped and fully resourced garage. Why? Because company policys and union agreements forbade mechanics with electrical specialisations looking at or repairing the minor mechanical overlap in the issue and vice versa for the mechanics with mechanical specialisation. There was no co-operation so the vehicle had to be towed (at a cost in the €1,000's I would guess) to a main dealer where the repair was done in a matter of hours. the vehicle had been off the road for at least a week at this stage. Now that's an efficient company for you. BTW the vehicle was long out of warranty so that was not a consideration. That is 100% fact and I have proof of it.

As far as I am concerned the semi state companies should be front and centre of our public transport but as taxpayers we deserve a reasonable level of customer service and certainly value for money. At present the customer service is patchy at best and poor in general while we don't get value for money. The type of companies who I would imagine will compete hardest in these tenders will be companies who are not overladen with overpaid, underworked (4 day week?!) and indecisive management, will not have senior staff reversing vehicles out of parking bays, will not outsource simple repairs because of nonsense procedures, drivers who damage vehicles wantonly would suffer disciplinary action or sanction, customer would be king and yes, staff should be paid a good (but fair and equitable wage).

There are crazy scaremonger allegations of all privates paying crap money. Yes it happens but in the main they pay quite well. For instance GoBus and Citylink are both known to pay well and treat staff well. Matthews are known to be a good employer who look after staff. In all 3 drivers would be expected to at least sweep out their bus during paid duties (as would be the norm in the UK and beyond), would most DB/BE staff know where the brush was?

I'm not criticising the staff, they are working under the conditions they have gained over many years. Do they represent what I consider a lean and competitive company? absolutely not, all these things add to the cost base and that's where major savings will be made by new entrants. Yes they are better than they were before, are they as good as they could be, no where near it IMO

We'll have to agree to disagree, Frustrating that everything has to be spelt out and even then can't be accepted.

There would be a number of lower grade staff working in Victoria on any day but no where near the number of senior (inspector and management grade) staff that Bus Aras enjoys. Those senior staff would be doing senior jobs, not reversing buses as one example (there are many others but each and every one will be fine to those who can't see that is neither efficient nor lean nor, more importantly, competitive in a tendered market place).

On the breakdown example, both mechanic teams involved were fully qualified to do both ends of the work but post qualification they specialise. There is no issue at all re qualification. In fact the fully time served mechanic (who is now an electrical specialist) fully diagnosed the problem, recommended the correct repair, had the parts and tools to hand and was laughing that he was prevented from doing it by company policies/union rules not his qualifications or skills. All of these type of things add to the cost base. The main dealer were laughing too - as they did the invoice!

My point re the training school was lost. Training inspectors are incredibly well paid, despite a reduced need for them they have remained in those positions, retained the packages and been less than productive in any efficient sense (not their fault but simple effective management would redploy them somewhere until the tide rises), a fleet of training buses was retained which until the current driving assessments were largely invisible etc. I never ever said scrap it. What I implied was it could have been massively downsized to relfect it's usage to save a large sum of money but that would upset union applecarts. Equally, they claim to be unable to fill the current vacancies and at a recent job fair a DB rep said they had 1000's of applications of unqualified people. So, they have the qualified staff getting the pay to do the job, they have the buses, they have the facilities, would it not be prudent management to get working? Nah, just burn more cash and keep the cost high. Never suggested scrapping it I must repeat - just make good and efficient use of it.

Equally while what others do may be seen as irrelevant it is only irrelevant in the 1932 protected timewarp some in the CIE group are stuck in. In a competitive market place what others are doing is incredibily relevant. At the end of the day if a company has a much lower cost base they can compete better, some level of basic vehicle cleaning is an industry standard outside state owned companies (and yes deep cleaning could still be left to cleaners), but in terms of customer service it's a winner too - Some BE vehicles work 20 hour duties (2 laps of an Expressway service and no one looks at them in terms of cleanliness in that time, regardless of long (way in excess in legal requirements) breaks. I know unions would find it controversial but just another example of how they could improve. These are realitys of the competitive market place and through time I suspect they will slowly have to be addressed but at what cost in the meantime.

Anyway I'm off, I have no doubt every point will be dissected with disdain but illusions that the overheads, legacy costs, management costs etc all suffered by CIE group leave them competitive are missplaced in my opinion and I have seen nothing here to suggest otherwise. We do what we do well because we've been doing it looks ok here but will win nothing on a tender submission.

currins_02 wrote: »

We'll have to agree to disagree, Frustrating that everything has to be spelt out and even then can't be accepted.


There would be a number of lower grade staff working in Victoria on any day but no where near the number of senior (inspector and management grade) staff that Bus Aras enjoys. Those senior staff would be doing senior jobs, not reversing buses as one example (there are many others but each and every one will be fine to those who can't see that is neither efficient nor lean nor, more importantly, competitive in a tendered market place).

On the breakdown example, both mechanic teams involved were fully qualified to do both ends of the work but post qualification they specialise. There is no issue at all re qualification. In fact the fully time served mechanic (who is now an electrical specialist) fully diagnosed the problem, recommended the correct repair, had the parts and tools to hand and was laughing that he was prevented from doing it by company policies/union rules not his qualifications or skills. All of these type of things add to the cost base. The main dealer were laughing too - as they did the invoice!

My point re the training school was lost. Training inspectors are incredibly well paid, despite a reduced need for them they have remained in those positions, retained the packages and been less than productive in any efficient sense (not their fault but simple effective management would redploy them somewhere until the tide rises), a fleet of training buses was retained which until the current driving assessments were largely invisible etc. I never ever said scrap it. What I implied was it could have been massively downsized to relfect it's usage to save a large sum of money but that would upset union applecarts. Equally, they claim to be unable to fill the current vacancies and at a recent job fair a DB rep said they had 1000's of applications of unqualified people. So, they have the qualified staff getting the pay to do the job, they have the buses, they have the facilities, would it not be prudent management to get working? Nah, just burn more cash and keep the cost high. Never suggested scrapping it I must repeat - just make good and efficient use of it.

Equally while what others do may be seen as irrelevant it is only irrelevant in the 1932 protected timewarp some in the CIE group are stuck in. In a competitive market place what others are doing is incredibily relevant. At the end of the day if a company has a much lower cost base they can compete better, some level of basic vehicle cleaning is an industry standard outside state owned companies (and yes deep cleaning could still be left to cleaners), but in terms of customer service it's a winner too - Some BE vehicles work 20 hour duties (2 laps of an Expressway service and no one looks at them in terms of cleanliness in that time, regardless of long (way in excess in legal requirements) breaks. I know unions would find it controversial but just another example of how they could improve. These are realitys of the competitive market place and through time I suspect they will slowly have to be addressed but at what cost in the meantime.

Anyway I'm off, I have no doubt every point will be dissected with disdain but illusions that the overheads, legacy costs, management costs etc all suffered by CIE group leave them competitive are missplaced in my opinion and I have seen nothing here to suggest otherwise. We do what we do well because we've been doing it looks ok here but will win nothing on a tender submission.

While I note Currins_02 statement concerning his relative lack of posts on Boards,that does'nt make his opinions any less valid.

However,all we have on this great facility is Opinion..whether from Customers,Providers or Observers it remains just that..... OPINION.

Which is why I would question the need for "frustration" due to these "Opinions" not being accepted by others.

The holding of Opinions should not be at the whim of general acceptance,if you hold them,then be confident of this in itself,rather than seeing the imposition of those views on everybody else as some form of crusading necessity.

As it happens I do not concur with currins_02's views,but he's fully entitled to hold and espouse them wherever he wishes.

I would'nt in a million years expect any other poster to concur with my own views,as I'm of the belief that we gain better understanding of our environment from taking note of what others believe,whether or not it's accurate.

I see cdebru has comprehensively addressed some of the issues raised,to which I would add my 2c worth.

The role of Staff Training has altered significantly over the time I have been working in and around CIE.

In the days of the flying snail and broken wheel,the term "Training SCHOOL" was the favoured description,reflecting the ethos and practice of what was then regarded as Training.

During the "School" era,training was indivisible from discipline and order,and therefore it was compulsory to have it delivered by a full supervisor Inspector grade.

The information and instruction given,was delivered always with the proviso of it being compulsory instruction and not up for debate and/or discussion.

Today,Dublin Buses Training facility is no longer a "School",but a Training CENTRE.

The requirement for all Company Training to be delivered by supervisory INSPECTORS no longer exists,with agreement having long ago been negotiated on this issue without recourse to any form of Industrial unrest.

Not that there would have been any requirement for action,as the Company's training policies have tended to be ahead of the curve on many different aspects,with Company input being sought into many HSA and RSA areas of policy.

The current Training policy now focuses on Trainers being drawn from the active Driving grade,recognizing the benefits of such trainers being au fait with the issues that occur in today's environment,rather than senior Inspectors who may have been away from the sharp-end for two decades or more.

The requirement for Training is ongoing and covers a broader canvas than Driving Instruction alone.

With Drivers CPC now accounting for a large proportion of Training,something likely to increase as the RSA takes further control of it's own remit,the benefits of a centralized Training regime covering c.2700 Drivers can be appreciated.

With the majority of Training Centre staff now comprising Driver/Trainers on revolving duties,it would appear Currins_02 may simply be unaware that significant change occurred without any "Union Applecarts" being upset,something which for many commentators is akin to being asked to believe in the Tooth-Fairy.

The issue with the specific vehicle being worked on in a Manufactures Dealership,is also unusual,even if the insinuation is that it represents everyday practice.

I cannot speak on this specific case,however it is worth noting that DB's maintenance staff now operate under multi-skill/multi-role agreements which see ALL trades working both independently and together as the tasks require.

Area's of specific note would be Vehicle Electricians apointed as Shift Supervisors and being trained to D driving licence standard (By the DB Training Centre )

Demarcation at the level inferred in the post is most certainly NOT the current norm in DB engineering operations.

The issue of Inspectors performing safety related banksman type duties at a busy (long outdated) Bus Station,whilst superficially capable of supporting accusations of poor management,tends to backfire if the on-site accident statistics are low enough.

It could also be of note that many of the BE staff described could well be Temporary Inspectors or "Half-Caps" who float between driving and inspector duties as required...as covered by yet more agreements between Company and Worker Representatives.

Equally,all DB vehicles are vacuumed and washed every night,as well as having heavy material taken up by hand.

It may disappoint the committed,demarcation based Trades Unionist,but I tend to do a sweep of my own bus at each terminus to take up bottles,cans, paper cups and uneaten food thrown around by customers.

I know many other drivers who do the same,encountering no ill feeling or Union sanction for so doing,however,such is the volume of such garbage strewn about on a busy route,it can be a King Canute exercise in futility....;)

I do hope that my response to currins_02's post does'nt qualify as "disdainful dissection",however as he himself states at the end,it is only his opinion and,misplaced as my own contrary opinion may well be,I'll stick with it for now

s8080 wrote: »

plenty of rants about the mighty dublin bus unions, but when asked not one poster can give a example of their omnipotent power.
so we can take it they already know they are only powerful in their imagination.
Sad stuff.

Network Direct. How long did that take again?

s8080 wrote: »

plenty of rants about the mighty dublin bus unions,

2000 - 20% pay claim followed by strike
2009 - LRC proposals rejected followed by strike
2013 - similar strike

Was there a strike in 2014? It's all a bit blurry, but we the travelling public have become used to strikes from woorkers in CIE companies.