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
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Bus Strike (read warning in post #1)

13567…55

Comments

  • #62
    Cool Mo D
    Registered Users Posts: 1,419 ✭✭✭Cool Mo D


    end of the road wrote: »
    i don't see any "competition" thats worth bothering about here. if dublin bus and private were operating along the same route then that would be actual competition to shout about. the NTA seem to be deciding everything.

    They are competing to run the route. The NTA put the route to tender, and whoever asks for the least amount of subsidy to run the route gets the contract. Dublin Bus are perfectly free to make an offer to run it themselves.


  • #63
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 28,981 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    Cool Mo D wrote: »
    They are competing to run the route. The NTA put the route to tender, and whoever asks for the least amount of subsidy to run the route gets the contract. Dublin Bus are perfectly free to make an offer to run it themselves.
    so we say that is the case, what happens then if someone wins and then they can't run it on that subsidy as its a loss making route? it goes back out again? doesn't sound like its worth the hassle to me personally

    shut down alcohol action ireland now! end MUP today!



  • #64
    Gatling
    Registered Users Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    Are we even 12 months out from the last threat of strikes by db .
    It's getting Rediculous at this stage .
    Paying more for less services and yet here we are again right lads all out .
    If there well able to chase the routes on offer what's the issue .
    Or is this another we want to be able to leave db with a decent redundancy and benefits and then walk in to a private company on the same terms while ordinary joes who apply get less terms and benefits because they didn't work for cie? ?
    360_F_102352090_ie3kLjDIvgrT1sxVDknWCUh8PxgMYzM7.jpg




  • #65
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 28,981 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    Gatling wrote: »
    Are we even 12 months out from the last threat of strikes by db .
    It's getting Rediculous at this stage .
    Paying more for less services and yet here we are again right lads all out .
    If there well able to chase the routes on offer what's the issue .
    Or is this another we want to be able to leave db with a decent redundancy and benefits and then walk in to a private company on the same terms while ordinary joes who apply get less terms and benefits because they didn't work for cie? ?
    paying "more" for "less" services is the fault of the government cutting the subvention. threats of strike action happen from time to time in many transport companies and people always make out how it is very frequent when it isn't.

    shut down alcohol action ireland now! end MUP today!



  • #66
    Gatling
    Registered Users Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    end of the road wrote: »
    paying "more" for "less" services is the fault of the government cutting the subvention. threats of strike action happen from time to time in many transport companies and people always make out how it is very frequent when it isn't.

    How many times does it have to be before its considered very frequent.
    I'm beginning to think the unions cutting off there noses depite face.
    360_F_102352090_ie3kLjDIvgrT1sxVDknWCUh8PxgMYzM7.jpg




  • Advertisement
  • #67
    Cookie_Monster
    Registered Users Posts: 24,468 ✭✭✭✭Cookie_Monster


    end of the road wrote: »
    paying "more" for "less" services is the fault of the government cutting the subvention. threats of strike action happen from time to time in many transport companies and people always make out how it is very frequent when it isn't.

    No paying more for less is a direct result of the inflated costs within DB.


  • #68
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 28,981 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    Cookie_Monster wrote: »
    No paying more for less is a direct result of the inflated costs within DB.
    no, its down to government subvention being cut. only the wage bill would be considered "inflated" and only by some

    shut down alcohol action ireland now! end MUP today!



  • #69
    Cookie_Monster
    Registered Users Posts: 24,468 ✭✭✭✭Cookie_Monster


    end of the road wrote: »
    no, its down to government subvention being cut. only the wage bill would be considered "inflated" and only by some

    Multiple threads on here refer to the very high cost per km of DB services, this cost encompassing all expenses, not just wages.

    thread from 2012 with plenty of figures: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056504146 - I hope that's not too out of date for you.

    Cost per KM from annual reports, 2013 is last available
    2012: 4.49 eur
    2013: 4.64 eur

    so overall DB is actually getting less efficient! While rising fuel costs undoubtedly partially drive the increase it's certainly not all of it.


  • #70
    cdebru
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,761 ✭✭✭cdebru


    devnull wrote: »
    So you are saying that you aren't paid much more than €800 a month? Come on, we both know that the average yearly take home amount in cash for Dublin Bus drivers is a few times more than €10,000 a year.

    And we all know a family dependent on social welfare doesn't get 800 a month sure the rent supplement is up to €1000 a month alone, and a married couple with a couple of kids is €372.40 per week, plus medical card, back to school, Christmas bonus etc etc so the poster could well be better off on welfare than on lower wages.


  • #71
    cdebru
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,761 ✭✭✭cdebru


    Cookie_Monster wrote: »
    Multiple threads on here refer to the very high cost per km of DB services, this cost encompassing all expenses, not just wages.

    thread from 2012 with plenty of figures: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056504146 - I hope that's not too out of date for you.

    Cost per KM from annual reports, 2013 is last available
    2012: 4.49 eur
    2013: 4.64 eur

    so overall DB is actually getting less efficient! While rising fuel costs undoubtedly partially drive the increase it's certainly not all of it.

    Well its not wage increases either.


    And its not "very" high, I called out the poster claiming this before and his argument that the cost per km could be 50% lower and it is impossible even paying minimum wage you couldn't do it.
    That's not to say there is no waste in Dublin Bus, but that is true of any company private or semi state, and particularly one with a high level of political interference in operations as DB has suffered from over the years.


  • Advertisement
  • #72
    cdebru
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,761 ✭✭✭cdebru


    Cookie_Monster wrote: »
    No paying more for less is a direct result of the inflated costs within DB.

    Untrue there is a slight increase in cost per kilometer because not all costs are related to how many kilometers are driven, while you may need less drivers and buses, that doesn't correspond to a pro rata decrease in managers or clerical, or even maintenance staff, for example a garage with 250 buses reduced to 240 buses will need less drivers but not necessarily less managers or mechanics or clerical staff, the medical department, the supervisors etc etc,
    For example, if that depot had 2 supervisors per shift, 3 mechanics, 3 clerical staff, a manager and an assistant manager you couldn't reduce their numbers in reality because that depot had 10 less buses, so the costs of those staff are now spread over less buses and less kilometers, there are other costs that are also not directly tied to fleet size


  • #73
    cdebru
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,761 ✭✭✭cdebru


    n97 mini wrote: »
    I reckon that's the kind of comment lx is talking about. God help us but there's probably some poor eejit who will believe you. It's not 1913 any more you know.

    Greyhound,

    It's not 1913, it was 2014, a perfect example of the dangers for employees regarding pay and conditions, when transferred to another employer.

    Or Irish Ferries in 2005 ?


  • #74
    Cookie_Monster
    Registered Users Posts: 24,468 ✭✭✭✭Cookie_Monster


    cdebru wrote: »
    Untrue there is a slight increase in cost per kilometer because not all costs are related to how many kilometers are driven

    long term historical higher costs rather than just the last couple of years.
    For example, if that depot had 2 supervisors per shift, 3 mechanics, 3 clerical staff, a manager and an assistant manager you couldn't reduce their numbers in reality because that depot had 10 less buses, so the costs of those staff are now spread over less buses and less kilometers, there are other costs that are also not directly tied to fleet siz
    Well you could probably look to get rid of the assistant manager potentially, or reduce mechanics hours as there are less buses to work on or reduce the clers as there is less paperwork due to less buses etc. Or merge smaller depots and remove a whole raft of duplicate rolls and resources.

    the cost per km was just in response to the poster claiming cutting of subvention was the only reason for drop in service and that's only happened in the last few years.


  • #75
    cdebru
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,761 ✭✭✭cdebru


    Cookie_Monster wrote: »
    long term historical higher costs rather than just the last couple of years.


    Well you could probably look to get rid of the assistant manager potentially, or reduce mechanics hours as there are less buses to work on or reduce the clers as there is less paperwork due to less buses etc. Or merge smaller depots and remove a whole raft of duplicate rolls and resources.

    the cost per km was just in response to the poster claiming cutting of subvention was the only reason for drop in service and that's only happened in the last few years.


    realistically the difference is say 10 buses so roughly 25 drivers, at a ratio of 2.5 drivers per vehicle so 600 from 625 so the staff to be catered for by management and clerical is not significantly reduced by a number that would realistically affect other grades to the extent that you would save money in correlation with the reduction in service provided by frontline staff.
    Again you can look at DB and its depots and it is impossible to see where you could merge depots, not to mention that even if you could there may be cost implications as to increased out of service running to and from depots located further from termini as well as a much longer lead time when it is time to grow the service.


  • #76
    cdebru
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,761 ✭✭✭cdebru


    Gatling wrote: »
    Are we even 12 months out from the last threat of strikes by db .
    It's getting Rediculous at this stage .
    Paying more for less services and yet here we are again right lads all out .
    If there well able to chase the routes on offer what's the issue .
    Or is this another we want to be able to leave db with a decent redundancy and benefits and then walk in to a private company on the same terms while ordinary joes who apply get less terms and benefits because they didn't work for cie? ?


    So they should really be pants down bend over and take whatever is given, they shouldn't try and protect their wages and conditions, they shouldn't be concerned as to the future of the pension scheme they have been paying money into, if someone wants to "greyhound" their wages by 30% in the future, they should just doff the cap and say thank you sir.

    This is zero thought or planning was put into this as to how it would affect the staff currently employed that is the problem.


  • #77
    n97 mini
    Registered Users Posts: 8,295 ✭✭✭n97 mini


    cdebru wrote: »
    Greyhound,

    It's not 1913, it was 2014, a perfect example of the dangers for employees regarding pay and conditions, when transferred to another employer.

    Or Irish Ferries in 2005 ?

    Or Irish Water 2014?


  • #78
    cdebru
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,761 ✭✭✭cdebru


    n97 mini wrote: »
    Or Irish Water 2014?


    Relevance ?


  • #79
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 28,981 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    Cookie_Monster wrote: »
    Multiple threads on here refer to the very high cost per km of DB services, this cost encompassing all expenses, not just wages.

    thread from 2012 with plenty of figures: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056504146 - I hope that's not too out of date for you.

    Cost per KM from annual reports, 2013 is last available
    2012: 4.49 eur
    2013: 4.64 eur

    so overall DB is actually getting less efficient! While rising fuel costs undoubtedly partially drive the increase it's certainly not all of it.
    its called costs of running a bus service. little can be done about that.

    shut down alcohol action ireland now! end MUP today!



  • #80
    Icepick
    Registered Users Posts: 2,452 ✭✭✭Icepick


    lxflyer wrote: »
    But at the same time that doesn't mean that bus drivers should be paid a pittance either - it can be a tough job, and derogatory comments as to the skills required etc. are frankly just insulting to those staff who are out there every day working unsocial hours.


    But this is why I think this sort of arguing over different levels of pay here is frankly daft - different jobs within every organisation have different responsibilities, workloads, expectations, and are going to be paid different rates.
    There is no need for this kind of discussion at all. They should be paid the market rate and properly managed.
    As usual the public service showed us that they can't be trusted with either.


  • #81
    Icepick
    Registered Users Posts: 2,452 ✭✭✭Icepick


    end of the road wrote: »
    its called costs of running a bus service. little can be done about that.
    Nonsense. Look at how private companies deal with this. And they don't force us to pay for their products either. Well unless the government helps them.

    CIE top management should be fired. It should have been years ago.


  • Advertisement
  • #82
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 28,981 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    Icepick wrote: »
    There is no need for this kind of discussion at all. They should be paid the market rate and properly managed.
    As usual the public service showed us that they can't be trusted with either.
    what "market rate" there is no "market rate" as some companies will pay different rates to others. but yes of course the oh so perfect private sector can be trusted, with "both of those" funny that.

    shut down alcohol action ireland now! end MUP today!



  • #83
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 28,981 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    Icepick wrote: »
    Nonsense. Look at how private companies deal with this. And they don't force us to pay for their products either. Well unless the government helps them.

    not nonsense at all. the private companies operate their own handpicked routes, which seem to be proffitable. they operate routes that have other services on them meaning you don't have to use them. a lot different to dublin bus services. just because they are private companies doesn't mean they may not have costs unique to their situation some of which may be a little high.
    Icepick wrote: »
    CIE top management shoyld be fired. It should have been years ago.

    yes, nobody disagrees with that bit.

    shut down alcohol action ireland now! end MUP today!



  • #84
    Kopparberg Strawberry and Lime
    Registered Users Posts: 3,964 ✭✭✭Kopparberg Strawberry and Lime


    Icepick wrote: »
    Nonsense. Look at how private companies deal with this. And they don't force us to pay for their products either. Well unless the government helps them.

    CIE top management shoyld be fired. It should have been years ago.

    Private companies ? Like aircoach ?

    They also get a subsidy to run those routes. So yes we are paying for them.


  • #85
    currins_02
    Registered Users Posts: 133 ✭✭currins_02


    One of my regrets in life is I didn't take a chance to go for a job in BE when the chance arose a few years back but you live and learn. The pay and conditions are way in excess of anything in the private sector. I don't begrudge anyone that really and am quite jealous. That said I do not believe, have 14 years experience on and off, I have ever been underpayed or abused in the private sector. Having had cause to use the health systems extensively in recent months I do have issue with the fact the packages enjoyed by many driving staff exceeds that of many nurses and junior doctors. That is unjustifiable and a systemic imbalance that must be addressed. Yes, hard for anyone to swallow cuts but there comes a time gravy train has to stop.

    Regarding cherry picking I would note 2 points:
    1) The former Lough Swilly (busted by poor management and revenue debts not non viability), North West Busways, Mangan Tours, McGeehan Coaches, Doherty Coaches, Patrick Gallagher Coaches, John McGinley Coaches, Feda O'Donnell etc all operate licenced route services into, out of an in/around rural Donegal which has historically been completely ignored by CIE/BE. Yes some have certain services which overlap or duplicate but in the main they don't - so there is a case there that CIE/BE do an odd bit of cherry picking themselves
    2) Historically the private operators had no choice. They could only go after profitable routes. They don't have the parachute of state funding to prop up loss making services. There is an argument there that is comparing apples and oranges. If privates could avail of some level of subsidy to sustain loss making routes but return a small profit many would - that is proven internationally. I personally know of one operator in the Midlands in UK who runs 2 loss making local services with a small local authority grant which makes them viable financially. They both feed into a larger service he operates which is unsubsidised and highly profitable. The reality is if he lost the passengers off the feeders his key service would be unviable and need a massive grant to stay going. The 2 small grants combined are smaller than what would be required but the patronage is enough to carry it all.

    All that aside, DB are struggling to fill jobs at the minute so TUPE may be a non issue, equally with natural wastage it has been reported BE should be able to reallocate a large number of affected staff so again the issue may be much smaller than is being made out to be.

    The fact everyone is resigned to DB/BE loosing the routes is incredible. No one knows the routes like they do and they should be able to wipe the floor with competitors based on that knowledge by being lean and efficient. BE, for God's sake, are looking to partner with privates to put in competitive bids for work they already operate! The Management/admin structures are a massive chain around the neck of both companies and if that was properly addressed and improved would help massively.

    Leo V and the current Minister have both publicly stated that protecting incumbent staff and pension issues were key for them over the last number of years (specifically Leo V did in his keynote speech at CTTC Bus show dinner dance in Nov 2012 and Minister Donoghue did at the same event in Nov 2014) so it is disingenuous to say this was in any way unforeseen.

    Would it be fair to say there will be an element at union level too of a loss of control if a new operator wins routes will they let unions sit in on commercial decisions like CIE do? will they even engage with unions or take a Ryanair approach? Not condoning those positions just saying unions have as much to lose potentially as their current members.


  • #86
    currins_02
    Registered Users Posts: 133 ✭✭currins_02


    Kopparberg Strawberry and Lime wrote: »
    Private companies ? Like aircoach ?

    They also get a subsidy to run those routes. So yes we are paying for them.

    What subsidy? beyond their payment for the free travel they get nothing. And free travel is an under funded and abused mess.


  • #87
    Kopparberg Strawberry and Lime
    Registered Users Posts: 3,964 ✭✭✭Kopparberg Strawberry and Lime


    currins_02 wrote: »
    What subsidy? beyond their payment for the free travel they get nothing. And free travel is an under funded and abused mess.

    They do and is fact. Their do not accept social welfare passes.

    why would they ? They go from leopardstown or killeny to the airport. Most of their buses are fairly empty.

    I heard it from aircoach management myself when I was trying to get a job with them. They receive a subsidy /grant from the government to run those services other wise they wouldn't be doing it so often.


  • #88
    antoinolachtnai
    Registered Users Posts: 9,773 ✭✭✭antoinolachtnai


    Kopparberg Strawberry and Lime wrote: »
    They do and is fact. Their do not accept social welfare passes.

    why would they ? They go from leopardstown or killeny to the airport. Most of their buses are fairly empty.

    I heard it from aircoach management myself when I was trying to get a job with them. They receive a subsidy /grant from the government to run those services other wise they wouldn't be doing it so often.

    This is just not true. Aircoach does not get any subsidy/grant from the government for running those routes. They get paid for carrying social welfare passengers. That is pretty much it.


  • #89
    currins_02
    Registered Users Posts: 133 ✭✭currins_02


    Kopparberg Strawberry and Lime wrote: »
    They do and is fact. Their do not accept social welfare passes.

    why would they ? They go from leopardstown or killeny to the airport. Most of their buses are fairly empty.

    I heard it from aircoach management myself when I was trying to get a job with them. They receive a subsidy /grant from the government to run those services other wise they wouldn't be doing it so often.

    I'm afraid I believe you were lied to then. They did accept pass on many services but can't on others which began after the cap

    I simply do not believe nor have any reason to believe they receive any subsidy. Their books were published in the past and displayed no such payment.


  • #90
    Icepick
    Registered Users Posts: 2,452 ✭✭✭Icepick


    end of the road wrote: »
    what "market rate" there is no "market rate" as some companies will pay different rates to others. but yes of course the oh so perfect private sector can be trusted, with "both of those" funny that.
    Yes it can.
    If DB drivers are not overpaid, they have nothing to fear because they are irreplaceable.


  • Advertisement
  • #91
    Icepick
    Registered Users Posts: 2,452 ✭✭✭Icepick


    Kopparberg Strawberry and Lime wrote: »
    Private companies ? Like aircoach ?

    They also get a subsidy to run those routes. So yes we are paying for them.
    Two wrongs don't make a right.
    The free travel pass scheme should be significantly curtailed.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement