Frank McDonald

paulm17781

Drivers have a good habit of swapping at Donnybrook at rush hour. I have waited 10 minutes for a driver change at 8.30 before. Customer always comes first. :rolleyes:

KC61

paulm17781 wrote:

Drivers have a good habit of swapping at Donnybrook at rush hour. I have waited 10 minutes for a driver change at 8.30 before. Customer always comes first. :rolleyes:

Very few driver changes take place in the middle of the morning rush hour, and the only way that you could be waiting is if the first driver reaches there ahead of the scheduled time, which can happen if traffic levels are low. The second driver may not be due to take up for that 10 minute period.

You're damned if you do and damned if you don't in this argument. People are complaining about buses parked in the city due to driver changes, and others about changes en route. If you say they should all take place in the relevant depot then you are faced with many buses travelling empty to/from the depot thereby reducing the number of buses in service and increasing fuel costs.

Unfortunately drivers do have to changeover at some point and that is not always possible at an outer terminus that has no facilities whatsoever!!

paulm17781

KC61 wrote:

Very few driver changes take place in the middle of the morning rush hour, and the only way that you could be waiting is if the first driver reaches there ahead of the scheduled time, which can happen if traffic levels are low. The second driver may not be due to take up for that 10 minute period.

You're damned if you do and damned if you don't in this argument.

Here's a radical idea... How about, the driver leaves the garage when the bus leaves the city or the driver radios through to Donnybrook and tells the driver he's 10 minutes away and the replacement driver goes to the stop at that minute. The only reason people are damned in this argument is the shoddy work practices of DB.

KC61

paulm17781 wrote:

Here's a radical idea... How about, the driver leaves the garage when the bus leaves the city or the driver radios through to Donnybrook and tells the driver he's 10 minutes away and the replacement driver goes to the stop at that minute. The only reason people are damned in this argument is the shoddy work practices of DB.

At the end of the day there have to be rosters drawn up, in order to operate a transport service. Drivers, like any of the rest of us have maximum working hours under EU legislation, and under Irish employement law must take their allocated breaks. Furthermore, unlike an office based employee, PSV drivers are subject to very rigid enforcement of maximum driving hours and can face prosecution for driving excessive hours or not taking scheduled breaks.

So what are you suggesting? That the second driver should not get the break that he is entitled to, if he is already taking it? And that if he is starting his duty that he should turn up early and work more hours than he is legally obliged to do? The other option is that the first driver drives slowly along the route, which he could do I suppose!

This problem is more prevalent during the summer months where there is less traffic and fewer passengers and buses can reach the changeover point earlier. However, it is true to say that with the variable traffic conditions in Dublin it is very difficult to predict exactly when a bus will reach a particular point, and the schedule reflects the best estimate of the scheduler of when the bus should reach that point.

As an example of the unpredictability can I give the following? The chaotic traffic in Dublin City centre caused one bus duty yesterday on routes 2 and 3 to have one journey cancelled and two others halved. Why? The bus was stuck in gridlock. Meantime the controllers are attempting to patch things up as best they can while ensuring that 1) passengers get from a to b and 2) drivers keep within the legal hours and get their breaks! On another day that service could work perfectly!

The schedulers try to come up with the most likely running time within working hours constraints and sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't, but I would suggest that it works more often than not.

paulm17781

KC61 wrote:

So what are you suggesting? That the second driver should not get the break that he is entitled to, if he is already taking it?

There we go. You just showed how the driver should benefit rather than the passengers. The driver should get his break, even if it delays passengers you just said. Now, how is sitting on a bench at Donnybrook garage for 10 minutes working?

Please, don't spout me rubbish of working hours and breaks, I'm sure they can make up their 10 minutes at the terminus if they are early. Simple changes in working practices could make DB a proper outfit but the like of you with your failure to compromise is what prevents this happening.

markpb

paulm17781 wrote:

Simple changes in working practices could make DB a proper outfit but the like of you with your failure to compromise is what prevents this happening.

A much simpler change would be DCC (and the other city councils) stop building pretend bus lanes and start doing it properly. At least then DB could schedule their buses in a predictable way and the passenger would get a much better service.

KC61

paulm17781 wrote:

There we go. You just showed how the driver should benefit rather than the passengers. The driver should get his break, even if it delays passengers you just said. Now, how is sitting on a bench at Donnybrook garage for 10 minutes working?

Please, don't spout me rubbish of working hours and breaks, I'm sure they can make up their 10 minutes at the terminus if they are early. Simple changes in working practices could make DB a proper outfit but the like of you with your failure to compromise is what prevents this happening.

Trust me I'm quite happy to criticise Dublin Bus and have done frequently. I would be no happier sitting on that bus than you are. But what about all of the other days where you are not waiting? I'm simply making the point that in scheduling buses you're not dealing with an exact science, and it is not as black and white as you outline.

The legislation on working hours is however very clear, and requires a particular length of break after a certain number of hours worked. DB do not have an option here. The drivers cannot split breaks, they are legally obliged to take a certain length of break. Don't blame me or DB work practices for that - that is the subject of the legislation passed by the politicians voted in by this electorate.

Mark is right - there is a need to focus on why buses are not operating to schedule and how predictable schedules can be arrived at.

paulm17781

markpb wrote:

A much simpler change would be DCC (and the other city councils) stop building pretend bus lanes and start doing it properly. At least then DB could schedule their buses in a predictable way and the passenger would get a much better service.

True, that would make a massive difference.

Now regarding breaks, I'm sure there is legislation that they must take a break (1 hour / 30 mins??? ) for every 4 hours worked. I'm sure the option also exists to replace that with a 10 min break every hour or some such.

KC61

paulm17781 wrote:

True, that would make a massive difference.

Now regarding breaks, I'm sure there is legislation that they must take a break (1 hour / 30 mins??? ) for every 4 hours worked. I'm sure the option also exists to replace that with a 10 min break every hour or some such.

I think that you'll find that for jobs that involve a PSV licenceholder that option does not apply!

Andrew Duffy

Now regarding breaks, I'm sure there is legislation that they must take a break (1 hour / 30 mins??? ) for every 4 hours worked. I'm sure the option also exists to replace that with a 10 min break every hour or some such.

What happens when a tired bus driver makes a mistake that kills a bus load of passengers? Extra funding for busses and bus lanes, new methods to improve efficiency, almost anything to improve our ability to move around should all be encouraged; but advocating a reduction in safety is counterproductive.

KC61

Andrew Duffy wrote:

What happens when a tired bus driver makes a mistake that kills a bus load of passengers? Extra funding for busses and bus lanes, new methods to improve efficiency, almost anything to improve our ability to move around should all be encouraged; but advocating a reduction in safety is counterproductive.

The focus has to be on improving the reliability of bus schedules so that a scheduler can with reasonable certainty predict when a bus will reach a certain point, and from that develop full working timetables so that schedules can be prepared with reliable intermediate timings. This would hopefully avoid the incidence of 10 minute waits at Donnybrook garage, which are in no-one's interest.

There is also a case for potentially developing school term and non-school term schedules to take account of the different journey times (particularly in the morning peak), but the work involved in that would be fairly enormous, and would of course require the full departmental licensing process to be implemented again!

Incidentally, the perception of more buses "stopped" in the city centre is probably enhanced by the fact that since the introduction of LUAS, significantly greater numbers of buses are travelling along the triangle of D'Olier Street, College Street, and Westmoreland Street - namely all the buses that previously serviced Middle Abbey Street (25/A, 26, 37, 38, 39/A/B, 66/A/B, 67/A and 70/A).

Also far more bus routes now operate along O'Connell Street (5, 7/A/B/D/E, 8, 14/A, 46A/B/C/D/E, 48A, 63 and 145) as a result of the terminus reallocation required by LUAS, which would have added to the perception of more buses in the city.

One has to wonder where the buses will go to that are currently in Marlboro Street and Hawkins Street if the LUAS city centre extension takes place? Perhaps the new bus station at Strand Street will remove the Blanchardstown/Lucan routes from Hawkins Street and Pearse Street, but where all of the services operated from Clontarf are going to go is anyone's guess. There is scope for more route mergers, but having everything cross-city can lead to serious reliability issues.

markpb

If DB and Irish Rail had put their heads together *at all*, they would have built a proper bus station at the new Docklands station and terminated a lot of buses there. I appreciate that the station has a life of ten years but it would be a problem swept away for ten years.

When the Ulster Bank towers were being built on Georges Quay, why didn't DCC and DB get in there and offer money towards building an underground bus garage? Perfect rail integration, perfect city centre location. They can do it in Stockholm under the Hilton, they can do it in Belfast under the Europa but we can't do it in Dublin? If they'd done that, all the buses that trundle along Talbot St (which was cleverly engineered to make it even less suitable for buses) and along Marlborough St could have parked up there instead.

Right now there's an entire street lying almost completely empty (bar a few parked-up BE buses) right under Connolly Station with easy access to Amiens St and Custom House Quay. It could easily be closed to traffic and used to terminate buses or as a mini-bus station instead of having waiting passengers clogging up the streets.

There are a whole lot of problems outside DB's control but there's plenty they do could if they put their mind to it.

KC61

markpb wrote:

If DB and Irish Rail had put their heads together *at all*, they would have built a proper bus station at the new Docklands station and terminated a lot of buses there. I appreciate that the station has a life of ten years but it would be a problem swept away for ten years.

When the Ulster Bank towers were being built on Georges Quay, why didn't DCC and DB get in there and offer money towards building an underground bus garage? Perfect rail integration, perfect city centre location. They can do it in Stockholm under the Hilton, they can do it in Belfast under the Europa but we can't do it in Dublin? If they'd done that, all the buses that trundle along Talbot St (which was cleverly engineered to make it even less suitable for buses) and along Marlborough St could have parked up there instead.

Right now there's an entire street lying almost completely empty (bar a few parked-up BE buses) right under Connolly Station with easy access to Amiens St and Custom House Quay. It could easily be closed to traffic and used to terminate buses or as a mini-bus station instead of having waiting passengers clogging up the streets.

There are a whole lot of problems outside DB's control but there's plenty they do could if they put their mind to it.

You still have to remember that we are dealing with an urban public transport system here.

There will still have to be bus stops located about the city centre to pick up/set down passengers. You are talking about termini, and I think as my post above indicates, these are almost all on little used side streets or bus only streets.

markpb

KC61 wrote:

There will still have to be bus stops located about the city centre to pick up/set down passengers.

That would be what I meant by "problems outside DBs control" and my previous post about Dublin's lack of actual bus lanes I was referring to your previous post when you asked where the current Marlborough and Hawkins st bus terminii will go when the Luas extensions are in place. My bad for not quoting.

Hoof Hearted

The issue of the timing of breaks can be a big issue for someone like a bus driver unlike people who work in an office, for example, I know a bus driver, a happy looking bloke, who will remain un-named, that wore an adult diaper:o becasue of his hourly needs. Needless to say hitting a hard bump or pothole wasn't any help.

How can I say it gently, there are times that you wish you had entered the bus on the side/rear and not the front.:eek:

strassenwolf

Frank McDonald.




I just thought this thread might need a mention of him from time to time.:p

gjim

strassenwolf wrote:

Frank McDonald.

I'm glad you brought it up. After reading the subsequent posts, I've changed my mind. The guy's obviously a g*bsh*te given that he never writes articles about the state of the health service, the destabalising effect of the war in Iraq, how to fix Dublin Bus, the argument to provide micro-nutriants to globally eradicate disease caused by malnutrician, or any other subject some indignant person somewhere feels is more important or interesting. What a dork.