Opening domestic rail passenger markets (public consultation) (no wages discussion)

monument

From the DoT:

Public Consultation on European Commission’s proposals
for a Fourth Railway Package

The Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport is inviting comments from interested parties on the European Commission’s proposals for a comprehensive package of measures (known as ‘the Fourth Railway Package’) to deliver better quality and more choice in railway services in Europe.

The Fourth Railway Package comprises six amending legislative proposals which can be grouped into three main pillars:

To establish consistent approvals procedures for rail interoperability and
Safety;

2. To open domestic passenger markets;

3. To create better structures and governance for infrastructure managers.

A Consultation Paper entitled ‘Fourth Railway Package proposed by the European Commission’ can be accessed on the Department of Transport, Tourism & Sport website at http://www.dttas.ie/feature.aspx?id=228 .

JeffK88

Is this anything to do with opening the Irish Network to private operators?

Grandeeod

JeffK88 wrote: »

Is this anything to do with opening the Irish Network to private operators?

YES. Ireland's derogation is up. But the reality of any other operator wanting to come in is debatable.

Judgement Day

I can just see all the foreign operators lining up and IE have made damn sure to scrap any locos and stock that might have been of use. I suppose there's always the old AEC driving trailer in Inchicore and the steam crane at Mallow. :rolleyes:

Jamie2k9

Judgement Day wrote: »

I can just see all the foreign operators lining up and IE have made damn sure to scrap any locos and stock that might have been of use. I suppose there's always the old AEC driving trailer in Inchicore and the steam crane at Mallow. :rolleyes:

Why should IE provide trains or locomotives for another rail operator. The simple fact is that no operator in their right mind would enter the Irish market

a-its a case of counting the millions losses per year.
b-People here are willing to pay very little for rail travel, Ireland has very cheap train fares. Some may say its slow but even on routes faster then the car people still won't pay much.

Not one rail line returns a decent profit to IE, other operators want profit not loss. I don't buy this crap that the Cork route is the only route making money. Absolute rubbish in my book.

Grandeeod

Debate away! I'm listening!

JeffK88

Would any of the Commuter/Dart services not be profitable.

Jamie2k9

JeffK88 wrote: »

Would any of the Commuter/Dart services not be profitable.

No last I heard, Pass holders and fare evaders would make up a lot of traffic which is lost revenue by the companies fault and the Governments fault. Now that the Darts have being reduced I expect loss have dropped a lot. Most of these services are only busy at peak times. Cork commuter area is suppose to be the least loss per passenger on the network. Says a lot as its a very well run service with a delay very rare. Unless you are traveling into Dublin city centre you can travel anywhere on the commuter network without getting caught unless their is RPU staff on the train.

A new operator would only be after Intercity traffic IMO.

dowlingm

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Why should IE provide trains or locomotives for another rail operator.

They are assets held in trust for the State, not to be scrapped simply to avoid competition.

n97 mini

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

A new operator would only be after Intercity traffic IMO.

A new operator would be entitled to subvention, the same as IE. If no route is making money then by definition they are all being run as Public Service routes. In that case the most profitable for the operator could be any route.

The only thing that lowers costs is competition. The benefit to the state may be that a private operator would run a very lean operation, staffing wise, and therefore could operate a route for less than IE could, in turn reducing the amount of subvention required.

Jamie2k9

dowlingm wrote: »

They are assets held in trust for the State, not to be scrapped simply to avoid competition.

Sure why not get IE to pay the refurb bill as well....
The state also have to protect their assets and in this case its CIE as a whole over another operator. They recently just announced that Aer Lingus wouldn't be sold until Ryanair are out of the picture.

A new operator would be entitled to subvention, the same as IE. If no route is making money then by definition they are all being run as Public Service routes. In that case the most profitable for the operator could be any route.

The only thing that lowers costs is competition. The benefit to the state may be that a private operator would run a very lean operation, staffing wise, and therefore could operate a route for less than IE could, in turn reducing the amount of subvention required.

The subvention wouldn't cover the losses and just where is the taxpayer to fin the money for this when it will give very little return and they operator will be providing the same service as IE on a route. If subventions were high enough the IE wouldn't be loosing 22 million a year. The core operating costs would be the same for IE and another operator, management end of things is very little cost on the grand scheme of things.

corktina

i imagine the assets that IE hold could be transferred to a leasing company, as they did in the UK and leased back to the Operator, whether IE or private.

markpb

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

The core operating costs would be the same for IE and another operator, management end of things is very little cost on the grand scheme of things.

How do you know that? Perhaps you've previously worked in the finance departments of both Irish Rail and another rail operator?

the_syco

Do the trains still queue much in London?

n97 mini

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

The subvention wouldn't cover the losses

The taxpayer always covers IE's losses, either as subvention, or otherwise. Which is part of the problem. Unlike a private company IE has no real incentives to turn a profit.

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

The core operating costs would be the same for IE and another operator, management end of things is very little cost on the grand scheme of things.

In 2011, IE's net wage bill was €223m, compared to only €21m on fuel.

flyingsnail

n97 mini wrote: »

In 2011, IE's net wage bill was €223m, compared to only €21m on fuel.

Is that just operations or a combination of operations and infrastructure?

LXFlyer

The payroll costs are not split out between the two in the annual report.

Jamie2k9

The taxpayer always covers IE's losses, either as subvention, or otherwise. Which is part of the problem. Unlike a private company IE has no real incentives to turn a profit.

So why all the current cost saving measures?

How do you know that? Perhaps you've previously worked in the finance departments of both Irish Rail and another rail operator?

Fuel, the operator will have to pay fees to keep the tracks in good shape, catering company, train drivers, ticketing staff, Inspectors as well as customer service agents, engineers. These staff are not going to work for nothing and will want a wage very similar to the current IE staff.

Just how will they have a lower cost base?

markpb

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Just how will they have a lower cost base?

I didn't say that they would, I just pointed out that your assumptions are based on nothing unless you have inside knowledge of IR and another rail company.

FWIW they could potentially differ by having a better fuel hedging strategy, lower staff costs, more efficient use of staff (apparently their managers have enough free time to wander off doing RPU duties which could be done by staff on a fraction of their salaries). On the income side, perhaps they'd have better yield management, better timetables, better advertising. I'm not saying a company would definitely be able to achieve all that but, likewise, you can't say they wouldn't.

If we take your approach, all airlines and bus companies must also make the same amount of money because they have the same cost base.

AngryLips

I suppose the only other operator we might see is Translink, though I find it more likely we'll see IE enter the Northern Irish rail market

Jamie2k9

markpb wrote: »

I didn't say that they would, I just pointed out that your assumptions are based on nothing unless you have inside knowledge of IR and another rail company.

FWIW they could potentially differ by having a better fuel hedging strategy, lower staff costs, more efficient use of staff (apparently their managers have enough free time to wander off doing RPU duties which could be done by staff on a fraction of their salaries). On the income side, perhaps they'd have better yield management, better timetables, better advertising. I'm not saying a company would definitely be able to achieve all that but, likewise, you can't say they wouldn't.

If we take your approach, all airlines and bus companies must also make the same amount of money because they have the same cost base.

I don't think they would get lower staff costs because "many" Irish don't and won't work for a cheap wage. If they were represented by unions I bet they would push for similar pay to that of IE staff.

As for better timetables, advertising don't see much difference. At the end of the day its one track and two operators who will be very limited on capacity in the Dublin area.

foggy_lad

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Fuel, the operator will have to pay fees to keep the tracks in good shape, catering company, train drivers, ticketing staff, Inspectors as well as customer service agents, engineers. These staff are not going to work for nothing and will want a wage very similar to the current IE staff.

Just how will they have a lower cost base?

The staff will take what they are offered which would most likely be just above the minimum wage and most will be thankful to have a job and a way to pay their bills.

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

I don't think they would get lower staff costs because "many" Irish don't and won't work for a cheap wage. If they were represented by unions I bet they would push for similar pay to that of IE staff.

Again even with unions the company can make an offer and only employ staff who are happy to work for that amount. there is nothing any union can do about this when the majority of their members agree.

Jamie2k9

foggy_lad wrote: »

The staff will take what they are offered which would most likely be just above the minimum wage and most will be thankful to have a job and a way to pay their bills.



Again even with unions the company can make an offer and only employ staff who are happy to work for that amount. there is nothing any union can do about this when the majority of their members agree.

I would normally agree but because Irish people are lazy and couldn't be bother to get off the social to work for a wage just about the minimum wage. Some of the jobs are skilled at will require high pay.

As you hear a lot - "It doesn't pay me to work as I'll lose my social money" and so on.

Grandeeod

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

I don't think they would get lower staff costs because "many" Irish don't and won't work for a cheap wage. If they were represented by unions I bet they would push for similar pay to that of IE staff.

As for better timetables, advertising don't see much difference. At the end of the day its one track and two operators who will be very limited on capacity in the Dublin area.

The amount of assumptions you are making is staggering. Lets look at Ryanair. Loads hate it. But it has found a business model that works. Has it ever occurred to you that a private rail operator in Ireland could or would follow a similar model? I understand where you are coming from, but I implore you to lose sight of how IR works. IR offloaded their catering division to a private operator that employed cheaper labour. The rights or wrongs with it are irrelevant. What matters is that the private sector is capable of a lot more savings. Once again the rights or wrongs of it are irrelevant and I'm not here to debate it, but the reality suggests that private enterprise makes it work.

n97 mini

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

So why all the current cost saving measures?

To reduce losses.

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

, catering company, train drivers, ticketing staff, Inspectors as well as customer service agents, engineers. These staff are not going to work for nothing and will want a wage very similar to the current IE staff.

Just how will they have a lower cost base?

All staff costs. Unless IE is the pinnacle of efficiency then no-one else can better them. Do you think IE are the pinnacle of efficiency, as I don't.

A case in point is Veolia Luas drivers vs DB/train/DART drivers. Last Luas leaves an hour after the last train or DB bus, yet drivers are on less pay and allowances, and substantially less pension.

Grandeeod

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

I would normally agree but because Irish people are lazy and couldn't be bother to get off the social to work for a wage just about the minimum wage. Some of the jobs are skilled at will require high pay.

As you hear a lot - "It doesn't pay me to work as I'll lose my social money" and so on.

Jamie. Calm the fcuk down. I hear you. Whether we like or not, Ireland is now in a situation whereby many people are prepared to work for the minimum wage in order to make it a reason to get out of bed and do something. Okay, they may not be all Irish people, but so what. We cannot go on protecting a culture of entitlement, that we created, in order to fund social welfare and those that think they should be paid a wage for a mediocre job, that enables them to buy a house, car and take two holidays a year!

While I doubt the viability of a private rail operator, I can clearly see how they would have to approach it.

Jamie2k9

Grandeeod wrote: »

Jamie. Calm the fcuk down. I hear you. Whether we like or not, Ireland is now in a situation whereby many people are prepared to work for the minimum wage in order to make it a reason to get out of bed and do something. Okay, they may not be all Irish people, but so what. We cannot go on protecting a culture of entitlement, that we created, in order to fund social welfare and those that think they should be paid a wage for a mediocre job, that enables them to buy a house, car and take two holidays a year!

While I doubt the viability of a private rail operator, I can clearly see how they would have to approach it.

I'm very calm and just saying it how it is, yes Ireland is in a bad situation however still a very large number of people still won't work for low wage jobs.

The amount of assumptions you are making is staggering. Lets look at Ryanair. Loads hate it. But it has found a business model that works. Has it ever occurred to you that a private rail operator in Ireland could or would follow a similar model? I understand where you are coming from, but I implore you to lose sight of how IR works. IR offloaded their catering division to a private operator that employed cheaper labour. The rights or wrongs with it are irrelevant. What matters is that the private sector is capable of a lot more savings. Once again the rights or wrongs of it are irrelevant and I'm not here to debate it, but the reality suggests that private enterprise makes it work.

Until you know how Ryanair works, you can't comment and if you knew maybe your view would change, success comes at a very large price and in this case its staff and European taxpayers. Won't be responding to more posts in relation to this unless its via PM.

To reduce losses.

so why bother reducing them if they have no incentive to make a profit?

All staff costs. Unless IE is the pinnacle of efficiency then no-one else can better them. Do you think IE are the pinnacle of efficiency, as I don't.

A case in point is Veolia Luas drivers vs DB/train/DART drivers. Last Luas leaves an hour after the last train or DB bus, yet drivers are on less pay and allowances, and substantially less pension.

Their efficiency can be improved however its getting much better. I'm lead to believe that DB drives have very poor pay and I would be surprised if Luas ones are on cheaper wages.

n97 mini

There are plenty of locals and foreigners who would prefer a life of social welfare here. But that's not the point.

We're talking well paid jobs, just not as well paid as existing IE jobs.

Jamie2k9

n97 mini wrote: »

There are plenty of locals and foreigners who would prefer a life of social welfare here. But that's not the point.

We're talking well paid jobs, just not as well paid as existing IE jobs.

Are you saying that all IE staff under management level are on well paid jobs and that a new operator could cut pay and still be well paid?

Grandeeod

Jamie.

Until you know how Ryanair works, you can't comment and if you knew maybe your view would change, success comes at a very large price and in this case its staff and European taxpayers. Won't be responding to more posts in relation to this unless its via PM.

I know exactly how it works. No need to get secretive.

n97 mini

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Are you saying that all IE staff under management level are on well paid jobs and that a new operator could cut pay and still be well paid?

Probably. For example, and hypothetically speaking, if a train driver in IE is on 50k, would a train driver in another company not be well paid on 42k with a working week that's 3 hours longer? That would amount to a 20% payroll saving for that grade.

devnull

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

I'm lead to believe that DB drives have very poor pa

What do you call very poor pay?

The average wage in Dublin Bus is over 50,000 euros. That information can easily be gathered from their accounts.

Unfortunately it is not possible to work out exactly what grades are paid what since that information is not in the public domain.

It's been done to death on here but the average pay outside the state companies is lower that it is inside the state companies.

devnull

Grandeeod wrote: »

Jamie. I know exactly how it works. No need to get secretive.

I don't see why we can't have it out in the open on here if it's being brought into the argument, as long as it's true and has some factual basis I can't see why there would be a problem with doing so.

Jamie2k9

Grandeeod wrote: »

Jamie.

I know exactly how it works. No need to get secretive.

If you knew exactly how it worked then you wouldn't of posted a response like that. Anyway we're getting off topic.

Probably. For example, and hypothetically speaking, if a train driver in IE is on 50k, would a train driver in another company not be well paid on 42k with a working week that's 3 hours longer? That would amount to a 20% payroll saving for that grade.

I find it hard to believe that drivers are on that sort of money, would say IE are closer to 40k

I don't see why we can't have it out in the open on here if it's being brought into the argument, as long as it's true and has some factual basis I can't see why there would be a problem with doing so.

Management might not be to happy....

SandyfordGuy

ignore jamie he is an aer lingus Fanboy who has a chip on his shoulder and supporter of all other monopolies'

He will not posthis thoughts since heknows unfound allegations could leave him opento action

n97 mini

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

I find it hard to believe that drivers are on that sort of money, would say IE are closer to 40k

They were on 38k in 1999!

SandyfordGuy

Jamie if your theories are true why not post them' seriously either back your argument or don't botherposting'

devnull

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Management might not be to happy....

Who cares what management think? When I post on boards the last thing I care about is what management of any company think, since at the end of the day this is a discussion forum and companies are always going to get some level of criticism at some time or other.

As long as what is posted is not breaking any laws or is in any way defamatory I honestly fail to see the problem here.

Grandeeod

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

If you knew exactly how it worked then you wouldn't of posted a response like that. Anyway we're getting off topic.

Doesn't answer my question and still leaves me insulted. I know how Ryanair works.

Jamie2k9

Ryanair management have recently taken legal action against a number of people on message boards who have posted negatively about the airline.

I would like to keep my job.

Grandeeod

n97 mini wrote: »

They were on 38k in 1999!

According to the NTAs WRC report, its 63K per annum.

Hilly Bill

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Ryanair management have recently taken legal action against a number of people on message boards who have posted negatively about the airline.

I would like to keep my job.

Is Jamie2k9 on your payslip?

Hilly Bill

Grandeeod wrote: »

According to the NTAs WRC report, its 63K per annum.

I'd say that they would love to be on 63k. The top rate is less than that.

Jamie2k9

Hilly Bill wrote: »

Is Jamie2k9 on your payslip?

Nope, I know what you are getting at but that won't stop them, now this is going way off topic.

Grandeeod

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Ryanair management have recently taken legal action against a number of people on message boards who have posted negatively about the airline.

I would like to keep my job.

I understand. But in fairness its been like that for years and only those stupid enough to be blatant, get caught. We are off topic, but I'd still love to see a Ryanair approach to railways, but not in Ireland. Its too small. However a general private sector approach would be nice.

monument

Relax everybody. Take a step back from your keyboards / touch screens / etc.

devnull

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Ryanair management have recently taken legal action against a number of people on message boards who have posted negatively about the airline.

If what you are saying is true and you know this is true for a fact and can prove it, why would someone sue you, since it would be a waste of their time and money and they'd have no case anyway.

Even if someone was foolish enough to sue such a party that was telling the truth, the judge would surely throw the case out pretty quickly and you might even get some compensation for the fact.

I would like to keep my job.

What does your job have to do this? Do you have a conflict of interest? Do you work in the rail industry or the airline industry?

Grandeeod

Hilly Bill wrote: »

I'd say that they would love to be on 63k. The top rate is less than that.

I'm not in the real know in Irish Rail so you will have to forgive me. I just go on what the lads tell me and envy the credit they can get for nice things. But thats okay with me. The 63K figure is an official and on the record figure though, so why are you disputing it?

devnull

Hilly Bill wrote: »

I'd say that they would love to be on 63k. The top rate is less than that.

But anyone can come on here and make such statements and say it's incorrect, but that doesn't mean they are or are not telling the truth if they cannot back it up with facts.

As I said when I quote figures I don't quote ones that I think are correct, I quote ones that are in the public domain, being quoted by agencies, authorities and from accounts.

Unfortunately some on here just use spin and make claims without being able to back them up, ironically such people tend to be the ones who have vested interests also.

Hilly Bill

Grandeeod wrote: »

I'm not in the real know in Irish Rail so you will have to forgive me. I just go on what the lads tell me and envy the credit they can get for nice things. But thats okay with me. The 63K figure is an official and on the record figure though, so why are you disputing it?

Because i have seen the pay scale. Its no more than 55k. Still a good wage but with added pressures and the threat of someone jumping in front of your train which would mess you up for life.

devnull

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Nope, I know what you are getting at but that won't stop them, now this is going way off topic.

As I said, if you break no laws and don't say anything that could be consider defamatory or libelous I don't see the problem in airing your views.