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
Go-Ahead Win 10% of Dublin Bus routes for tender
Options
Comments
-
-
Voipjunkie wrote: »Spoken like a man who has no idea whats involved, the NTA could just operate themselves but then they would actually just be Dublin Bus, thats the model we had before CIE was the NTA.
I'll be the first to admit I don't know what it's about.
There are no figures to check and the NTA does corporate waffle in high volume.
Long on the sales pitch short on specifics.
The same is being echoed here BTW
There is an "anyone but DB" attitude and the only thing to back it up is something about a tender which no one knows anything about bar the brochure-speak.
An obvious aim to begin to privatise by the back door is what I think it's about!
Unlike whats gone before, the NTA have set themselves up as unprecedented experts in the area of public transport.
Just wondering why are they bothering with anyone else's expertise in the final link in the chain.
You're saying it's to protect us from the NTA turning into a unionised public sector mess? OK.
Privatisation would be the answer to that then wouldn't it?
But that's NOT what this is about by a long shot apparently.
Comparisons have been made with LUAS.
I don't really see much comparison because transdev wasn't supplying a service that was already there.0 -
-
Monopolies are not always bad we had far cheaper health insurance when we only had the VHI.
I'd say we didn't have as many consultants and a smaller population then too though.
But yes, the illusion of competition seems to have assisted in electricity prices here being some of the most expensive in Europe and "rural" broadband being so elusive compared to elsewhere.
Maybe we just tend to make a bags of competition.0 -
-
Advertisement
-
-
If this was the case, DBs tender would have been cheaper. It clearly wasn't
You do not even vaguely understand the maths here
DB lost because they were dearer. You can't fluff and fudge around that
Have you got the figures. Id actually would like to see them and see exactly what details and criteria the NTA actually chose from. I doubt it was solely down to cost.0 -
Lets be realistic though, as the sole company with the resources, vehicles, staff and facilities to be able to provide the full kind of services that Dublin Bus conduct, if the NTA were to terminate the contract what would happen at the end of the day? They wouldn't just suddenly all resume a few days later.
That's why monopolies are bad because however strong regulator you have and however good they do their job, the monopoly holder will have more of a say than an operation which is divided between several smaller companies because the operator knows that there is nowhere else the regulator can turn.
I've worked in industries where this is the case before, the bigger the monopoly that one company has on an industry, the less scared they are at a regulator, especially when they know that whilst the regulator in theory has power to take away their contract, in reality it's not practical and isn't going to happen because nobody will step into their shoes.
except look at the uk railway. a good few companies running things and yet the regulators still don't regulate and clamp down hard on failure, at least not from what i can see. it doesn't matter how many companies you have if the regulator won't regulate.ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.
0 -
So basically what you are saying if the Unions don't get their own way it's perfectly acceptable for them to hold out as long as they possibly can and any delay is not the fault of the unions defying authority but simply the fact that the other party just didn't give into their demands right left and center?
Sounds like defiance of authroity to me and people who are too used at getting their own way and when they don't get their own way throwing their toys out of the pram and saying it's not fair.
But if the NTA micro managed every single terms and condition of the contract then you would have plenty of people moaning about that left right and center, some people are already doing that. If a party signs a contract they have agreed to adhere to it's terms, if they don't want to adhere to them they shouldn't sign the contract.
Targets are set metrics at the end of the day but there are also other things that companies will be judged on such as how rigidly they stuck to the contract that was previously signed, how co-operative they have been in the past and myrid of other things.
We don't know what the 35% quality criteria for the bid was judged on even if what the Indy is reporting is correct, so unless we know that is is impossible to know exactly what they may or may not have scored on the technical aspects of this part of the tender, it's impossible to judge the way someone scored a tender if you don't know what they were even scoring the bidders on.
No you are claiming the unions delayed it, I haven't seen any evidence the unions delayed anything, the unions looked for assurances the government and NTA refused they had a 2 day strike if I remember properly and which there were talks and assurances given etc.
I haven't seen any evidence the unions delayed anything or prevented the NTA from proceeding, if there was a delay it was not caused by the unions.
I note you have moved on from insisting yesterday that DB is so inefficient that they were underbid to now it is about service measures that may or may not be measured etc.
Perhaps you will except that despite what you and others regularly claim DB is not grossly inefficient.0 -
-
Advertisement
-
I'll be the first to admit I don't know what it's about.
There are no figures to check and the NTA does corporate waffle in high volume.
Long on the sales pitch short on specifics.
The same is being echoed here BTW
There is an "anyone but DB" attitude and the only thing to back it up is something about a tender which no one knows anything about bar the brochure-speak.
An obvious aim to begin to privatise by the back door is what I think it's about!
Unlike whats gone before, the NTA have set themselves up as unprecedented experts in the area of public transport.
Just wondering why are they bothering with anyone else's expertise in the final link in the chain.
You're saying it's to protect us from the NTA turning into a unionised public sector mess? OK.
Privatisation would be the answer to that then wouldn't it?
But that's NOT what this is about by a long shot apparently.
Comparisons have been made with LUAS.
I don't really see much comparison because transdev wasn't supplying a service that was already there.
The model is the same as transdev for the luas it doesn't matter if the service already exists or doesn't, the luas exists now Transdev have to reapply to be the operator in 2019 it is the same thing. Go ahead will have to reapply in 2014 if they are successful in this round, DB have to reapply in 2019 as well.
It is your basic outsourcing model you get in people to clean your offices because they are the experts and cleaning is not your business speciality, the day to day running of a service is not what the NTA do they do the planning, the contracting etc the day to day grind of running a bus service is left to operators to manage.0 -
Have you got the figures. Id actually would like to see them and see exactly what details and criteria the NTA actually chose from. I doubt it was solely down to cost.
Read back a few pages it wasn't down to cost in the end, DB came in with the cheaper bid which carried 65% of the qualifying points but Go ahead outscored them in the Service end which carried 35% of the points.
It would be interesting to see the actual bids, I am guessing if DB was a private company it would be looking at the legal avenue to have a judicial review of the process, but given it is controlled by the DOT/NTA I doubt they will be free to look at that option.0 -
Have you got the figures. Id actually would like to see them and see exactly what details and criteria the NTA actually chose from. I doubt it was solely down to cost.
65% was on cost
35% was on quality
We don't know what made up the criteria for both of those elements.end of the road wrote: »except look at the uk railway. a good few companies running things and yet the regulators still don't regulate and clamp down hard on failure, at least not from what i can see. it doesn't matter how many companies you have if the regulator won't regulate.
A lot of the passengers would be to differ!
Right now a lot of the overcrowding on the network is the direct result of the fact that the regulator has been micro-managing train orders for years and cutting them en-mass, despite the operator warning that such actions will cause overcrowding, only for the regulator to then blame the operators for it when it occurs, despite the fact it is a direct result of government policy. That's before you even go into the Thamslink and IEP debacle!
Also you have to recognise that you cannot compare UK train franchises and Dublin Bus, in virtually all of the UK train franchises, all the stations, trains, infrastructure, depots etc are listed as franchise assets and do not belong to any Train Operating company which makes it far easier for another company to come in if one fails because everything will automatically transfer over and there are many other large companies who can take over services.
That is not the case in Dublin where the operators ow a lot of the bus infrastructure and the buses themselves, the bus depots and there is no other company that is realistically able to provide that service because of the assets that they own which a new operator would not be able to avail of.0 -
Voipjunkie wrote: »No you are claiming the unions delayed it, I haven't seen any evidence the unions delayed anything, the unions looked for assurances the government and NTA refused they had a 2 day strike if I remember properly and which there were talks and assurances given etc.
So basically what you are saying is the unions did not get their own way so they went on strike in a bid to force the other side to give them what they want else they would stay on strike? Sounds to me like a group of people who have asked for something, been told they are not getting it and then have tried to use their power to force the other side into giving it
Unfortunately this is a typical tactic in many unions, if you don't get your own way go on strike to try and force the other side to give you what you want, of course such disputes delay things, if there hadn't have been a dispute from the union side and there hadn't been a strike and time wasn't wasted on discussing things, things would have been sorted out quicker.I note you have moved on from insisting yesterday that DB is so inefficient that they were underbid to now it is about service measures that may or may not be measured etc. Perhaps you will except that despite what you and others regularly claim DB is not grossly inefficient.
In any case it is hard to compare Dublin Bus and Go Ahead directly when it comes to efficiency as one operator has to build a depot and the other doesn't and of course that will add in extra costs, that one operator doesn't have, GA could for instance be vastly more efficient in other areas than Dublin Bus but the cost of a depot pushes them to be more expensive than Dublin Bus.
On the other hand maybe they were not more expensive than Dublin Bus, all we have to say that it is the case is a journalist in the newspaper who uses what is clearly a caveat in his piece saying he understands, and as I said before, there's no need to use a word like 'understands' since if it's a fact you present it as one and there is no use for such word.0 -
-
Voipjunkie wrote: »Read back a few pages it wasn't down to cost in the end, DB came in with the cheaper bid which carried 65% of the qualifying points but Go ahead outscored them in the Service end which carried 35% of the points.
It would be interesting to see the actual bids, I am guessing if DB was a private company it would be looking at the legal avenue to have a judicial review of the process, but given it is controlled by the DOT/NTA I doubt they will be free to look at that option.
Sorry I was replying to older posts from where I last left off only read through the extra 9 pages now.
Most of the GA / NTA supporters where adamant that DB where ripping us off and couldn't be trusted.
Regarding the depot some where suggesting yesterday DB should be removed from some depots and have them handed over to GA by the NTA surprised this one hasn't been rammed down our throats again.
I really can't see any sizeable plot of land becoming available inside the M50 on south Dublin for a bus garage of all things unless they can negotiate land in parkwest or ballymount. There is a nice sized plot behind the aspect hotel in Parkwest running adjacent to the railway but I'm sure there is a plan for housing or commercial builds here. On a separate note I always liked that land for a new DART depot should DART ever expand in that direction.0 -
-
So basically what you are saying is the unions did not get their own way so they went on strike in a bid to force the other side to give them what they want else they would stay on strike? Sounds to me like a group of people who have asked for something, been told they are not getting it and then have tried to use their power to force the other side into giving it
Unfortunately this is a typical tactic in many unions, if you don't get your own way go on strike to try and force the other side to give you what you want, of course such disputes delay things, if there hadn't have been a dispute from the union side and there hadn't been a strike and time wasn't wasted on discussing things, things would have been sorted out quicker.
In any case it is hard to compare Dublin Bus and Go Ahead directly when it comes to efficiency as one operator has to build a depot and the other doesn't and of course that will add in extra costs, that one operator doesn't have, GA could for instance be vastly more efficient in other areas than Dublin Bus but the cost of a depot pushes them to be more expensive than Dublin Bus.
On the other hand maybe they were not more expensive than Dublin Bus, all we have to say that it is the case is a journalist in the newspaper who uses what is clearly a caveat in his piece saying he understands, and as I said before, there's no need to use a word like 'understands' since if it's a fact you present it as one and there is no use for such word.
First off that is what strikes are about, you ask you don't get an agreeable solution you withdraw labour, still no evidence this delayed anything though which is your original claim.
There is no mention of building a depot or how it will be funded in the NTA statement. Odd that you base that on a media report with no evidence but then question the Irish Independent story on the cost element when it doesn't suit you.
The NTA make no mention of how or who will build any new depot, of how it will be funded but you are happy to make assumptions.
As I said yesterday paying GA to build a depot they would then own makes no sense, if the NTA have to pay for it directly or indirectly by payments to Go Ahead then the NTA should build and own it the same as they do with the Luas depots otherwise we will pay for this depot numerous times but never own it.0 -
Well you where very certain what made up the critea yesterday.
I simply based my views on the information that was in the public domain at the time at the end of the day, today there has been further information that suggests Dublin Bus may have won the cost element, however it is unfortunately short on detail.
I never said I know exactly how the criteria for each of those elements were worked out, simply that cost is normally self explanatory and the only people that will really know the quality criteria is the people who are marking it, people on either side have speculated what it may include but the only people who really know will be the NTA.0 -
Sorry I was replying to older posts from where I last left off only read through the extra 9 pages now.
Most of the GA / NTA supporters where adamant that DB where ripping us off and couldn't be trusted.
Regarding the depot some where suggesting yesterday DB should be removed from some depots and have them handed over to GA by the NTA surprised this one hasn't been rammed down our throats again.
I really can't see any sizeable plot of land becoming available inside the M50 on south Dublin for a bus garage of all things unless they can negotiate land in parkwest or ballymount. There is a nice sized plot behind the aspect hotel in Parkwest running adjacent to the railway but I'm sure there is a plan for housing or commercial builds here. On a separate note I always liked that land for a new DART depot should DART ever expand in that direction.
CIE own the depots, CIE is a legal entity you can not just asset strip it because you want to, in all likelyhood those depots are surety on loans etc CIE have taken out, as well as other liabilities like pensions etc.
Isn't that what the owners of Clearys got into trouble for ?
I agree though, not only do they have to find a plot of land, they have to get planning permission and build it in the next 18 months and they still don't even have a contract to provide anything yet. More NTA pie in the sky, you can put it up there with Dublin connect and the BRT they were building.0 -
Advertisement
-
Voipjunkie wrote: »First off that is what strikes are about, you ask you don't get an agreeable solution you withdraw labour, still no evidence this delayed anything though which is your original claim.
So basically you're saying the unions should have the final say on everything and if they don't get their own way just go on strike forever more until they get what they want? If someone opposes everything they don't like in a tender and kicks up a fuss about it and there has to be negotiations and the tender needs to be changed to take this into account of course it delays things.There is no mention of building a depot or how it will be funded in the NTA statement. Odd that you base that on a media report with no evidence but then question the Irish Independent story on the cost element when it doesn't suit you.
Firstly the depot building remark was made by the NTA in Media Briefings which occurred yesterday and was reported and covered on many radio stations, websites, media outlets and was established as being a fact and was presented as such every time it was refereed to.
Secondly the story about Dublin Bus winning the tender based on cost was contained in an opinion article of a journalist and was something said journalist was said to understand. When someone understands something, it means that it is something they think is the case and they are fairly confident it is the case, but they don't know it to be a fact, otherwise they would present it as a fact.As I said yesterday paying GA to build a depot they would then own makes no sense, if the NTA have to pay for it directly or indirectly by payments to Go Ahead then the NTA should build and own it the same as they do with the Luas depots otherwise we will pay for this depot numerous times but never own it.
The Government paid for new depots to be built for Dublin Bus but they still do not own these and many on the union side have moaned that this should stay the case, on one hand they're moaning that the depots should be owned by the state and not the operator but on the other hand they are arguing the opposite, it really doesn't make sense to me.
But that wasn't the tender was it - the tender included the requirement to provide a depot, so talking about the NTA building their own depot is a moot point because it was never in the tender to start with, so you can talk about it all you want but it was never an option in this tender. If the NTA are going to build it and own it then the NTA would have to pay for it directly and the tenders would not include the cost of the depot.0 -
I simply based my views on the information that was in the public domain at the time at the end of the day, today there has been further information that suggests Dublin Bus may have won the cost element, however it is unfortunately short on detail.
I never said I know exactly how the criteria for each of those elements were worked out, simply that cost is normally self explanatory and the only people that will really know the quality criteria is the people who are marking it, people on either side have speculated what it may include but the only people who really know will be the NTA.
And the point many people are making is do the NTA really know themselves. This latest development suggests more to me that they haven't really got a clue as to what it is they are doing other than thrown their wait about. The power trip will wear down eventually and more people will start to see just how little the NTA is worth as the things the likes of yourself accrediteds them for doing is ridiculous.
At the end of the day someone at the end of Twitter account wearing a DB uniform isn't really getting people from point A to point B. Making the big calls adding more buses along routes with massive population increases is bread and butter stuff. I'll give them some credit for leap card as that required a lot of time and input to develop but if they weren't there somebody else would of done it as it's the way of the world now.0 -
And the point many people are making is do the NTA really know themselves. This latest development suggests more to me that they haven't really got a clue as to what it is they are doing other than thrown their wait about.
That's what regulators do, they regulate.At the end of the day someone at the end of Twitter account wearing a DB uniform isn't really getting people from point A to point B. Making the big calls adding more buses along routes with massive population increases is bread and butter stuff. I'll give them some credit for leap card as that required a lot of time and input to develop
Everything matters in a proper service, if Dublin Bus sign a contract saying they are going to do things they should do them otherwise they shouldn't sign a contract, nobody holds a gun to their head and forces them to sign at the end of the day.but if they weren't there somebody else would of done it as it's the way of the world now.
You could say that for anything that has been achieved by anyone in history or any innovation in history, but in reality it's the ultimate in clutching straws response, the fact is NTA did a lot of things and people and bodies are judged by what they deliver.
The unfortunate thing is that many of the things that the NTA have done should have been done way before they were formed.0 -
So basically you're saying the unions should have the final say on everything and if they don't get their own way just go on strike forever more until they get what they want? If someone opposes everything they don't like in a tender and kicks up a fuss about it and there has to be negotiations and the tender needs to be changed to take this into account of course it delays things.
Firstly the depot building remark was made by the NTA in Media Briefings which occurred yesterday and was reported and covered on many radio stations, websites, media outlets and was established as being a fact and was presented as such every time it was refereed to.
Secondly the story about Dublin Bus winning the tender based on cost was contained in an opinion article of a journalist and was something said journalist was said to understand. When someone understands something, it means that it is something they think is the case and they are fairly confident it is the case, but they don't know it to be a fact, otherwise they would present it as a fact.
The Government paid for new depots to be built for Dublin Bus but they still do not own these and many on the union side have moaned that this should stay the case, on one hand they're moaning that the depots should be owned by the state and not the operator but on the other hand they are arguing the opposite, it really doesn't make sense to me.
If you're going to have one rule you need to have ti across the board to all operators at the end of the day, regardless of who they are or where they come from.
Ah come on this is what unions exist for, the plans affect the employees of Dublin Bus, they had legitimate concerns and bot the DOT and the NTA ignored them until they had a 2 day strike over 2 years ago and the issue was quickly resolved. if the NTA and DOT had done that originally then the strike would never have happened.
Nothing that came out of that changed the tender, employees would not be forced to move, but they still can if they choose so any bidder would have to take TUPE into account, as they would have to have done anyway nothing changed in the tender, so explain how this delayed it ?
Remarks made at press briefings but not included anywhere in the NTA statement so we still don't know who is paying for it who will own it, or how it is being paid for.
Have the NTA disputed the piece that claims DB was cheaper ? presumably we can take it since they haven't that they accept it as true, I'm sure they would have been out of the blocks sharpish if the report was incorrect.
The state does own them, it owns CIE, CIE own the depots, they own the buses as well through the NTA, and the LUAS, neither the NTA nor CIE are private companies whatever they own ultimately the state own, doesn't mean the state can do what they like with them, the NTA and CIE are legal entities in their own right and the state can not asset strip them no more than shareholders of a private company can asset strip a private company.
Go Ahead is a private company whatever it owns ultimately belongs to it's shareholders. Do you see the difference.0 -
Voipjunkie wrote: »CIE own the depots, CIE is a legal entity you can not just asset strip it because you want to, in all likelyhood those depots are surety on loans etc CIE have taken out, as well as other liabilities like pensions etc.
Isn't that what the owners of Clearys got into trouble for ?
I agree though, not only do they have to find a plot of land, they have to get planning permission and build it in the next 18 months and they still don't even have a contract to provide anything yet. More NTA pie in the sky, you can put it up there with Dublin connect and the BRT they were building.
Exactly, pure nonsense them lands are well and truly owned by CIE and I can't see them doing any deal's resulting in DB been ousted out of their garages.
GA will be doing very well to find anything even slightly suitable for this type of operation in 18 months. I'd imagine transferring buses from one to other doesn't exactly happen overnight. But known the NTA they probably don't even think of these things. The Dublin Coach depot in Knockmitten is a disgrace and very dangerous imo and it's only a matter of time before a accident is caused by the number of buses left lying around and there is only 30 or so based there by the looks of it. Also if that depot is anything to go by I can't see to many businesses been to happy with a bus depot for 125 buses plus staff cars ect going into any industrial estate.
BRT, connect the NTA didn't design any of them they had to get companies from outside of Ireland to produce them plans. Pretty sure BRT has been on the table well before the NTA were around.0 -
Voipjunkie wrote: »Ah come on this is what unions exist for, the plans affect the employees of Dublin Bus, they had legitimate concerns and bot the DOT and the NTA ignored them until they had a 2 day strike over 2 years ago and the issue was quickly resolved. if the NTA and DOT had done that originally then the strike would never have happened.
Unions should not be able to dictate public transport policy choices at the end of the day, you appear to be suggesting that the unions should always get what they want and that the companies should be run for their benefit and if other people do not like that them it's just tough because the unions have got to have their own way.
I have no problems of unions having concerns and airing their views and of course they have a right to do that but at the end of the day what you appear to be saying is if that the unions don't like something then it has to be changed to accommodate them but if the other party don't like something that is just tough they have to deal with it.Remarks made at press briefings but not included anywhere in the NTA statement so we still don't know who is paying for it who will own it, or how it is being paid for.[
Have the NTA disputed the piece that claims DB was cheaper ? presumably we can take it since they haven't that they accept it as true, I'm sure they would have been out of the blocks sharpish if the report was incorrect.
So you won't believe a comment which is recorded in a number of sources, on TV, Radio, online and other sources as fact but you will believe a sole persons opinion who has to use a caveat when expressing it who doesn't have enough confidence in what they are saying to say it outright?
Nobody has claimed in the media that DB was cheaper, they have simply claim that they understand they are cheaper in an opinion piece, nobody has come out and said it is a fact - if things were factual there would be no need to use a caveat at the end of the day, which the term 'understands' clearly is.
Besides having been involved in tenders in the past much of it is commercially confidential and that level of detail will never been released in the public domain so I wouldn't take the fact that the NTA hasn't said anything as gospel - it's just not proper to comment on such mattersGo Ahead is a private company whatever it owns ultimately belongs to it's shareholders. Do you see the difference.
I just see someone who is more concerned about ideology than the issues of the day and what are being discussed here, personally I couldn't care if an operator is private or public at the end of the day and it makes no impact on my views but I understand that some people believe ideology is more important.0 -
That's what regulators do, they regulate.
Everything matters in a proper service, if Dublin Bus sign a contract saying they are going to do things they should do them otherwise they shouldn't sign a contract, nobody holds a gun to their head and forces them to sign at the end of the day.
You could say that for anything that has been achieved by anyone in history or any innovation in history, but in reality it's the ultimate in clutching straws response, the fact is NTA did a lot of things and people and bodies are judged by what they deliver.
The unfortunate thing is that many of the things that the NTA have done should have been done way before they were formed.
But their not any better at regulating than DB regulating themselves. Times have changed the way people do business has changed DB and the likes would of changed either way. All the NTA did was place the order for the equipment they didn't exactly change the world of transport as the way you like to make out they have. They were given a big pot of money to bring these things in something the companies you dislike so much haven't been given.
What should of been done before they were formed.0 -
BRT, connect the NTA didn't design any of them they had to get companies from outside of Ireland to produce them plans. Pretty sure BRT has been on the table well before the NTA were around.
Sub-Contracting work is part of the operation of a lot of companies though and most companies do it for some things or other, Dublin Bus, Bus Eireann and Irish Rail do exactly the same for some activities, be it cleaning, security, public relations, social media, web-design or certain aspects of maintenance.
It still requires the company themselves to put tenders out and set the standards for their contractors, agree what work they are going to have to do, the terms, and issue them with a brief of what they are going to do and release funding to make them possible
There will always be needs to outsource certain functions for various reasons.0 -
But their not any better at regulating than DB regulating themselves.
Nobody can regulate themselves, it's an oxymoron.Times have changed the way people do business has changed DB and the likes would of changed either way
The way people do business and what they expect from a bus service changed a long time before the NTA were formed yet transport services had not kept pace with that change and were years behind what users in other European countries could avail of.All the NTA did was place the order for the equipment they didn't exactly change the world of transport as the way you like to make out they have.
The NTA did a lot more than just place orders for equipment, they designed schemes for bike hire schemes in Galway, Cork, Limerick, introduced the kids go free offer in the summer holidays to encourage more people to use public transport, provided some proper integration measures which the CIE companies were unable to do despite being sister companies of each other for decades.What should of been done before they were formed.
Before the NTA it was common for money to be allocated without any accountability, it's a far better formula to have that funding is released only in exchange for certain improvements because it makes sure that the money is spent on these things rather than going into a big black hole which it often otherwise would.0 -
Advertisement
-
Sub-Contracting work is part of the operation of a lot of companies though and most companies do it for some things or other, Dublin Bus, Bus Eireann and Irish Rail do exactly the same for some activities, be it cleaning, security, public relations, social media, web-design or certain aspects of maintenance.
It still requires the company themselves to put tenders out and set the standards for their contractors, agree what work they are going to have to do, the terms, and issue them with a brief of what they are going to do and release funding to make them possible
There will always be needs to outsource certain functions for various reasons.
There is a big difference between DB, IE &BE outsourcing some cleaning contractors ect. to the "national transport authority" outsourcing a transport plan for the nation. I'm not expecting them to have the construction / software skills and knowledge to build the infrastructure but I sure as hell do expect them to have the abilities to design, produce, plan and implement a transport network into the town's and cities they are responsible for rather than seeking an American or German company who quite frankly don't really know the area or geography of the city to plan it along with paying them millions.0
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement