Bust Éireann

devnull

end of the road wrote: »

i'm sure being able to pick routes will make those private operators more efficient seeing as they don't have to serve all and sundry if they do not wish to

I'll keep it simple for you.

Bus Eireann serves PSO Routes
Bus Eireann is paid by the state for these routes.
Bus Eireann has an exclusive contract from the state for these routes.
Bus Eireann has the vehicles for these routes provided for free by the state
Bus Eireann has the insurance for these vehicles paid for by the state.

Commercial Operators do not service PSO routes
Commercial Operators are not paid by the state for these routes
Commercial Operators were never able to bid for the contract BE PSO holds
Commercial Operators have to pay full price for vehicles.
Commercial Operators have to pay full Commercial Insurance Rates for Vehicles.

Essentially, BE services unviable routes because it has free insurance, free vehicles, direct award exclusive contracts and on top of that is paid tens of millions every year in order to service them.

Commercial operators do not operate unviable routes since they have to pay insurance, pay for vehicles, were not able to bid for contracts anyway, and get no revenue to run any route whatsoever.

But sure, put out the picture that BE run unviable PSO routes out of the kindness of their hearts and privates don't because they are evil capitalists, the money that BE gets, of course, is not related at all.

does bus eireann expressway dispite being a commercial service really have that freedom? wouldn't surprise me if they didn't, tbh.

They have the exact same rules as everyone else has had over a good number of years now, the problem with Expressway, as well as the poor management who were beaten out of the blocks by more proactive and innovative commercial operators is that the first time some local group kicks off about losing their bus service they back down if enough pressure is placed on them and end up with routes like they have now on Expressway which are not commercially sustainable because there are stops in there which shouldn't be.

It doesn't work like that in the commercial world. In the commercial world, a commercial arm has to be ruthless and pursue what is right for the best commercial instincts of that particular arm. If this means cutting some stops out and leaving that to the NTA to sort it out, so be it, the NTA will have to sort it out and it's not Bus Eireanns problem, they should point the fingers at the NTA and tell them to get on with sorting it out and they have to operate their own commercial arm in a commercial manner.

The problem is BE management were not ruthless. The Commercial marketplace is not for people with weak minds or those who want to be seen "to do the right thing." it's about doing whatever it takes to make your business a success, and if you have to upset a small number of people along the way to increase the performance of your commercial arm and to grow your customers, so be it. That's why Ryanair and other companies are so successful, they are ruthlessly focused on running their business commercially with no other priority.

i agree. however, does bus eireann politically have the freedom to actually withdraw expressway routes dispite being commercial routes if they need to do so?

Every time a bus is pulled there is going to be political discourse. This does not effect just BE, it happened with Aircoach when they pulled the stopping Cork services and it happened with JJ Kavanagh when they pulled some services as well, some of the politicans screamed blue murder at both of those operators and put them under increasing pressure.

The one big difference? Everybody knows that if BE are placed under enough pressure they are too weak to hold their ground. The privates just say nothing, ignore whatever the politicians say and get on with it in the knowledge that they have to do it for the good of their business.

salonfire

end of the road wrote: »

no it isn't because they don't pay drivers over the odds. they pay them at the higher end of the market rate sure, but not over the odds.

There's some cost savings you've identified right there then.

Wait! That's what BE mgmt are targeting!!

Well done, you will be the astute business man some day!!

bigredone

devnull wrote: »

.
Bus Eireann has the insurance for these vehicles paid for by the state.

Essentially, BE services unviable routes because it has free insurance,

Dont believe this to be true at all.
Have you got any proof of this?

devnull

bigredone wrote: »

Dont believe this to be true at all.
Have you got any proof of this?

The bus companies are exempt from independent insurance requirements under the Road Traffic Act, 1961 and subsequent amendments to said legislation. This practice is only possible to state owned companies.

Essentially a reserve is kept back to use for insurance claims, should the need arise, rather than having to pay for monthly premiums, they are exempt from having to do this. This option is not open to private companies.

This was made clear in the PriceWaterhouseCoopers Report into Restructuring of CIE which was released a number of years ago, this was also touched upon in the 2015 report into the insurance industry from the Insurance Institute of Ireland.

It states:
"The State also acts as its own insurer for many of its risks, e.g., the State self-insures the motor risk of certain State vehicles. The State Claims Agency (SCA) will deal with claims arising from use of those State vehicles. There are different authorities that deal with other State motor claims. For example, Córas Iompair Éireann (CIÉ) and the Rail Procurement Agency (RPA) are deemed to be exempted persons under the Road Traffic Act 1961."

Dyr

end of the road wrote: »

bus eireann have always had huge competition. competition for them isn't anything new.


not let them go to the wall, this tax payer doesn't wish ireland to potentially turn into another britain.

Most of us can remember when Bus Eireann had no significant competition and the shambles they offered to the public as a service

You see the old card that letting these clusterf**k semi states go to the wall will result in instant Thatcherism just won't play anymore. We've all seen the sectors that were once semi state shambles forced to open up to competition and the customer benefited from it enormously. Think back to when getting a landline required six months of your life and a letter from the parish priest/local TD. I remember being given the bums rush for months by telecom eireann about moving the phone line when moving house until a relative who was high up in there had a word and there was a bevy of engineers out the next day courtseying and falling over themselves. Them days are gone thank god, bar the transport sector.


Once Bus Eireann is consigned to history, we can still invest the same amount in public services for transport and we'll probably get a return for that investment instead of it being poured into a black hole

bigredone

devnull wrote: »

The bus companies are exempt from independent insurance requirements under the Road Traffic Act, 1961 and subsequent amendments to said legislation. This practice is only possible to state owned companies.

Essentially a reserve is kept back to use for insurance claims, should the need arise, rather than having to pay for monthly premiums, they are exempt from having to do this. This option is not open to private companies.

This was made clear in the PriceWaterhouseCoopers Report into Restructuring of CIE which was released a number of years ago, this was also touched upon in the 2015 report into the insurance industry from the Insurance Institute of Ireland.

It states:
"The State also acts as its own insurer for many of its risks, e.g., the State self-insures the motor risk of certain State vehicles. The State Claims Agency (SCA) will deal with claims arising from use of those State vehicles. There are different authorities that deal with other State motor claims. For example, Córas Iompair Éireann (CIÉ) and the Rail Procurement Agency (RPA) are deemed to be exempted persons under the Road Traffic Act 1961."

Wong again.
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/bus-%C3%A9ireann-may-be-insolvent-by-end-of-year-if-losses-continue-1.2950494
"He said in 2014 insurance claims cost €1.5 million, but this figure had increased to close to €7 million last year."
Can you explain that?

devnull

bigredone wrote: »

Wong again.
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/bus-%C3%A9ireann-may-be-insolvent-by-end-of-year-if-losses-continue-1.2950494
"He said in 2014 insurance claims cost €1.5 million, but this figure had increased to close to €7 million last year."
Can you explain that?

No actually you are wrong. You are confusing claims with the cost of insurance. They are two different things.

Self insured means they do not pay premiums on a monthly basis they simply settle claims as and when they occur from a reserve. This means they do not pay anything per month to keep their vehicles on the road.

Commercial operators have to pay monthly premiums or yearly whether they are involved in any incidents or not. It is illegal for them to self insure or to not pay premiums.

Dyr

Self insurance is common enough for State functions in Ireland

Pretty sure Dublin Corporation are self insured.

Bass Reeves

Bambi wrote: »

Most of us can remember when Bus Eireann had no significant competition and the shambles they offered to the public as a service

You see the old card that letting these clusterf**k semi states go to the wall will result in instant Thatcherism just won't play anymore. We've all seen the sectors that were once semi state shambles forced to open up to competition and the customer benefited from it enormously. Think back to when getting a landline required six months of your life and a letter from the parish priest/local TD. I remember being given the bums rush for months by telecom eireann about moving the phone line when moving house until a relative who was high up in there had a word and there was a bevy of engineers out the next day courtseying and falling over themselves. Them days are gone thank god, bar the transport sector.


Once Bus Eireann is consigned to history, we can still invest the same amount in public services for transport and we'll probably get a return for that investment instead of it being poured into a black hole

Bus Eireann and the semi state transport is in a cluster f##k by itself. By and far it has been a huge drain on state resources. Aer Lingus was similar over paid staff and pampeted staff that refused to change until nearly too late. Telecom Eireann was slightly different originally it was part of the P&T a civil service body that was made into a we!I state. When it was made a semi state it got the phone E service sorted it went from having manual switch board services to by 1990 having the most modern phone servicing Europe. Alot of the issue we have with modern Broadband services was that during the nineties it was fatten up for sale ( or maybe thinned down) where I vestment was stopped in the provision of telecoms.

There was a reluctance to undestand that due to our population density it was not possible to duplicate or tripiclate our copper and fibre network. Comreg spend years trying to encourage investment in secondary networks to find that with the exception of the larger cities in general commercial operations only wanted to piggyback on the main networks. When you consider that most of the money from its sale went into the pension reserve fund d that was raided by the EU during the economic crash and that it is going to cost the government a couple of billion to sort out the broadband mess are we any better off with the sale of it. As well the government had already spend hundreds of millions on telecoms infrastructure since it sold Telecom Eireann I think towards the end it used to make the highest dividend payment to the Exchequer of any semi state.

It stupid really as a country generally we sell the state bodies that make a profit and hold on to the unprofitable ones that are costing us billions.

Heisenberg1

devnull wrote: »

No actually you are wrong. You are confusing claims with the cost of insurance. They are two different things.

Self insured means they do not pay premiums on a monthly basis they simply settle claims as and when they occur from a reserve. This means they do not pay anything per month to keep their vehicles on the road.

Commercial operators have to pay monthly premiums or yearly whether they are involved in any incidents or not. It is illegal for them to self insure or to not pay premiums.

So instead of BE paying out insurance premiums they pay the claims instead of the insurance company paying them is that right ? Surely that way is more expensive to BE than paying premiums would be.

bigredone

Heisenberg1 wrote: »

So instead of BE paying out insurance premiums they pay the claims instead of the insurance company paying them is that right ? Surely that way is more expensive to BE than paying premiums would be.

Premiums never go up?
Insurance companies are not profit making?

bigredone

BE boils down to a choice of 2 options.
Have BE go in and out of every town,little village and accept the FTP in other words a public service company. Government will have to pay out a lot money.

BE run as a for profit company, wont be going in and out of every town,little village and a discount for the FTP.
Government will pay out much less money

Pick one , you cant have both.

devnull

Heisenberg1 wrote: »

So instead of BE paying out insurance premiums they pay the claims instead of the insurance company paying them is that right ? Surely that way is more expensive to BE than paying premiums would be.

According to wikipedia, BE have 1,300 vehicles.

In 2014 they paid €1.4m in insurance claims, with not too wildly different figures in previous years which equals just over €1000 per vehicle per year if you want to calculate it.

The fact that insurance claims went up to €7m a year later suggests that there were a larger number of accidents in 2015 and BE needs to take steps to reduce them to avoid a similar repeat by implementing an action plan to address that. Clearly there is a real issue there.

The other good thing about BE is that if there are incidents, it doesn't impact their insurance costs, if a commercial operator has one single crash, their premiums go up even further, this is not something BE have to worry about.

The commercial operators will argue it is folly that they have to pay huge sums every year or not be allowed to take to the road, and not have a single incident and simply see that money drop into a black hole, whilst BE/DB don't have such requirement.

bigredone wrote: »

Premiums never go up?
Insurance companies are not profit making?

BE do not use insurance companies, they do not pay premiums so this doesn't even come into it.

devnull

bigredone wrote: »

BE boils down to a choice of 2 options.
Have BE go in and out of every town,little village and accept the FTP in other words a public service company. Government will have to pay out a lot money.

BE run as a for profit company, wont be going in and out of every town,little village and a discount for the FTP.
Government will pay out much less money

Pick one , you cant have both.

You can and you do.

Expressway = Commercial Arm
Bus Eireann = PSO Arm.

Expressway acts as a commercial operator and as a commercially focused subsidiary
Bus Eireann acts as a public service operator which has it's losses covered by the state.

AlmightyCushion

devnull wrote: »

According to wikipedia, BE have 1,300 vehicles.

In 2014 they paid €1.4m in insurance claims, with not too wildly different figures in previous years which equals just over €100 per vehicle per year if you want to calculate it. I can tell you, that no commercial insurer is going to insure vehicles for that price or anywhere near it, but if you find an insurer offering it, feel free to show it.

The fact that insurance claims went up to €7m a year later suggests that there were a larger number of accidents in 2015 and BE needs to take steps to reduce them to avoid a similar repeat by implementing an action plan to address that. Clearly there is a real issue there.

The other good thing about BE is that if there are incidents, it doesn't impact their insurance costs, if a commercial operator has one single crash, their premiums go up even further, this is not something BE have to worry about.

The commercial operators will argue it is folly that they have to pay huge sums every year or not be allowed to take to the road, and not have a single incident and simply see that money drop into a black hole, whilst BE/DB don't have such requirement.



BE do not use insurance companies, they do not pay premiums so this doesn't even come into it.

Your figures are off, €1.4m for 1,300 vehicles works out at just over €1,000 per vehicle a year.

Infini

It may not be just that BE had more accidents as well you got compo culture alive and well and rewards in the newspapers seem to show increasing payouts hence higher insurance etc. People being rewarded for their own stupidity and ridiculous payouts for minor accidents instead of being forced to have some personal responsibilty hasnt helped.

Also the whole Telecom Eireann argument is rather faulty considering how many got burned back then as well.....

devnull

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

Your figures are off, €1.4m for 1,300 vehicles works out at just over €1,000 per vehicle a year.

My bad, I will fix it up - thanks!

devnull

Infini2 wrote: »

It may not be just that BE had more accidents as well you got compo culture alive and well and rewards in the newspapers seem to show increasing payouts hence higher insurance etc. People being rewarded for their own stupidity and ridiculous payouts for minor accidents instead of being forced to have some personal responsibilty hasnt helped..

You won't hear me arguing about that, the compensation culture in this country is really crazy, however it effects all operators in some way, whether that is through premium payments or via claims at the end of the day.

I have issues with the courts and judges in general in Ireland because I feel too many people are treated too generously and there is too much light touch and huge payouts, but that discussion isn't for C+T!

Idbatterim

Were I transport minister, i'd argue to finance and the Taoiseach that we should do a zero based budget for Bus Eireann, start from scratch and build Bus Eireann 2.0 get rid of all the rot and if the unions refuse to agree to that, implement a package of unilateral cuts to BE and do competition with expressway

I agree and I have proposed the same. We will be back to square one every few years, its typical Ireland. They have to break even, so any damage the unions do the company, will come out of employees pay, watch them keep in line then! I wouldnt be arguing for this if I thought they were underpaid, many are likely massively over paid, there have been quotes that the clerical staff, are way out of line pay wise. Youd have to ask, given in this country how BE do a ****e job, have ridiculous pay and nothing is ever enough. Honestly, why not just privatise the lot and be done with it?

Heisenberg1

bigredone wrote: »

Premiums never go up?
Insurance companies are not profit making?

Sure they go up I'm saying that when a company is paying out claims from its balance sheet rather than paying premiums the costs would be substantially more.

Del.Monte

The fiasco in Bus Eireann will be put in the ha'penny place when the Irish Rail train hits the buffers shortly.

end of the road

Bambi wrote: »

Most of us can remember when Bus Eireann had no significant competition and the shambles they offered to the public as a service

You see the old card that letting these clusterf**k semi states go to the wall will result in instant Thatcherism just won't play anymore. We've all seen the sectors that were once semi state shambles forced to open up to competition and the customer benefited from it enormously. Think back to when getting a landline required six months of your life and a letter from the parish priest/local TD. I remember being given the bums rush for months by telecom eireann about moving the phone line when moving house until a relative who was high up in there had a word and there was a bevy of engineers out the next day courtseying and falling over themselves. Them days are gone thank god, bar the transport sector.

public transport or at least subsidized public transport cannot be compared to telecoms. the fact is bus eireann have always had competition from operators, even when it was simply under the CIE brand. competition isn't the issue for me, it's those wanting rid of bus eireann altogether, considering we have witnessed from britain what happens when you rely only on private companies.

Bambi wrote: »

Once Bus Eireann is consigned to history, we can still invest the same amount in public services for transport and we'll probably get a return for that investment instead of it being poured into a black hole

britain thought the same.

Idbatterim wrote: »

I agree and I have proposed the same. We will be back to square one every few years, its typical Ireland. They have to break even, so any damage the unions do the company, will come out of employees pay, watch them keep in line then! I wouldnt be arguing for this if I thought they were underpaid, many are likely massively over paid, there have been quotes that the clerical staff, are way out of line pay wise. Youd have to ask, given in this country how BE do a ****e job, have ridiculous pay and nothing is ever enough.

would this be according to the rags? the middle management and high management may be on ridiculous pay, but the ground staff aren't. whether it is state or private companies, management will earn high money.

Idbatterim wrote: »

Honestly, why not just privatise the lot and be done with it?

because it would solve nothing, it's a solution looking for a problem.

Heisenberg1

Del.Monte wrote: »

The fiasco in Bus Eireann will be put in the ha'penny place when the Irish Rail train hits the buffers shortly.

How so?

Del.Monte

Heisenberg1 wrote: »

How so?

Rail route closures are permanent and more emotive. Losses at Irish Rail are out of control and vast amounts of cash are needed to just keep the existing network safe ...do you need more?

n97 mini

Del.Monte wrote: »

Rail route closures are permanent and more emotive. Losses at Irish Rail are out of control and vast amounts of cash are needed to just keep the existing network safe ...do you need more?

Which brings me to something else: taxis. At €550 per person per journey on the Nenagh branch it would be cheaper to let people buy their ticket (or get it free on the FTP) at the station, which then would entitle (there's that word again) them to get a "free" taxi to their destination station. Throw multiple occupancy into the mix and it works out better again.

Wondering could this be applied to some of the more rural BE routes, resulting in savings for the taxpayer?

Infini

Del.Monte wrote: »

Rail route closures are permanent and more emotive. Losses at Irish Rail are out of control and vast amounts of cash are needed to just keep the existing network safe ...do you need more?

Losses arent so much out of control as was the butchering of the subvention to inflate debts and a recession reducing numbers travelling all the while services remained more or less at the same level even while the company shed staff. Maybe if we had foward thinking in this country and started investing and focusing populations near these lines they actually might do better rail hasnt the mobility of buses either.

end of the road

n97 mini wrote: »

Which brings me to something else: taxis. At €550 per person per journey on the Nenagh branch it would be cheaper to let people buy their ticket (or get it free on the FTP) at the station, which then would entitle (there's that word again) them to get a "free" taxi to their destination station. Throw multiple occupancy into the mix and it works out better again.

Wondering could this be applied to some of the more rural BE routes, resulting in savings for the taxpayer?

ah, we are still believeing this "550 euros per person per journey" claim, i see. i doubt your taxi idea would lead to much savings over all once you add everything up.

n97 mini

end of the road wrote: »

ah, we are still believeing this "550 euros per person per journey" claim, i see. i doubt your taxi idea would lead to much savings over all once you add everything up.

I admire your selective belief and disbelief of IE's claims when it suits you.

Have a read of this to see how bad finances can become.
http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-18032721

Doubt we'd let the situation get that bad here. Lines would be closed first.

One thing is for sure, the Roscrea branch, like the Waterford Rosslare line, will close. It's not if, it's when. So start campaigning for those taxis now.

end of the road

n97 mini wrote: »

I admire your selective belief and disbelief of IE's claims when it suits you.

you are mixing me up with someone else. i never have believed anything out of the mouths of irish rail management and never will.

n97 mini wrote: »

One thing is for sure, the Roscrea branch, like the Waterford Rosslare line, will close. It's not if, it's when. So start campaigning for those taxis now.

i won't be campaigning for the taxis. a waste of my time.
it's news to me that someone is saying that the ballybroaphy branch won't close, i haven't read such claims on this or other threads on here.

jimmycrackcorm

bigredone wrote:

BE boils down to a choice of 2 options. Have BE go in and out of every town,little village and accept the FTP in other words a public service company. Government will have to pay out a lot

BE run as a for profit company, wont be going in and out of every town,little village and a discount for the FTP. Government will pay out much less money

Pick one , you cant have both.

Can we have option 3 which is the government licence and pay a subvention to private operators for routes.

That would get rid of the fat.