Go-Ahead Dublin City Routes - Updates and Discussion

MJohnston

dashcamdanny wrote: »

The wages are considerably less for the ground workers .. Irish residents. Now doing a job they could have been doing for Dublin Bus with better T & Cs and wages.

Dublin Bus has got alot better in recent years in quailty of service and still has work to do. But paying people less is not the way to fix it.

I'm sorry, but what has that got to do with your original point that people apparently need to see an Irish company run bus services over a foreign one?


You think foreign companies are more likely to push for lower wages than Irish companies? I see absolutely zero evidence of that being true.

XPS_Zero

It's not full privatization though, we've tried that in the UK we know it was a disaster, we also know total state monopoly with unchecked union power dominating the entire network and holding the public to ransom is a disaster.

This is a happy medium, one can disagree but I think it's a happy medium.

We do it with other things too, our hospitals and schools and Unis are not all nationalized they are technically independent entities, often legally charities, with state funding (even the ones erroneously called "private" which are really fee paying). Plenty of countries that are known as big lefty socialist places do it with their healthcare system, private hospitals with public funding or a mix with manditory insurance (not a model I'd advocate I prefer single payer but still it happens)


The system we had before the NTA was an utter embarrasement, and to think the govt of the day didn't even trust it's own rail company to run Metro and Luas so had to invent a new one out of whole cloth, that alone was a devestating indictment of the previous system.
The NTA are not perfect, I can see them sitting in a board room removed from the realities of the service IE would work with and know about, which is why they need to talk to each other all the time and plan together, but they are better than what we have before.

ffsake even under the much vaunted Luas model we still have them whinging about their f----g lunch!!!!

end of the road

XPS_Zero wrote: »

It's not full privatization though, we've tried that in the UK we know it was a disaster, we also know total state monopoly with unchecked union power dominating the entire network and holding the public to ransom is a disaster.

This is a happy medium, one can disagree but I think it's a happy medium.

We do it with other things too, our hospitals and schools and Unis are not all nationalized they are technically independent entities, often legally charities, with state funding (even the ones erroneously called "private" which are really fee paying). Plenty of countries that are known as big lefty socialist places do it with their healthcare system, private hospitals with public funding or a mix with manditory insurance (not a model I'd advocate I prefer single payer but still it happens)


The system we had before the NTA was an utter embarrasement, and to think the govt of the day didn't even trust it's own rail company to run Metro and Luas so had to invent a new one out of whole cloth, that alone was a devestating indictment of the previous system.
The NTA are not perfect, I can see them sitting in a board room removed from the realities of the service IE would work with and know about, which is why they need to talk to each other all the time and plan together, but they are better than what we have before.

ffsake even under the much vaunted Luas model we still have them whinging about their f----g lunch!!!!

there is no unchecked union power in ireland. there is plenty of legislation around union activity. this supposed "holding the public to ransom" is not something tendering would stop.
my understanding is the reason for luas being separated out was to prevent any losses falling on CIE. it sounds more plausible then the government not trusting it's own rail company, a company which is ultimately in the situation it is because of the very government that owns it, who are either to stupid or to disinterested to insure it actually works.
this mythical "luas model" aka tendering, (the tendering which remember i said) wasn't invented in ireland and isn't a unique being designed for luas, was never going to stop industrial issues. anyone who thought otherwise was not living in the real world. what insures no industrial issues is a good management which talks with their staff, listens to their concerns and works with them to come up with a solution. management which make a genuine effort.

Tarabuses

MJohnston wrote: »

No, apologies, looks like you're right:



At a guess, someone has input the data incorrectly. Wonder if that's showing up on RTPI screens too though!

The planner is still showing Sandymount for 175 buses heading towards City West however the RTPI screen in Dundrum shows Kingswood. The screen in UCD doesn't show 175 times at all but has an information line saying that the 175 is now in operation!

Qrt

Tarabuses wrote: »

The planner is still showing Sandymount for 175 buses heading towards City West however the RTPI screen in Dundrum shows Kingswood. The screen in UCD doesn't show 175 times at all but has an information line saying that the 175 is now in operation!

Kingswood?? They ought to change that, considering it's a completely different Kingswood to that of the luas stop.

Tarabuses

Qrt wrote: »

Kingswood?? They ought to change that, considering it's a completely different Kingswood to that of the luas stop.

Sorry, I should have said Kingswood Avenue.

dashcamdanny

MJohnston wrote: »

I'm sorry, but what has that got to do with your original point that people apparently need to see an Irish company run bus services over a foreign one?


You think foreign companies are more likely to push for lower wages than Irish companies? I see absolutely zero evidence of that being true.

We already have a state owned company already doing it! With 1000s of people employed. Getting a decent wage.

How can you see no evidence? Please consider the future... And how our sneaky politicians have always operated. Privatising State assets is not in the public interest as past events has clearly showed. New owners are driven by the need to increase shareholder returns. Full stop.



A driver in Go-ahead has a work his/her way upto 32k after a few years. With terrible T&Cs

In Dublin that means a family income support from welfare for a man/woman trying to provide for their family.

If they tender and win again, that means many DB drivers will have to transfer or be redundant, and have a crazy drop in wages after one year.


This has me and many others very very worried . Im bloody terrified to be honest.

I am well aware there are many, (especially here) that have a big problem with Dublin Bus for some reason or other, but the company is turning around with regard service, especially with the new blood coming in all the time.

FG selling us off and providing a watered down version of privatisation which will send large amounts of tax payers money to the rich and less to the guy working. In this case, a foreign companies shareholders.

And will ultimately effect the service

Stephen15

dashcamdanny wrote: »

We already have a state owned company already doing it! With 1000s of people employed. Getting a decent wage.

How can you see no evidence? Please consider the future... And how our sneaky politicians have always operated. Privatising State assets is not in the public interest as past events has clearly showed. New owners are driven by the need to increase shareholder returns. Full stop.



A driver in Go-ahead has a work his/her way upto 32k after a few years. With terrible T&Cs

In Dublin that means a family income support from welfare for a man/woman trying to provide for their family.

If they tender and win again, that means many DB drivers will have to transfer or be redundant, and have a crazy drop in wages after one year.

Not true if any current DB workers did have to switch over they would be entitled to a TUPE agreement whereby they will be entitled to the same T+Cs and pension as they are already getting.

Happens all the time in London Ile give a hypothetical example if Joe Bloggs drove the number 20 bus which is operated by Metroline and supposing Metroline lost the tender for that route to Arriva then Joe Bloggs would continue driving the number 20 bus with the same pay terms and conditions and pension he would get from Metroline. The same would apply if DB employees had to switch over to Go-Ahead or any other private operator. This is something you are entitled to under European law.

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/employment/employment_rights_and_conditions/contracts_of_employment/transfer_of_business.html

MJohnston

dashcamdanny wrote: »

We already have a state owned company already doing it! With 1000s of people employed. Getting a decent wage.

How can you see no evidence? Please consider the future... And how our sneaky politicians have always operated. Privatising State assets is not in the public interest as past events has clearly showed. New owners are driven by the need to increase shareholder returns. Full stop.



A driver in Go-ahead has a work his/her way upto 32k after a few years. With terrible T&Cs

In Dublin that means a family income support from welfare for a man/woman trying to provide for their family.

If they tender and win again, that means many DB drivers will have to transfer or be redundant, and have a crazy drop in wages after one year.


This has me and many others very very worried . Im bloody terrified to be honest.

I am well aware there are many, (especially here) that have a big problem with Dublin Bus for some reason or other, but the company is turning around with regard service, especially with the new blood coming in all the time.

FG selling us off and providing a watered down version of privatisation which will send large amounts of tax payers money to the rich and less to the guy working. In this case, a foreign companies shareholders.

And will ultimately effect the service

Again, just ranting, nothing about why you think an Irish private company running these routes would be better than a foreign one? Because that was your original claim. Feel free to reverse course on that one, as it seems you want to now that you're raving on about private companies in general.

devnull

Personally I believe the quality of service offered to the public is more important than anything else, I note that the poster making the point about privatisation seemed to be more concerned with the welfare of the staff, rather than the public of which the service is set up to serve. The public must always come first in any public service.

dfx-

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

It still seems nuts to me that Dublin Bus are disposing of what are apparently still perfectly serviceable vehicles (the AV's) that are still in daily use elsewhere, and replacing them with inferior rubbish (IMO anyway) at taxpayer expense.

There's one argument about the pollution levels that can't be argued. The other stuff about attracting people out of cars or their smell or ventilation isn't a thing. Never mind losing the VTs

There's hundreds of them, possibly thousands in the UK. I've a wide selection of 18 year old buses to get home each day. The DB buses are all in better state and have bench seats too.

Probably a hangover from the state of the KDs when they were the same age that an arbitrary 'replacement cycle' was put in place of twelve-ish years..

devnull

dfx- wrote: »

There's hundreds of them, possibly thousands in the UK. I've a wide selection of 18 year old buses to get home each day. The DB buses are all in better state and have bench seats too.

Show someone who hasn't used a bus for a while an AV and the inside of it and they'll think of all the negative perceptions of the past and stick with their car, because quite frankly it looks similar to what it did 20 years ago inside. I know people have been attracted out of cars by the new vehicles because my friends and colleagues are some of the people who have done it.

What newer buses are doing is showing people who would never use a bus that things have changed and they have personal space, Wifi, USB sockets, brighter interiors, passenger information etc. And getting people to shift from cars is vital to stop gridlock in our city.

Appreciate that there are a group of people who feel different, but generally most of these are people who are using the bus, have to use the bus, or are enthusiasts, I know many I work with who have switched because the modernising of interiors because it makes them feel (rightly or wrongly) something changed.

It's true there are ALX400s still around in the UK, but I don't see any ex DB vehicles in the UK that work anything like the stressful duties that they would have done under DB, where they have a very short time between runs and can be on the route for 12 hours a dat at least.

Qrt

devnull wrote: »

Show someone who hasn't used a bus for a while an AV and the inside of it and they'll think of all the negative perceptions of the past and stick with their car, because quite frankly it looks similar to what it did 20 years ago inside.

What newer buses are doing is showing people who would never use a bus that things have changed and they have personal space, Wifi, USB sockets, brighter interiors, passenger information etc. And getting people to shift from cars is vital to stop gridlock in our city.

Appreciate that there are a group of people who feel different, but generally these are people who are using the bus or have to use the bus, or are enthusiasts, I know many I work with who have switched because the modernising of interiors.

It's true there are ALX400s still around in the UK, but I don't see any ex DB vehicles in the UK that work anything like the stressful duties that they would have done under DB.

True about the interior. I always feel a bit queasy on the older buses. Not a fan.

Xterminator

devnull wrote: »

Personally I believe the quality of service offered to the public is more important than anything else, I note that the poster making the point about privatisation seemed to be more concerned with the welfare of the staff, rather than the public of which the service is set up to serve. The public must always come first in any public service.

IMO that has been the greatest problem with Dublin Bus services in the last 20 years - they are not run for the convenience of the customers.

They think nothing of tossing all the passengers off to another bus when shifts are ending and they are nearing the end of the route, and dont always check there are enough seats free etc.

When a dublin bus arrives and the last service was late/didn't turn up my expereince is the driver doesn't care, if anyone asks they say things like 'not my fault' or 'nothing to do with me'.

This happened to me on a private bus route and the driver apologized to everyone he let on, without prompting. Because he recognised he is the face of the company he represents.

I don't care if the service is run by a semi state or private company, im not wedded to any particular ideology. Just offer a good service.

If go-ahead dont offer a decent rate of pay they wont be able to attract drivers, meet their obligations and they will be fined, and possibly lose their routes. That's what i like about the tendering process NTR use.

punisher5112

Stephen15 wrote: »

Not true if any current DB workers did have to switch over they would be entitled to a TUPE agreement whereby they will be entitled to the same T+Cs and pension as they are already getting.

Happens all the time in London Ile give a hypothetical example if Joe Bloggs drove the number 20 bus which is operated by Metroline and supposing Metroline lost the tender for that route to Arriva then Joe Bloggs would continue driving the number 20 bus with the same pay terms and conditions and pension he would get from Metroline. The same would apply if DB employees had to switch over to Go-Ahead or any other private operator. This is something you are entitled to under European law.

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/employment/employment_rights_and_conditions/contracts_of_employment/transfer_of_business.html

They only keep current employment conditions for 1 year.
They would then fall under a new contract with the new employer.

It is the start of low low wages and it's a joke to be honest.

GM228

punisher5112 wrote: »

They only keep current employment conditions for 1 year.
They would then fall under a new contract with the new employer

Totally incorrect, the terms remain for the term of employment unless they are changed with agreement through collective bargaining for example, but even in that case they can only be changed for the better, not to the detriment of the employee.

This is well established both in Ireland, the UK and the rest on the EU and held by every EU states national courts as well as the European Court of Justice.

AlekSmart

punisher5112 wrote: »

They only keep current employment conditions for 1 year.
They would then fall under a new contract with the new employer.

It is the start of low low wages and it's a joke to be honest.

The 1 year red herring constantly surfaces in relation to TUPE.

There is NO time limit on the maintenance of the transferree's Contractual Terms.

The is,however,provision for the alteration of such terms,by way of collective bargaining,or by the new employer being able to prove that the maintenance of such Conditions is counter to the Companies ability to function.

TUPE legislation is not a single A4 piece of paper,and has to be approached with caution by BOTH parties to it.

It may be prophetic,but Go Ahead has some relevant experience of similar occurences in it's,not dissimilar,Singapore Operation.

https://www.todayonline.com/singapore/go-aheads-bus-driver-shortage-does-not-breach-contract-terms-lta

Whilst noting the overwhelming sense of doom'n gloom surrounding the Dublin BMO process,I do not share it.

It is,not for the first time,useful to take note of what has happened,and is happening in Singapore,particularly in relation to Bus Drivers Wages,Terms & Conditions post Tendering.

https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/sbs-transit-bumps-up-bus-captain-pay-enhances-benefits-7955764

SINGAPORE: From Wednesday (Jun 1), bus captains that join SBS Transit will be able to earn a gross monthly salary of up to S$3,460 within their first year, more than 15 per cent higher than before.

In a joint news release on Wednesday, SBS Transit and the the National Transport Workers Union (NTWU) said Singaporeans and Singapore Permanent Residents (PR) that join as bus captains will start at a monthly basic salary of S$1,950, which is S$175 more than the current S$1,775 starting salary. They will also receive a sign-on bonus of S$3,000.

https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/smrt-raises-starting-pay-for-bus-captains-to-match-competitors-7890226

This comes on the heels of similar pay hikes by Singapore's two other public bus operators as competition for local bus captains intensifies. SBS Transit increased its starting salary from S$1,775 to S$1,950 in June while UK-based bus operator Go-Ahead increased its starting salary from the S$1,865 it announced in February to S$1,950 in July.

Interestingly,in this increasingly competitive Job market,the non-pay elements also are improving...

The public transport operator also announced a slew of other enhancements to its staff benefits, which will take effect between Sep 1 to Jan 1, 2017.

It will be raising the number of days of annual leave for SMRT Buses employees to up to 21 days, which is seven days more than currently offered, depending on their years of service. This is in addition to two days of eldercare leave.

All staff will be given free travel on all public bus and train networks throughout the year.

The company will also roll out an enhanced flexible benefits scheme - E-FLEX - for all of its Singaporean and PR bus captains. Under the scheme, bus captains will receive credits of between S$350 and S$1,050, depending on their years of service, which they can use to buy portable medical insurance through the Integrated Shield Plans and enjoy better medical coverage and ward eligibility if hospitalised.

With this new scheme, along with their existing MediShield Life and insurance riders provided by SMRT, Singaporean and PR staff will enjoy full hospitalisation coverage with no deductibles or co-payment for B2 wards at restructured hospitals.

The "new" operators,including Go-Ahead and Tower Transit are unable to ignore the prevailing market conditions,and are also competing for a largely static pool of suitably qualified Busdrivers...dare I say,just like here

https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/tower-transit-raises-bus-drivers-basic-pay-to-more-than-s-2-000-9018788

SINGAPORE: Public bus operator Tower Transit Singapore said on Monday (Jul 10) it will raise the salaries of its bus drivers and other staff by 3.7 per cent – bumping up the basic pay for its new bus drivers to more than S$2,000 for the first time.

The annual wage increment will benefit more than 800 staff in Singapore, the UK-headquartered transport operator said.

ALL of this has occurred in the wake of the first tranche of Bus Market Tendering in Singapore.
This is not to suggest that Dublin's BMO process will result in the same outcome,BUT,the overall situation,particularly in relation to qualified Staff and the requirement for Bus Service expansion are significantly similar.

I would suggest that my colleagues spend less time listening to disgruntled UK Bus people,each one keen to relive the pre-deregulation days and instead focus on the present day,and events unfolding further afield,not all of which indicate the end of the World as we know it.

GM228

AlekSmart wrote: »

The is,however,provision for the alteration of such terms,by way of collective bargaining,or by the new employer being able to prove that the maintenance of such Conditions is counter to the Companies ability to function.

That is something specific to the UK and not the rest of the EU when dealing with changing T&Cs.

It can be applied for economic, technical or organisational reasons and is known as the "ETO Defence", strictly speaking it is not in compliance with the TUPE Directive (2001/23/EC), that was never the intended use of the defence although the UK courts and EAT have upheld such defences.

In Ireland and the rest of the EU the ETO Defence applies only to dismissals which is in accordance with the Directive. A dismissal due to TUPE is automatically unfair unless the employer successfully raises the defence.

punisher5112

I was told the union didn't sign off on it so deal is 1 year.

AlekSmart

GM228 wrote: »

That is something specific to the UK and not the rest of the EU when dealing with changing T&Cs.

It can be applied for economic, technical or organisational reasons and is known as the "ETO Defence", strictly speaking it is not in compliance with the TUPE Directive (2001/23/EC), that was never the intended use of the defence although the UK courts and EAT have upheld such defences.

In Ireland and the rest of the EU the ETO Defence applies only to dismissals which is in accordance with the Directive. A dismissal due to TUPE is automatically unfair unless the employer successfully raises the defence.

As of now,my understanding is that the ETO defence remains untested in the Irish environment.

As with all such legislation,it will be a work-in-progress and only set-in-stone when suitably proven in the Courts.

It is somewhat risky to portray TUPE,as an all encompassing protection guaranteeing a transferee's T's & C's in perpetutity.

It provides a good deal of protection,particularly in that fraught period at actual handover,however ALL Employment Contracts are subject to alteration as the employer/employee relationship changes.

Currently in the BAC-Go Ahead situation I see little sign that it will be utilized,as I believe that GAI will have to adapt their Employment Package before BAC do,assuming that is,the NTA remain hands-off in the process ?

Yggr of Asgard

I think that some posters casual racism (foreign companies are evil) might be motivated (and possible understandable) out of fear for their own position in a company that currently is providing services and might soon find that is cannot compete anymore due to cost structure or inflexibility of the workforce when it comes to new work practices.

For a person in the company obviously, its decent wages because there was no other option and the company had to pay what the workforce demanded as otherwise, they could not get the staff. However with competition in some form or another market rates adapt (not always down, sometimes even up as there is more demand for a qualified workforce) so there is fear.

Unless someone can correct me, nobody did get forced to join the new providers and it looks they are not having trouble to recruit on the T&C they offer, in fact they were overwhelmed with the applications. If we would force people to move to a worse condition than this would be a different discussion, but that is not the case here and there is legislation (while untested) to ensure this can not happen.

In the meantime, we get better buses (thanks to the TFI) and a pay for performance model in which the NTA can ensure the public get's value for money. We will need to see in a couple of weeks if the new operator is providing better customer service and how they get on.

I am happy that we are giving another operator a chance to provide services. The services are there for the public (including me) and I pay for it (either with a fare or my taxes) so I want a value for money service and if that includes scaling down an operation that is too expensive or inflexible than that has to happen.

Again, I appreciate it's difficult for some individuals but overall it hopefully improves the overall delivery of service and results in cost savings.

Yggr of Asgard

dashcamdanny wrote: »

We already have a state owned company already doing it! With 1000s of people employed. Getting a decent wage.

That is your opinion, mine as Shareholder of that company I am disputing that I as I think that they are not providing value for money and are paying a too high wage with inflexible working practices. But I'm not advocating of taking back that what negotiated.

dashcamdanny wrote: »

How can you see no evidence? Please consider the future... And how our sneaky politicians have always operated. Privatising State assets is not in the public interest as past events has clearly showed. New owners are driven by the need to increase shareholder returns. Full stop.

And if we had an effective government than state-owned or controlled companies would try to do the same for the good of the overall public, not those who work there. But unfortunately, our governments do not understand how to run companies which is why we have situations across the country where we have challenges including bundled privatizations.

dashcamdanny wrote: »

A driver in Go-ahead has a work his/her way upto 32k after a few years. With terrible T&Cs

And yet they received an overwhelming amount of applications and had no trouble finding people who want to work there.

dashcamdanny wrote: »

If they tender and win again, that means many DB drivers will have to transfer or be redundant, and have a crazy drop in wages after one year.

That is not true as discussed above.

dashcamdanny wrote: »

This has me and many others very very worried . Im bloody terrified to be honest.

Rightfully so and that needs to be appreciated but your fear is no different than the fear of anybody else in sectors where there is competition with the need for cost reductions and new work practices. We are not living in a system that guarantees work and some of us are used to that for all of their life, other just discover it now.

dashcamdanny wrote: »

I am well aware there are many, (especially here) that have a big problem with Dublin Bus for some reason or other, but the company is turning around with regard service, especially with the new blood coming in all the time.

There have been improvements (thanks to TFI/NTA) with better buses, better infrastructure and also better drivers (at least on the route I use) but too often it's still the good old DB. Buses not showing or 3 in a row. And sometimes I even prefer DB over, for example, Swords Express, but we can not wait and starting to source the right provider is the right thing to do for our nations transport system.

dashcamdanny wrote: »

FG selling us off and providing a watered down version of privatisation which will send large amounts of tax payers money to the rich and less to the guy working. In this case, a foreign companies shareholders.

And previously it sends it to the well paid and well-secured people working for DB. And does it matter if the profits are going to an Irish Company or a foreign company? Giving that most likely the bus you drive has been partly financed by the EU this is kind of a strange point. EU give me money, but please ensure only Irish companies can reap the reward of your investment.

dashcamdanny wrote: »

And will ultimately effect the service

Hopefully for the better.

end of the road

Yggr of Asgard wrote: »

That is your opinion, mine as Shareholder of that company I am disputing that I as I think that they are not providing value for money and are paying a too high wage with inflexible working practices. But I'm not advocating of taking back that what negotiated.

except they aren't paying a to high wage at all, but the correct wage. what are these inflexible working practices you speak of? how are they not providing value for money? fares are decided by the NTA and are unlikely to go down, so we should discount fares as a reason for now unless a miracle does happen there. the unions will be bringing up the wages at any new company who would ever tender for routes, so i think we should discount that as a reason as well.

Yggr of Asgard wrote: »

And yet they received an overwhelming amount of applications and had no trouble finding people who want to work there.

that's because the wages and terms will be going up. the dogs on the street know this.

Yggr of Asgard wrote: »

Rightfully so and that needs to be appreciated but your fear is no different than the fear of anybody else in sectors where there is competition with the need for cost reductions and new work practices. We are not living in a system that guarantees work and some of us are used to that for all of their life, other just discover it now.

it's not rightfully so that people should be in fear.
also, there is no actual competition as such, it's more competition in the loose sense of the word. also, there is unlikely to be any cost reductions coming via this process long term, and as for these supposed new working practices, if they negatively effect workers then the unions will be insuring they don't happen.

Yggr of Asgard wrote: »

There have been improvements (thanks to TFI/NTA) with better buses, better infrastructure and also better drivers (at least on the route I use) but too often it's still the good old DB. Buses not showing or 3 in a row. And sometimes I even prefer DB over, for example, Swords Express, but we can not wait and starting to source the right provider is the right thing to do for our nations transport system.

we sourced the right provider for our nation, it's called dublin bus. the provider operates to the specified contract, and can do nothing differently to that contract from what i can gather.

Yggr of Asgard wrote: »

And previously it sends it to the well paid and well-secured people working for DB.

only a tiny proportion of it, and those dublin bus workers are spending most, probably all, their money in ireland.

Yggr of Asgard wrote: »

And does it matter if the profits are going to an Irish Company or a foreign company? Giving that most likely the bus you drive has been partly financed by the EU this is kind of a strange point. EU give me money, but please ensure only Irish companies can reap the reward of your investment.

it does matter yes . with an irish company, all the money is more likely to stay in the irish economy. with a foreign company, some of that money will have to leave the economy to go to the shareholders.

Yggr of Asgard wrote: »

Hopefully for the better.

the service improvements are down to the contract, not tendering, as the NTA decide everything.

dublinman1990

I saw one of GAI's single deck training buses out on the Blackrock bypass this afternoon.

I presume that this bus was going out from Dun Laoghaire as I hadn't seen any other GA buses on my travels in Blackrock.

There is a photograph on Flickr of a GA London Gemini in it's red livery doing some route training in Bray a few weeks ago.

punisher5112

dublinman1990 wrote: »

I saw one of GAI's single deck training buses out on the Blackrock bypass this afternoon.

I presume that this bus was going out from Dun Laoghaire as I hadn't seen any other GA buses on my travels in Blackrock.

There is a photograph on Flickr of a GA London Gemini in it's red livery doing some route training in Bray a few weeks ago.

They are all over the city and outskirts.

.G.

punisher5112 wrote:

I was told the union didn't sign off on it so deal is 1 year.

If this is actually the case, whats the point of being in a union if their actions subject their members to worse protections than the law is supposed to provide?

punisher5112

superg wrote: »

If this is actually the case, whats the point of being in a union if their actions subject their members to worse protections than the law is supposed to provide?

I'm going to see can I get more information on it.

dfx-

devnull wrote: »

Show someone who hasn't used a bus for a while an AV and the inside of it and they'll think of all the negative perceptions of the past and stick with their car, because quite frankly it looks similar to what it did 20 years ago inside. I know people have been attracted out of cars by the new vehicles because my friends and colleagues are some of the people who have done it.

What newer buses are doing is showing people who would never use a bus that things have changed and they have personal space, Wifi, USB sockets, brighter interiors, passenger information etc. And getting people to shift from cars is vital to stop gridlock in our city.

Appreciate that there are a group of people who feel different, but generally most of these are people who are using the bus, have to use the bus, or are enthusiasts, I know many I work with who have switched because the modernising of interiors because it makes them feel (rightly or wrongly) something changed.

It's true there are ALX400s still around in the UK, but I don't see any ex DB vehicles in the UK that work anything like the stressful duties that they would have done under DB, where they have a very short time between runs and can be on the route for 12 hours a dat at least.

wrongly.

Newer buses at 400k a go. Heck of a price for a small sliver of anecdotal customers who 'feel different' about WiFi and USB charging.

devnull

dfx- wrote: »

wrongly. Newer buses at 400k a go. Heck of a price for a small sliver of anecdotal customers who 'feel different' about WiFi and USB charging.

I just know what many people have told me or I've heard being said about people who haven't taken buses for many years, they think something has changed and the changes have helped to shake off negative perceptions of the past. I'm not saying the perceptions are right, but they certainly are there from your average person who hasn't used the bus for ages. I know 20-30 people now who will give buses a time of day that they never did in the past because of improvements over the last few years. Newer vehicles are also cheaper to run and are saving operators a large amount in fuel and maintenance.

We must get people out of their cars to stop the city grinding to a halt if we don't encourage modal shift and honestly, stepping on a 2006 AX literally says nothing has changed on vehicles since the early 90s. In the UK, National Express platinum brand, Arriva Saphire and Stagecoach Gold and the Witch Way in Lancashire to name a few have been very successful in attracting modal switch from people who haven't been on a bus in a long time with modern vehicles.

The good thing i slowly I feel that Dublin is moving towards a transport system that we see in other European cities and it cannot come soon enough, it looks like we might get fully multi-mode tickets as standard soon, a network that doesn't just revolve around the city center and also a more integrated system which firmly puts the public first rather than any individual operator or other interests. There's still a long way to go to achieve that and issues to be resolved but there are signs there and good progress has been made in the last few years and there is still a good way to go, but I see encouraging signs.

Stephen15

dfx- wrote: »

wrongly.

Newer buses at 400k a go. Heck of a price for a small sliver of anecdotal customers who 'feel different' about WiFi and USB charging.

Nonsense older buses are gonna have to be replaced sooner or later by new buses which believe it or not cost money.

If newer buses increase customer satisfaction then that's an added bonus. More importantly newer buses are more fuel efficient and cheaper to maintain. If they kept an old fleet on the road then they would cost a hell of a lot to maintain and buses would be frequently breaking down causing passengers to get even more disgruntled. There would also be a safety risk older buses have tendency to go up in flames if heavily used.

Now is the best time to replace the older buses in the fleet while some money can recouped from their sale rather than running them into the scrap heap as you appear to be suggesting.