Bus Eireann

Dr Martin wrote: »

Well if Bus Eireann can't put up the prices then AXE the loss making routes.

which loss making routes.

end of the road wrote: »

they won't be crawling back begging for anything. their pay is as low as it's going to go as it is competitive with the rest of the industry. the issues with rosters and overtime are being dealt with. your dream of low wages will not be realised, time to move on. workers rights, terms and conditions will remain competitive and to a good standard. not their fault that you can't be bothered trying to improve your lot. the rest of us won't be dragged down to your level.

Simple change work practices to improve on road driver hours, which reduces overtime and helps BE costs. BE drivers should approach that of private drivers.

abandon routes that are not cost effective and NAT can offer them to the private sector

Slim the workforce as productivity improvements mean less does more

remove BE from ancillary business , I even would suggest that the rural routes be hived into a seperate company


Alternatively withdraw BE from commercial Express way business and leave it handle PSO obligations

The Raptor wrote: »

Saw a poor soul standing at the bus stop in the morning. I thought i would say it to her because she would have been waiting all day.

Anyway, how long is the strike going on for? The last strike was a few days here and then. But what about this time?

until workers realise the Gov isnt going too give them any more money

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

If a route is not cost-effective, why would the private sector take it on?

Also, what alternative do you put in place for people depenign on these routes?

because clearly the private sector can operate routes at a lower cost. Thats clearly why BE is having such issues, i mean like " hello "

stand clear, luggage doors operating

that would mean the majority of routes in the country having to be withdrawn. meaning i would have to face a huge increase in some form of tax to create the extra road space for extra cars.

Not at all, the vast majority of roads in ireland and especially the new motorways are operating way under capacity , leaving aside certain issue in the GDA

I also meant that private operators are well capable of operating interurban routes and PSO supported routes

the private sector can only operate profitable routes at lower cost. for loss making/subsidized routes, the subsidy has to increase so the company can make a profit. a profit they are duty bound to make for their shareholders, and which the tax payer is duty bound to insure is made at all costs if we are expecting them to operate what should be operated by a publically owned bus company. leave the private sector to develop their own routes, and the public company operate routes the tax payers have to subsidize, to insure our money goes to something we own.

The pursuit of profit is an entirely honourable and legal and encourage undertaking , so less leave your well thumbed copy of Das Kapital to one side thanks

Private operators are manifestly more cost effective then BE as BE cant compete and private operators are presumably also making a return

note that a private company has no obligation per se to
"a profit they are duty bound to make for their shareholders"

nd the public company operate routes the tax payers have to subsidize,

sure so lets shut down BE Expressway then , because that is what you are saying as Expressway is a commercial side of BE and is not and cannot be subsidised. Im glad you agree, leave private operator to the routes where they can obviously operate and let BE just handle PSO routes and drop Expressway , which it clearly cant make a go of in the face if efficient private operators

BoatMad wrote: »

Not at all, the vast majority of roads in ireland and especially the new motorways are operating way under capacity , leaving aside certain issue in the GDA

they aren't no . however, pricing off capacity and not adding to the capacity would be a good thing and we must encourage it. it would cut road maintenence and other road spending.

BoatMad wrote: »

note that a private company has no obligation per se to
"a profit they are duty bound to make for their shareholders"

it is their job to make a profit for their shareholders. their shareholders are entitled for the company to be profitable so they can get a return on their investment.

BoatMad wrote: »

sure so lets shut down BE Expressway then , because that is what you are saying as Expressway is a commercial side of BE and is not and cannot be subsidised. Im glad you agree, leave private operator to the routes where they can obviously operate and let BE just handle PSO routes and drop Expressway , which it clearly cant make a go of in the face if efficient private operators

no no, bus eireann has to have a cut of the commercial services market. they are entitled to operate expressway routes and should be on all commercial routes along with the private operators to insure real competition.

TheDoctor wrote:

Private buses making a fortune on the quays in Dublin this evening

AMKC wrote:

Also Sean Ross is a terrible Transport minister I can not think of one thing he has done in that portfolio that is good if he has done anything at all. He cold at least be encouraging te parties to get together and talk as well as coming up with ideas on how to solve it. Leo when he was Transport Minister at least had ideas about what he wanted to do.

Ross is doing brilliantly. He stood firm on the Luas and DB disputes which were sorted by themselves, and staging equally firm on this. Be thankful that he isn't a groveling FF minister.

end of the road wrote:

the private sector can only operate profitable routes at lower cost. for loss making/subsidized routes, the subsidy has to increase so the company can make a profit. a profit they are duty bound to make for their shareholders, and which the tax payer is duty bound to insure is made at all costs if we are expecting them to operate what should be operated by a publically owned bus company. leave the private sector to develop their own routes, and the public company operate routes the tax payers have to subsidize, to insure our money goes to something we own.

The taxpayer gains by subsidizing the private sector instead of owning it publicly because private sector competition means that exorbitant profits cannot be gained otherwise another competitor will provide the same service for smaller profits. Meanwhile private sector companies in this competitive scenario still have to pay workers good salaries because otherwise they will get other jobs and the service will not be provided to the required standard. I think the recent LUAS dispute has shown it to some degree.

In comparison public ownership just shows us overpaying for a bloated inefficient service. There are no advantages to having a publicly owned bus company except for workers to blackmail the rest of us.

Dr Martin wrote:

Fine with me. I'm for building more motorways. Better than a crappy bus service.

The coming automation of transport means much of our arguments are going to be irrelevant.

BoatMad wrote: »

by european standards they are very under-utilised , too late to search the net , but our motorways are very under utilised




there is no such legal requirement and in fact many private companies have stars that have no real trade value and pay no dividends . Most are typically owner managed and as a result renumeration by shares is not a tax efficient system

You are mixing up public companies



yes yes , they are entitled to any route where they can make an operating profit , thats all . Thats the whole point of Expressway , I notice you keep avoiding the Expressway issue

outside of that BE is " entitled" to SFA

it's entitled to the PSO routes, which are both ours, and be's, be being ours.

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

The taxpayer gains by subsidizing the private sector instead of owning it publicly because private sector competition means that exorbitant profits cannot be gained otherwise another competitor will provide the same service for smaller profits. Meanwhile private sector companies in this competitive scenario still have to pay workers good salaries because otherwise they will get other jobs and the service will not be provided to the required standard. I think the recent LUAS dispute has shown it to some degree.

The taxpayer doesn't gain by subsidizing the private sector instead of owning it publicly because private sector or any sector competition doesn't exist, because it's not financially viable. profits have to be gained otherwise companies won't bid. there are no advantages in giving subsidies to the private sector, we have witnessed from britain what happens with britain having the most expensive rail fares in the world among many examples.

Dr Martin wrote: »

Fine with me. I'm for building more motorways. Better than a crappy bus service.

but building more motor ways is just not cost effective. and it's not my job to pay for them.

Dr Martin wrote: »

You're already paying for roads. Why should I pay for a failing bus service?

i am all ready paying for roads but i don't want to pay any more, as we have enough for the demand. it's your job to contribute to a service that gives access to all, to employment and educational opportunities. a bus service does that and more. and it means more road space for you, and less cost. win win for all.

Dr Martin wrote: »

Plenty of private bus operators out there. Let them sink or swim. Or shut em down and put the money into more roads. I'll take an M20 please.

the plenty of private operators have to operate profitable routes only as their job is to make money so their owners can feed their families. bus eieann operates socially necessary and essential routes that aren't financially viable but bring benefits to the economy such as giving all the people access to jobs, education, and other opportunities. to shut "m" down and leave them sink or swim would mean no socially necessary routes meaning the huge potential for a bigger wellfare bill among other costs. there is enough roads for the demand meaning the current road where the m20 would have been planned to go is sufficient for the traffic on offer. remove the bends where possible and it will do for now. then when the country gets back on it's feet and has more money then it can be built without effecting the people's tax money.

anyway back to the actual topic of bus eireann. hopefully a solution can be found between all so that our publically owned company can survive and thrive and show the begrudgers and haters that it really can pull it out of the bag. you can do it lads.

scoey wrote: »

Not reading this entire thread, but judging by the first few pages it's the same old boring boards.ie pro big business posts.
Who do these bus driving scum think they are. On 40 grand don'cha know. For driving a bus! The nerve. Didn't go to college for free for 3 years like me to be a computer programmer writing scripts for some bank or (whatever other terribly important and valuable to society job most of you anti union corporate mouthpieces have).

There is no attempt to curb drivers standard income, just the unsustainable levels of overtime.

end of the road wrote:

The taxpayer doesn't gain by subsidizing the private sector instead of owning it publicly because private sector or any sector competition doesn't exist, because it's not financially viable. profits have to be gained otherwise companies won't bid. there are no advantages in giving subsidies to the private sector, we have witnessed from britain what happens with britain having the most expensive rail fares in the world among many examples.

You're forgetting that BE is based largely on PSO. Any private sector operation would get the equivalent but would run it efficiently.

Britain is not a comparison. They totally deregulated, the NTA here didn't do the same. You just put the same argument forward like union shills.

As for rail fares, it's been many times cheaper to fly from Dublin to cork on Ryanair than by rail. I've done it.

Railways are price gouging because they are a monopoly and a terrible one at that. They are like a motorway but only a few people can occupy their space at any one time.

What will happen is that they disappear and be replaced by autonomous cars an buses that drive in sync with the same capacity without strikes.

end of the road wrote:

but building more motor ways is just not cost effective. and it's not my job to pay for them.

Guessing you live in Dublin maybe?

end of the road wrote: »

nope, incorrect i'm afraid. there would be no saving, and you would be causing a shortage of truck drivers. also, as you would have fired the original staff there would be nobody to train the new staff.

Dont be ridiculous. The Drivers in Bus Eireann make approx 40K basic, plus all their criminal overtime.

Lorry drivers get approx 27K.


You dont even need to replace them with Truck Drivers;

Their only qualifications are;
1) over 18
2) Cat C Licence

replace them with literally any lad in ireland. IT IS AN UNSKILLED JOB.

If we were playing street sweepers 50K+ there would be outrage.
I dont get the difference.