Bus Eireann

devnull · 27-03-2017 01:40PM

Vic_08 wrote: »

PSO is €33m

https://www.nationaltransport.ie/news/statement-by-national-transport-authority-on-bus-services-in-rural-communities/

Subvention for these services by the NTA to Bus Éireann increased from €34m in 2014, to €40m in 2016. And that figure is likely to go up again in 2017.

That still leaves nearly €60m they are apparently spending on things that are not wages (except management and hangers-on) or directly attributed to day to day operations.

Outsourced contracts, such as cleaning of bus stations and to other third party contracts, social media staff (since they are still active through the strike, so they're either payroll or contractors), outside maintenance contracts which are spread over the year (Irish Commercials and Westward Scania to name two),

Just because they are not operating, doesn't suddenly mean that they stop paying their bills, many of contracts will have the cost spread over the year.

Anita Blow · 27-03-2017 01:43PM

The NTA fines BE 80,000 per day in addition to withholding funding for each strike day

Galwayguy35 · 27-03-2017 01:56PM

Sometimes workers have to take pain when the company that employs them is in trouble in order for the company to survive and return to profitability.

Most private sector workers know this because we had to do it when things went bust in 2007/08 but it seems BE employees would let their employer go to the wall rather than turn the company around.

knipex · 27-03-2017 02:21PM

Vic_08 wrote: »

(except management and hangers-on)

So anyone not driving a bus is a "hanger-on" or manager ?

BoatMad · 27-03-2017 02:21PM

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

Sometimes workers have to take pain when the company that employs them is in trouble in order for the company to survive and return to profitability.

Most private sector workers know this because we had to do it when things went bust in 2007/08 but it seems BE employees would let their employer go to the wall rather than turn the company around.

of course thats not whats being played for here, The unions simply mean to cause enough disruption to force Shane Ross and his " endless taxpayer chequebook" to the table

its the same every time the CIE unions strike. its irrelevant what the dispute is really about

PS Unions dont care about the financial state of the companies their members are in ( unlike private unions ) . they just see a gravy train

time for that to end. Let BE rot , we have plenty of alternatives and we didnt survive a vicious recession to see self interest groups muscle in

pilly · 27-03-2017 02:22PM

Vic_08 wrote: »

Most BE property is owned, they self-insure, none of the fleet is leased, depreciation is a paper cost whereas the fleet purchases are already paid for.

If the overall service is losing as much as they claim then not running all of it will cost less than business as usual.

PSO is €33m, that still leaves nearly €60m they are apparently spending on things that are not wages (except management and hangers-on) or directly attributed to day to day operations.

You do understand that a paper cost is still a cost though right?

bnt · 27-03-2017 02:24PM

I can definitely see bankruptcy as an option for BE now, for protection from both creditors and union alike. It's only a matter of time before the buses are self-driving anyway i.e. if all you can do for a living is drive, the union is not going to save your job. Time to look for a different line of work.

pilly · 27-03-2017 02:27PM

I don't think the bus drivers realise that if BE does go into examinership they do what they like with the employees anyway. Maybe this is what BE are aiming for? If I was management in there that's what I'd be doing.

BoatMad · 27-03-2017 02:28PM

bnt wrote: »

I can definitely see bankruptcy as an option for BE now, for protection from both creditors and union alike. It's only a matter of time before the buses are self-driving anyway i.e. if all you can do for a living is drive, the union is not going to save your job. Time to look for a different line of work.

bankruptcy is not an option ( actually a business cant go bankrupt, only individuals can go bankrupt) . BE could be voluntary wound up by its directors petitioning the high court , or technically it could be placed in receivership by a creditor . Howver the fact that BE is part of CIE further complicates things

The fact of course is that neither of these thing should be allowed to happen , as it would mean a state backed company reneging on legal bills.

the unions know the threat of liquidation is not viable . BE could be downsized etc after the strike , but not wound up

BoatMad · 27-03-2017 02:30PM

pilly wrote: »

I don't think the bus drivers realise that if BE does go into examinership they do what they like with the employees anyway. Maybe this is what BE are aiming for? If I was management in there that's what I'd be doing.

can see that happening either . The Gov is not going to allow a CIE company to in effect be subjected to an examiner-ship process.

Walter H Price · 27-03-2017 02:35PM

the government would be better downsizing and selling it off , waste of time and money , massive losses being shored up by the tax payer and plenty of cheaper or quicker private operators like Dublin Coach , Air Coach , Matthews coaches etc to cover most routs.

I get some people will loose service and people have a right to live wherever they like and that's great but they don't have the right that the rest of us shore up and economically non viable company to get them around the place.

No need what so ever for state involvement here , downsize , privatize and get out of the industry

end of the road · 27-03-2017 02:36PM

devnull wrote: »

It doesn't matter how much you keep saying the same thing without substantiating it, it still does not make your initial claims true, you come out with the same lines all of the time but in a in-depth discussion about your claims you quickly run into trouble.

because there is nothing to discuss indepth. it is what it is

devnull wrote: »

As I said before, tendered services exist in the UK but services only go out to tender when the commercial market decides it cannot service them as opposed to Ireland where services from day one were deemed as need in PSO because BE/DB said so rather than the market saying so.

that doesn't change the fact that it's more expensive long term as public service tendering always is .

devnull wrote: »

As I stated to you before, how is it that in Glasgow there can be over 900 buses and well over 95% of those routes be run commercially and companies still buy their own buses every year and pay commercial rates for insurance, yet in Dublin, every single route is deemed as being nonviable and the company needs state insurance and free buses?

huge population and bus usage compared to dublin. if the routes were viable they wouldn't be getting a PSO subsidy.

devnull wrote: »

If it was about the things you say, they'd go for all out de-regulation, tendering gives the best of both worlds, it keeps regulation whilst at the same time preventing monopolies, be they public or private, all monopolies are bad for the consumer because they drive prices up, union power up to hold the country to ransom and taxpayer costs up.

they may go for de-regulation yet. we will be going from 1 monopoly to smaller monopolies so nothing will change. union power to hold the country to ransom doesn't exist and never has. tax payer cost will have to go up hugely to support the smaller monopolies.

end of the road · 27-03-2017 02:38PM

TrustedApple wrote: »

It's just a joke like the way the government won't do anything about it.

it's not the government's job to do anything about it.

TrustedApple wrote: »

Like I am pro making the buses run by perv company's as if my company changes something I have to agree to if or be showed the door.

will you be happy to have huge fare and subsidy increases to pay for your busses to be run by private companies? what is wrong with having to agree to something before your employer changes it?

TrustedApple wrote: »

The company I work for is rebranding and I have a new contact with a few things changed and if I did not agree I be giving the door and I am sorry but that is the proper way of dealing with thinks as unions are just a huge pain the ass.

you clearely aren't sorry for being against workers having any rights, and being for employers having the right to bully the workers. showing someone the door because rather then asking them if they wish to sign the contract is not the proper way of dealing with things. unions are only a pain for those who are against workers rights.

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

What makes you come to this conclusion? If we look at non PSO routes, private operators are running on routes that Bus Eireann are running on. Bus Eireann are usually more expensive and even still are not able to make a profit on these routes whereas private operators are. There are no subsidies and fares are lower with private operators on these routes so if anything fares and subsidies would likely fall.

world evidence of tendering of public services from britain and others. non-PSO routes don't mean anything to this discussion and aren't proof that PSO subsidies would be lower with private operation (because it wouldn't be the case) . fares and subsidies will not be lower whoever runs the operation.

AlmightyCushion · 27-03-2017 02:42PM

end of the road wrote: »

orld evidence of tendering of public services from britain and others. non-PSO routes don't mean anything to this discussion and aren't proof that PSO subsidies would be lower with private operation (because it wouldn't be the case) . fares and subsidies will not be lower whoever runs the operation.

The problems are extending from the commercial arm of BE not the part that receives PSO subsidies.

BoatMad · 27-03-2017 02:42PM

will you be happy to have huge fare and subsidy increases to pay for your busses to be run by private companies? what is wrong with having to agree to something before your employer changes it?

Because its the job of management to run the company, and if the company is in financial trouble, there is a LEGAL requirement that the directors must act.

Hence workers may express an " opinion " , they are not charged with the running of the company and in many cases , decisions have to be taken , whether the work force agree or not.

BoatMad · 27-03-2017 02:43PM

you clearely aren't sorry for being against workers having any rights, and being for employers having the right to bully the workers. showing someone the door because rather then asking them if they wish to sign the contract is not the proper way of dealing with things. unions are only a pain for those who are against workers rights.

BE wishes to pay the drivers the contracted rate and no more.

Wheres the issue

end of the road · 27-03-2017 03:01PM

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

private operators can run better services with a PSO for routes that deem it, make a profit, and it would still be cheaper than doing it with BE.

private operators can't run any better of a service on PSO routes, or any cheeper, as profit has to be taken into account, and a bus service is a bus service anyway.

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

You're also conveniently ignoring the fact that currently the PSO subvention has been increased, which is a worse scenario than suggesting a private operator might make a little profit.

i'm not ignoring it. increasing subsidy isn't worse then paying for profit. subsidy has to be increased anyway as more services and more vehicles will be required.

Walter H Price wrote: »

the government would be better downsizing and selling it off , waste of time and money , massive losses being shored up by the tax payer and plenty of cheaper or quicker private operators like Dublin Coach , Air Coach , Matthews coaches etc to cover most routs.

the government would not be better downsizing and selling it off, unless they want a huge cost increase and wish to privatize profit and socialize risk. the operators you mention don't cover most routes, just the intercity and other commercial routes. the vast majority of routes have be as the operator and are unprofitable.

Walter H Price wrote: »

I get some people will loose service and people have a right to live wherever they like and that's great but they don't have the right that the rest of us shore up and economically non viable company to get them around the place.

actually they have a right to be provided with public services, and it's our job to pay for public services as we all benefit from them, and this public service benefits the economy by allowing people to access employment and education. unless you want a huge increase in the wellfare bill. but either way we are paying, so a bus service is better use of tax payers money then more wellfare.

Walter H Price wrote: »

No need what so ever for state involvement here , downsize , privatize and get out of the industry

every need what soever for state involvement here, not downsize privatize and get out of the industry, as privatization would cost way to much.

BoatMad wrote: »

BE wishes to pay the drivers the contracted rate and no more.

Wheres the issue

ask the workers. and the poster i replied to wasn't talking about be but in general.

Walter H Price · 27-03-2017 03:10PM

end of the road wrote: »

every need what soever for state involvement here, not downsize privatize and get out of the industry, as privatization would cost way to much.
actually they have a right to be provided with public services, and it's our job to pay for public services as we all benefit from them, and this public service benefits the economy by allowing people to access employment and education. unless you want a huge increase in the wellfare bill. but either way we are paying, so a bus service is better use of tax payers money then more wellfare.

Cost more for who , sell it off stop p!ssing money down a black hole and let private operators which at the minute are quicker and cheaper then Bus Eirien (from personal experience) take on the commercially viable routs , if a routes not commercially viable and loses service tough tits.

If that volume were affected then the routes would be viable we have one of the least densely populated countries in Europe tbh the government should be encouraging the expansion and ubanisation of a few more centers nationally. we absolutely do not all benefit from half the stuff we pay tax for , I pay PAYE , i also pay private health insurance , My GP visits are not cover , i was privately schooled as will my kids be , i don't use Bus Eiren even when traveling between Dublin and Louth , Kildare or Cork by Bus as i do regularly.

we've had succes with regulated privatization of the energy market why are people still clinging to failing semi states like BE there a massive waste of money, same as the post office debate last week , the Aer Lingus debates previously , The ongoing RTE debate , get government out of business its inefficient and a drain on resources.

hmmm · 27-03-2017 03:14PM

end of the road wrote: »

private operators can't run any better of a service on PSO routes, or any cheeper, as profit has to be taken into account, and a bus service is a bus service anyway.

They absolutely can run it cheaper if their costs are lower than BE (which they are). How long are you going to be trotting out this false line?

devnull · 27-03-2017 03:16PM

end of the road wrote: »

private operators can't run any better of a service on PSO routes, or any cheeper, as profit has to be taken into account, and a bus service is a bus service anyway.

Nnobody has a duty to ensure that a private makes a profit, that is up to them at the end of the day, there is nothing in law that requires that at all, the only people who have a duty to a private company are the directors and I'm sure they are quite capable of doing their job without your input.

Right now they are paying for the equivalent 650 more staff members than the company feels it needs at the moment and the average pay is €45,000 at the driver grade. Essentially the company is saying that with modern working practices and rotas that make the best use of resources, they can save over €25m before even talking about changing any terms and conditions or rates and any other cost measures.

You are saying that dealing with this will not lead to the service being more efficient? You do realise that the biggest cost of running services are staff costs?

That's before we even talk about the fact that the drivers won't allow fuel monitoring and fuel saving software to be switched on in their buses because they believe it is nannying when such software has been in the private bus and trucking industry for many years now.

the government would not be better downsizing and selling it off, unless they want a huge cost increase and wish to privatize profit and socialize risk

You have learnt new buzz words, congratulations.

Can you explain in detail how this is? We have had this discussion three days in a row now and you have gone running off every time when you have been asked for some examples and details with the tail between your legs. You continue to post such claims but as per normal you back nothing up.

No doubt you will accuse me of copying and pasting again soon, but the difference with me is I'm prepared to back up my opinion rather than making the same throwaway claims time after time like a stuck record.

the operators you mention don't cover most routes, just the intercity and other commercial routes. the vast majority of routes have be as the operator and are unprofitable.

How is it that in Glasgow there can be over 900 buses and well over 95% of those routes be run commercially and companies still buy their own buses every year and pay commercial rates for insurance, yet in Dublin, every single route is deemed as being nonviable and the company needs state insurance and free buses?

Bus Eireann is serving PSO routes and the routes that they deem not to be viable as they have an exclusive contract ot do so, which up until now nobody else has been able to compete for. It is given free vehicles and almost 100m euros, the same for Dublin Bus last year when you include everything.

Private operators do not run PSO routes because they are not eligible for this, have never been able to bid for the PSO contracts that Dublin Bus and Bus Eireann happen to have been awarded (since it's a direct award) do not get free vehicles or do not get free insurance, so until the playing field levels off, you are spinning a false narrative.

I know that time and time again you think that Bus Eireann is some kind of beautiful goddess that has come from the skies to save mankind, they do so much work as they are so generous and love everyone and want world peace and they are like some kind of charity, but really they are not, they run services because they re paid to rather than some beautiful romantic story.

actually they have a right to be provided with public services, and it's our job to pay for public services as we all benefit from them, and this public service benefits the economy by allowing people to access employment and education. unless you want a huge increase in the wellfare bill. but either way we are paying, so a bus service is better use of tax payers money then more wellfare.

They will be earning a lot less on the social than they are now, that is for sure, and if they are so hard up as they claim they are, they will seek employment straight away, as if they can't live on €45k as a lot of them claim, they certainly can't live on social welfare which would pay under half that,.

So they'd rejoin another bus company, earn less money, they'll be off welfare the taxpayer pays less money because there is no way they could live on the money the social gives them if they can't live on twice that.

every need what soever for state involvement here, not downsize privatize and get out of the industry, as privatization would cost way to much.

See above post, especially my first reply, regulated privatisation with tendering would drive down the overall cost.

Vic_08 · 27-03-2017 03:37PM

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

Sometimes workers have to take pain when the company that employs them is in trouble in order for the company to survive and return to profitability.

Most private sector workers know this because we had to do it when things went bust in 2007/08 but it seems BE employees would let their employer go to the wall rather than turn the company around.

BE employees took a 2 year pay cut in 2010 for this reason and all that has happened is the company has gotten further into trouble.

If there was a genuine belief that the company could be turned around then there would be a lot less militancy from the staff and they would be far more receptive to the idea that they need to take a part of the pain.

Instead as per usual the staff are being scapegoated for all the troubles and along with the paying public who get service cuts are expected to take all the pain. All while it is business as usual from the management whose gross incompetence has caused this crisis in the first place and who show absolutely no sign that they have any idea how to properly run the company.

rob316 · 27-03-2017 03:44PM

The biggest problem is the free travel that every tom dick and harry on social welfare get. Apparently on a 52 seat bus there is only 15 fee paying passengers on average. Like how is that sustainable?

I'm not attacking people on SW, I have been on it myself in the past. Just give the free travel to the pensioners and people on disability.

pilly · 27-03-2017 03:47PM

rob316 wrote: »

The biggest problem is the free travel that every tom dick and harry on social welfare get. Apparently on a 52 seat bus there is only 15 fee paying passengers on average. Like how is that sustainable?

I'm not attacking people on SW, I have been on it myself in the past. Just give the free travel to the pensioners and people on disability.

They are the only people who get free travel. And you are attacking people on SW.

I heard this same line trotted out by a bus driver before but in his case there were 23 on the bus and 17 on free travel passes. In other words if the free travel people weren't there then there would be 6 people and definitely no need for the service.

Reducing free travel would do nothing but put bus drivers out of work, hence why they've dropped this argument.

Galwayguy35 · 27-03-2017 03:59PM

Vic_08 wrote: »

BE employees took a 2 year pay cut in 2010 for this reason and all that has happened is the company has gotten further into trouble.

If there was a genuine belief that the company could be turned around then there would be a lot less militancy from the staff and they would be far more receptive to the idea that they need to take a part of the pain.

Instead as per usual the staff are being scapegoated for all the troubles and along with the paying public who get service cuts are expected to take all the pain. All while it is business as usual from the management whose gross incompetence has caused this crisis in the first place and who show absolutely no sign that they have any idea how to properly run the company.

And does that make them a special case or something?

As I said lot's of people took pay cuts and many more lost their jobs altogether which BE workers were protected from to a large degree.

For once I agree with Shane Ross that the rest of us shouldn't have to pick up the tab for BE and if it goes then the guys who walked out will see where it got them.

Vic_08 · 27-03-2017 04:10PM

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

The problems are extending from the commercial arm of BE not the part that receives PSO subsidies.

That is absolute BS and nobody with any knowledge of the way BE is run believes it.

For one there is no real separation, it is all down to what is being assigned on balance sheets and I would bet that if all EXP routes were axed tomorrow the company would be in just as bad a financial mess next year because a lot of the expenditure being assigned to EXP is in fact shared or fixed costs that PSO would still be paying anyway. Not to mention some of the totally un-necessary costs that are no doubt being levelled directly at EXP such as TV ad campaigns and extravagant spending on new fleets of coaches which are partially needed only to cross-subsidise the school bus services.

The claim that drivers are getting paid for far more hours than they are operating revenue earning services is true, however this is almost all on the PSO side not EXP.

The majority of EXP duties are simple out and back runs with only a small amount of extra paid time that is unavoidable (booking-on, driving bus from garage to bus station, loading, driving back to garage, booking off) while on the PSO side there are significant amounts of dead running, extended paid breaks and spreadover shifts due to the nature of peak heavy commuter routes and rural routes.

BE is a complex company and the reasons for it's failings are also complex, staff costs are a legitimate area where they need to make savings but they are far from the only area and if there is not significant reform in both costs and better management then no amount of pay cuts will be enough to turn it around. The joke is there are a few areas where significant pay reductions could be made that would only effect a minority of drivers and I seriously doubt that the majority would support them to strike level over it.

The core of BE's problems is poor management and there is no getting around that, they simply are incompetent or incapable of running the company. It is as simple as them not properly understanding the basics of the services they run. Over and over they have made service cuts based on balance sheet returns with no apparent knowledge of the way cuts in one area will effect another and are then caught unawares when revenues drop as a result, not to mention the bloody obvious losses by being completely unprepared for the obvious changes the motorway network would bring.

I don't blame the staff for having enough and digging their heels in, I do blame the unions for not showing proper leadership and ignoring the obvious self-implosion of the company until it is properly in the toilet. I think they have left their members hanging by a limb now and whatever way this ends they are going to lose.

TheQuietFella · 27-03-2017 04:14PM

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

And does that make them a special case or something?

As I said lot's of people took pay cuts and many more lost their jobs altogether which BE workers were protected from to a large degree.

For once I agree with Shane Ross that the rest of us shouldn't have to pick up the tab for BE and if it goes then the guys who walked out will see where it got them.

Close it so! Re-label it as something new and start all over again with it.
Import hundreds of foreign drivers and pay them minimum wage, have
them all live in squalor sharing beds and homes as was previously done in
some Dublin house! But wait! they're f**king immigrants! You can't do that with f**king immigrants!!!
That's f**king racist but you can do it to your own!

If this issue existed in Dublin only it wouldn't be happening i.e. Dublin Bus!
As it is a nationwide problem the whole country can go to f**k!
If it's not impacting on the nations capital there's no problem!

Awesomeness · 27-03-2017 04:21PM

end of the road wrote: »

you clearely aren't sorry for being against workers having any rights, and being for employers having the right to bully the workers. showing someone the door because rather then asking them if they wish to sign the contract is not the proper way of dealing with things. unions are only a pain for those who are against workers rights.

I would love if you could give an answer to one question before we can take you seriously on workers rights

1. Would you agree that no worker has a right to overtime?

TheDoctor · 27-03-2017 04:22PM

Its terrible that these people were forced to drive buses for a career.

And that after that, were forced to join BE for life, unable to leave.

Awful just awful.

ixoy · 27-03-2017 04:24PM

Vic_08 wrote: »

The joke is there are a few areas where significant pay reductions could be made that would only effect a minority of drivers and I seriously doubt that the majority would support them to strike level over it.

What are they and why haven't the unions proposed them? The biggest issue is a resounding silence on alternative cost cutting measures that will cover the gaping hole.

TheDoctor · 27-03-2017 04:24PM

end of the road wrote: »

you clearely aren't sorry for being against workers having any rights, and being for employers having the right to bully the workers. showing someone the door because rather then asking them if they wish to sign the contract is not the proper way of dealing with things. unions are only a pain for those who are against workers rights.

Employment Law covers workers rights, no need for a union.

Bus Eireann

Comments