BE strike [Read 1st post before posting]

devnull · 28-03-2017 06:56PM

horseburger wrote: »

I was suggesting, that if they are running services at particular times, like the one I got from Belfast recently at 4.30pm with five people on it, and services during the night, like one I got recently from Belfast, where there were about 10 or 12 people on it, that a decision might be taken, at some point in the future, to discontinue particular services, that are not very busy.

That it might pull such services, would, to me, seem more of a possibility, if there was not another service covering Dublin Airport, at pretty much the same time.

As I I said to you before they have been running that timetable for five years and not cut it yet! You cannot judge a service by look at one or two journeys. It's not possible.

The idea that you seem to suggest that they are running empty coaches because the competitom are running makes zero sense and trying to scare r!people they may lose a service when there is nothing to indicate that is absurd.

The timetable clearly works for them and 4.30in the evening from Belfast and late at night from Belfast would hardly be peak direction. Go look at the split of flights at the airport.

It's amusing though you are talking about so called failings of aircoach in a thread about bus eireann. The fact the union side are now resorting to talking down the competition is highly amusing.

How about we get back on topic?

devnull · 28-03-2017 06:59PM

horseburger wrote: »

Perhaps, but what type of service would you put in place for passengers at the intermediates stops currently covered by the Bus Éireann Ulster Bus Dublin Belfast service?.

I think it is down to the government of northern Ireland to look after such things in their country isn't it? We have no obligation to look after them.

I can't see Translink allowing them to be under served

Graham · 28-03-2017 07:04PM

horseburger wrote: »

Perhaps, but what type of service would you put in place for passengers at the intermediates stops currently covered by the Bus Éireann Ulster Bus Dublin Belfast service?

Neither the Aircoach or Dublin Coach Dublin Belfast services are much advantage to passengers in Sprudefield, Banbridge or Newry.

2 options

1) let the operators decide what's commercially viable/justified.
2) designate the routes as PSO routes and offer a subsidy.

horseburger · 28-03-2017 07:16PM

devnull wrote: »

As I I said to you before they have been running that timetable for five years and not cut it yet! You cannot judge a service by look at one or two journeys. It's not possible.

The idea that you seem to suggest that they are running empty coaches because the competitom are running makes zero sense and trying to scare r!people they may lose a service when there is nothing to indicate that is absurd.

The timetable clearly works for them and 4.30in the evening from Belfast and late at night from Belfast would hardly be peak direction. Go look at the split of flights at the airport.

It's amusing though you are talking about so called failings of aircoach in a thread about bus eireann. The fact the union side are now resorting to talking down the competition is highly amusing.

How about we get back on topic?

I did not say they are running empty services. I gave two examples where there were very few passengers on the services that I took. I have never criticized Aircoach's services. Obviously if I am able to give examples of having used the service, I use the service.

I have questioned how it can sustain a regular hourly service, if some services have very few passengers.

What I have asked is, how, if there is to be one less company operating between both cities, with which Aircoach is in competition for people going to and from Dublin Airport, what incentive would Aircoach have to keep operating such a regular service, if the other remaining operating service doesn't cover Dublin Airport?

Even if Ulster bus did continue to serve Dublin Airport, if Bus Éireann ended, I would guess it wouldn't be as frequent as the service that it runs in conjunction with Bus Éireann.

I like the way you suggest I shouldn't be discussing Aircoach's services, in a discussion where some people are advocating that Bus Éireann should collapse, and its services be run by companies like Aircoach, despite the fact that it has been shown, in statements by the NTA, that no assurances can be given by the NTA, that the services currently operated by Bus Éireann, would be operated by other bus companies.

end of the road · 28-03-2017 07:18PM

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

The interesting question is why the subsidy should have been 49.4m in the first place.

i presume so that services could be increased and extra services added. considering the amount of services operated 49.4m sounds quite decent to me at least.

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

The good news is that there will be 150 buses on the market for private operators to provide more efficient services.

i'm unaware be have any plans to sell busses?

PeadarCo wrote: »

There are losers, Bus Eireann and the people who work for them. The reason why its rare for private companies to see extended strike action is that its self defeating when customers switch to competitors. You can see it with this strike if you are on a major commuter/transport corridor the strike will have limited effect. The people who are most affected are those reliant on PSO routes which covers smaller groups of people.

The reason why unions are looking at sympathy strikes at Dublin bus and iarnroid Eireann is due to the weakness of their position. Competition weakens unions probably more than bus Eireann. Its the reason they are so set against it. Particularly if it was extended to the whole of Dublin and PSO bus network in general.

Ultimately the customer and taxpayer gets a better and cheaper services but union reps aren't paid by the ordinary person. It is understandable and logical if selfish position. Where the issue is trying to reconciling that position back to the idea of unions standing up for the weak. As much as I disagree with EOR s/he does a very good job and showing the union position and it's inherent contradictions(seen when the views are questioned) when viewed from the stand point of an ordinary person not part of the relevant union.

unions exist in the big transport companies in the uk dispite competition for example. so competition doesn't automatically weaken the unions.

Graham wrote: »

The type of all-out/indefinite industrial action we're seeing at the moment just wouldn't be possible in a scenario where there are multiple independent service providers.

such an all out would actually be very possible with multiple companies, assuming the same issue has arisen in those companies at the same time.

horseburger · 28-03-2017 07:21PM

devnull wrote: »

I think it is down to the government of northern Ireland to look after such things in their country isn't it? We have no obligation to look after them.

I can't see Translink allowing them to be under served

That's quite a partition-ist outlook!:)

Graham · 28-03-2017 07:22PM

end of the road wrote: »

i'm unaware be have any plans to sell busses?

BE won't need them if the operation fails.

end of the road wrote: »

such an all out would actually be very possible with multiple companies, assuming the same issue has arisen in those companies at the same time.

It's unlikely multiple independent companies would have the same issues at the same time.

CIARAN_BOYLE · 28-03-2017 07:26PM

end of the road wrote: »

i'm unaware be have any plans to sell busses?

Well if the company is forced into bankruptcy by the drivers and has to close up I doubt that the busses will sit in a depot til they rust away.

horseburger · 28-03-2017 07:30PM

CIARAN_BOYLE wrote: »

Well if the company is forced into bankruptcy by the drivers and has to close up I doubt that the busses will sit in a depot til they rust away.

That is an example of what I was saying about aim of the Bus Éireann press releases being, to deflect the responsibility of the financial situation of the company, away from the company management, and onto the drivers, where Bus Éireann management are aiming to paint employees in a negative light.

Graham · 28-03-2017 07:32PM

horseburger wrote: »

That is an example of what I was saying about aim of the Bus Éireann press releases being, to deflect the responsibility of the financial situation of the company, away from the company management, and onto the drivers.

That's just trying to ignore the fact that the current terms & conditions are simply untenable.

StringerBell · 28-03-2017 07:36PM

http://www.independent.ie/breaking-news/irish-news/40m-euro-strike-fund-will-help-bus-eireann-dispute-workers-unite-pledges-35572452.html

StringerBell · 28-03-2017 07:39PM

Graham wrote: »

That's just trying to ignore the fact that the current terms & conditions are simply untenable.

Nobody disputes that.

The blame for this lays at the feet of management, you only have to have actually followed the industry and decisions for the last number of years to know that.

Obviously the general public wouldn't follow things as closely as those of us with family members in the job but the facts don't change, only the spin.

What I will say is that it is clear that given the amount of ****e posted regarding the strike, the Unions are not getting their message across clearly and properly. Something they need to address.

horseburger · 28-03-2017 07:41PM

Graham wrote: »

That's just trying to ignore the fact that the current terms & conditions are simply untenable.

If people, in this discussion want Bus Éireann to collapse, and then argue that the strike will result in the collapse of the company - if the striking drivers manage to secure their current terms and conditions - well then, why don't they support the strike, rather than criticizing the drivers for striking?

People in this forum are criticizing the employees for striking, saying that if the employees manage to secure their previously agreed terms and conditions, that the company will not survive, but at the same time, they are saying they wouldn't care if Bus Éireann does end.

Graham · 28-03-2017 07:44PM

StringerBell wrote: »

Nobody disputes that.

The blame for this lays at the feet of management, you only have to have actually followed the industry and decisions for the last number of years to know that.

Obviously the general public wouldn't follow things as closely as those of us with family members in the job but the facts don't change, only the spin.

What I will say is that it is clear that given the amount of ****e posted regarding the strike, the Unions are not getting their message across clearly and properly. Something they need to address.

I agree the management are partly to blame, political pressure means they keep caving in to unrealistic demands.

This should have all been stopped long ago.

CIARAN_BOYLE · 28-03-2017 07:49PM

horseburger wrote: »

That is an example of what I was saying about aim of the Bus Éireann press releases being, to deflect the responsibility of the financial situation of the company, away from the company management, and onto the drivers, where Bus Éireann management are aiming to paint employees in a negative light.

Salaries are the only expense that's broadly variable. Every other expense there's not significant savings to be made.

Perhaps there are savings to be made by cutting management staff numbers. The problem is that they are not as inefficient as the bus drivers. There isn't a huge body of overtime worked by non front line staff.

Yes the management are spineless, irresponsible and weak. No one is disputing this. How do I know this? By the fact that they didn't take their recent acts to cut overtime several years ago.

Personally I don't want anyone to lose their jobs so I hope Bus Eireann doesn't collapse. Problem is that the drivers don't seem willing to pay baLL regarding this.

bk · 28-03-2017 07:57PM

horseburger wrote: »

Perhaps, but what type of service would you put in place for passengers at the intermediates stops currently covered by the Bus Éireann Ulster Bus Dublin Belfast service?

Neither the Aircoach or Dublin Coach Dublin Belfast services are much advantage to passengers in Sprudefield, Banbridge or Newry.

Well if BE failed, there wouldn't be much issue for these intermediate stops as the route is jointly run with Translink and if BE failed I'd assume Translink would step in and take up the slack.

Also there are rumours going around that Dublin Coach are looking to start a second route to the North following their new Belfast Route, so I'd suspect they would jump at the opportunity to take these routes if BE failed and Translink didn't take up the slack (very doubtful IMO).

I have to say I find it rather bizarre that you are trying to suggest that private companies will reduce services if BE failed on the same week that the route has been flooded with 16 new departures per day on the route by Dublin Coach. Clearly showing private bus companies interest in aggressively starting new routes.

Also I simply can't understand the logic of what you are trying to suggest. You seem to be suggesting that the only reason Aircoach operate these less busy times, is because BE do too. That in some weird way Aircoach are running non-profitable routes just to spite BE. And that if BE fail and Aircoach suddenly get more passengers over from BE, that AC will stop the departures because they don't have to spite BE anymore. I'm sorry it just makes no sense at all.

This sounds more like something BE has down in the past, running predatory, non-profitable routes to keep competition out.

Aircoach certainly aren't going to do that for 5 years! It just isn't how for profit run companies work. I assume this quieter departures are simply repositioning for later, much busier return legs. An absolute necessity for all transport. I'd assume that if you look at the full return journey that it is profitable over all.

Remember Aircaoch and the Belfast route overall are highly profitable.

Having said all that, if BE failed there would be issues on other routes, for instance the stopping service to Cork. However I suspect Aircoach, GoBE or one of the other privates would jump to also take up these routes if BE aren't around anymore to compete with them. After all private companies happily running stopping services on other routes, for instance Citylink to Galway (parallel to their direct service), JJKavangh, etc.

And of course if any route isn't of interest to any company and the NTA deem it necessary, they can over it as a subsidised route.

quadrifoglio verde · 28-03-2017 08:00PM

The Dublin Belfast route is outside the ntas juristiction. As a result as many buses can run routes as its international. If the demand is there, buses could be run every minute.
I fail to see what the issue is.

horseburger · 28-03-2017 08:01PM

bk wrote: »

Well if BE failed, there wouldn't be much issue for these intermediate stops as the route is jointly run with Translink and if BE failed I'd assume Translink would step in and take up the slack.

Also there are rumours going around that Dublin Coach are looking to start a second route to the North following their new Belfast Route, so I'd suspect they would jump at the opportunity to take these routes if BE failed and Translink didn't take up the slack (very doubtful IMO).

I have to say I find it rather bizarre that you are trying to suggest that private companies will reduce services if BE failed on the same week that the route has been flooded with 16 new departures per day on the route by Dublin Coach. Clearly showing private bus companies interest in aggressively starting new routes.

Also I simply can't understand the logic of what you are trying to suggest. You seem to be suggesting that the only reason Aircoach operate these less busy times, is because BE do too. That in some weird way Aircoach are running non-profitable routes just to spite BE. And that if BE fail and Aircoach suddenly get more passengers over from BE, that AC will stop the departures because they don't have to spite BE anymore. I'm sorry it just makes no sense at all.

This sounds more like something BE has down in the past, running predatory, non-profitable routes to keep competition out.

Aircoach certainly aren't going to do that for 5 years! It just isn't how for profit run companies work. I assume this quieter departures are simply repositioning for later, much busier return legs. An absolute necessity for all transport. I'd assume that if you look at the full return journey that it is profitable over all.

Remember Aircaoch and the Belfast route overall are highly profitable.

Having said all that, if BE failed there would be issues on other routes, for instance the stopping service to Cork. However I suspect Aircoach, GoBE or one of the other privates would jump to also take up these routes if BE aren't around anymore to compete with them. After all private companies happily running stopping services on other routes, for instance Citylink to Galway (parallel to their direct service), JJKavangh, etc.

And of course if any route isn't of interest to any company and the NTA deem it necessary, they can over it as a subsidised route.

I was clearly speaking about services at particular times that were not in any way busy, for example a service I was on recently that had five people on it.

PeadarCo · 28-03-2017 08:05PM

StringerBell wrote:

The blame for this lays at the feet of management, you only have to have actually followed the industry and decisions for the last number of years to know that.

But surely by reducing the amount of overtime that is required by employees is that not management doing its job. People are getting a base pay increase. It is crazy that management has allowed a situation to exist where overtime is considered part of normal pay. You can't blame management and then go on strike when they actually decide to start running the company like a modern business.

This strike keeps getting more bizarre the more I read. It seems to be a strike overall extras like overtime and nothing to do with base pay.

bk · 28-03-2017 08:21PM

horseburger wrote: »

I was clearly speaking about services at particular times that were not in any way busy, for example a service I was on recently that had five people on it.

And we have been over this a billion times now!

Coach goes one way with 5 passengers and back with 50 passengers. That is 55 passengers on a return trip and equals €€€€€

The alternative is the bus runs out of service with zero passengers and returns with 50 passengers and they lose 5 extra fares they could have had.

Or even worse they don't run the route at all and make no money.

Honestly I don't see what you find this so hard to understand?

CatFromHue · 28-03-2017 08:26PM

PeadarCo wrote: »

But surely by reducing the amount of overtime that is required by employees is that not management doing its job. People are getting a base pay increase. It is crazy that management has allowed a situation to exist where overtime is considered part of normal pay. You can't blame management and then go on strike when they actually decide to start running the company like a modern business.

This strike keeps getting more bizarre the more I read. It seems to be a strike overall extras like overtime and nothing to do with base pay.

Aren't all of the allowances in the public sector for various tasks, whether those tasks still exist or not, considered core pay by the unions?

murphaph · 28-03-2017 08:45PM

horseburger wrote: »

I was clearly speaking about services at particular times that were not in any way busy, for example a service I was on recently that had five people on it.

If Aircoach don't run a proper show, nobody will step in and hand them a bunch of money to keep the show on the road. They have a business reason for every single departure, of that you can be absolutely sure.

GM228 · 28-03-2017 08:56PM

StringerBell wrote: »

http://www.independent.ie/breaking-news/irish-news/40m-euro-strike-fund-will-help-bus-eireann-dispute-workers-unite-pledges-35572452.html

€40m isn't much use when they can only support 100 or so of the 2600 workers on strike.

Bass Reeves · 28-03-2017 08:58PM

horseburger wrote: »

That is an example of what I was saying about aim of the Bus Éireann press releases being, to deflect the responsibility of the financial situation of the company, away from the company management, and onto the drivers, where Bus Éireann management are aiming to paint employees in a negative light.

It is not BE management that paint the workers in a negative light. It is reality. people are no longer fools or have blind faith in institutions like unions. How can you explain away statistics like BE having over 5 drivers/bus compared to about 3/bus for DB and 1.8/bus for privates. Drivers only driving 5.5 hours/day and this including 1.5 hours overtime. Some drivers earning 50% of there basic in allowances and OT.

Most ordinary workers have to struggle to earn a living why should they pay extra tax to fund lazy work practices in protected industry's when there is a viable alternative to those that cannot provide the service efficiently.

StringerBell wrote: »

Nobody disputes that.

The blame for this lays at the feet of management, you only have to have actually followed the industry and decisions for the last number of years to know that.

Obviously the general public wouldn't follow things as closely as those of us with family members in the job but the facts don't change, only the spin.

What I will say is that it is clear that given the amount of ****e posted regarding the strike, the Unions are not getting their message across clearly and properly. Something they need to address.

Often those closest to the ball see the least of the action. The General public are following this more close that people think. Management in the semi-state transport companies are not left manage the company. They cannot react to competition because there cost base is out of line. The unions refuse to negotiate the restructuring of the company

horseburger wrote: »

If people, in this discussion want Bus Éireann to collapse, and then argue that the strike will result in the collapse of the company - if the striking drivers manage to secure their current terms and conditions - well then, why don't they support the strike, rather than criticizing the drivers for striking?

People in this forum are criticizing the employees for striking, saying that if the employees manage to secure their previously agreed terms and conditions, that the company will not survive, but at the same time, they are saying they wouldn't care if Bus Éireann does end.

Because the strike is not the answer to the issue. If BE is further subsidized we pay extra tax or else tax has to be redirected from Health or Education etc,etc. The current level of OT is not sustainable in any industry. The reason that most have no issue with with BE failing is because nowadays we have viable alternatives that are better and quicker to react.

horseburger wrote: »

I was clearly speaking about services at particular times that were not in any way busy, for example a service I was on recently that had five people on it.

You continually harp on about this. My better half was on a Aircoach this week they had to put a second and third on the route. My children have uses the Green Bus and find it always full or nearly full. I myself have see three Green buses pass me today all nearly full yet I see red buses parked empty.

n97 mini · 28-03-2017 09:04PM

CatFromHue wrote: »

Aren't all of the allowances in the public sector for various tasks, whether those tasks still exist or not, considered core pay by the unions?

Big part of the problem. A list of what constitutes core pay should be put in every employee's contract, along with a list of what doesn't, e.g.
- Time off on Friday to cash pay cheque (all payment is electronic)
- King's Birthday (although this has been rolled into annual leave now)
- Rent allowance when you're not renting (gardai get 4k RA regardless)

Stheno · 28-03-2017 09:11PM

n97 mini wrote: »

Big part of the problem. A list of what constitutes core pay should be put in every employee's contract, along with a list of what doesn't, e.g.
- Time off on Friday to cash pay cheque (all payment is electronic)
- King's Birthday (although this has been rolled into annual leave now)
- Rent allowance when you're not renting (gardai get 4k RA regardless)

The first was gotten rid of a few years ago

end of the road · 28-03-2017 09:16PM

Bass Reeves wrote: »

It is not BE management that paint the workers in a negative light. It is reality. people are no longer fools or have blind faith in institutions like unions. How can you explain away statistics like BE having over 5 drivers/bus compared to about 3/bus for DB and 1.8/bus for privates. Drivers only driving 5.5 hours/day and this including 1.5 hours overtime. Some drivers earning 50% of there basic in allowances and OT.

this is claimed by the company, is there independant evidence to verify it?

Bass Reeves wrote: »

Most ordinary workers have to struggle to earn a living why should they pay extra tax to fund lazy work practices in protected industry's when there is a viable alternative to those that cannot provide the service efficiently.

if you are lucky to live on a commercial route, there is an alternative to be. if you don't, then there is unlikely to be any. not forgetting that it is unknown how long it would take to implement a replacement operator for PSO routes if be went to the wall. no extra tax is going to be paid for be unless there is going to be a large service increase which in my view is unlikely. it's up to workers to organise to get good terms and conditions. no point in blaming others because you don't get good terms and conditions.

Bass Reeves wrote: »

The General public are following this more close that people think.

i don't agree that they are.

Bass Reeves wrote: »

Because the strike is not the answer to the issue. If BE is further subsidized we pay extra tax or else tax has to be redirected from Health or Education etc,etc. The current level of OT is not sustainable in any industry. The reason that most have no issue with with BE failing is because nowadays we have viable alternatives that are better and quicker to react.

only on commercial routes though. you can't be quicker if you have to serve everywhere, which the PSO routes do. subsidy would likely have to increase to provide more services going forward, whoever operates the routes, as with the country supposibly recovering then more workers = greater demand for services.

devnull · 28-03-2017 09:19PM

end of the road wrote: »

Bass Reeves wrote: »

It is not BE management that paint the workers in a negative light. It is reality. people are no longer fools or have blind faith in institutions like unions. How can you explain away statistics like BE having over 5 drivers/bus compared to about 3/bus for DB and 1.8/bus for privates. Drivers only driving 5.5 hours/day and this including 1.5 hours overtime. Some drivers earning 50% of there basic in allowances and OT.

this is claimed by the company, is there independant evidence to verify it?

Bass Reeves wrote: »

Most ordinary workers have to struggle to earn a living why should they pay extra tax to fund lazy work practices in protected industry's when there is a viable alternative to those that cannot provide the service efficiently.

if you are lucky to live on a commercial route, there is an alternative to be. if you don't, then there is unlikely to be any. not forgetting that it is unknown how long it would take to implement a replacement operator for PSO routes if be went to the wall. no extra tax is going to be paid for be unless there is going to be a large service increase which in my view is unlikely. it's up to workers to organise to get good terms and conditions. no point in blaming others because you don't get good terms and conditions.

Bass Reeves wrote: »

The General public are following this more close that people think.

i don't agree that they are.

Bass Reeves wrote: »

Because the strike is not the answer to the issue. If BE is further subsidized we pay extra tax or else tax has to be redirected from Health or Education etc,etc. The current level of OT is not sustainable in any industry. The reason that most have no issue with with BE failing is because nowadays we have viable alternatives that are better and quicker to react.

only on commercial routes though. you can't be quicker if you have to serve everywhere, which the PSO routes do. subsidy would likely have to increase to provide more services going forward, whoever operates the routes, as with the country supposibly recovering then more workers = greater demand for services.

So you are saying some routes are not viable because they don't earn enough money or passengers to make them viable but if they get more passengers they need more subsidy as they become even more nonviable?

Here we go · 28-03-2017 09:21PM

As far as I know this is just expressway which is serviced by faster cheaper altenitives time to close them down and properly fund pso routes

Allinall · 28-03-2017 09:23PM

If the strikers did their heels in, the company will inevitably fold.

They can then hold their heads high, claim the moral high ground, and pat themselves on the back whilst waiting in their respective dole queues.

They can comfort themselves in the knowledge that it was someone else's fault.

Clever bunch.

BE strike [Read 1st post before posting]

Comments