Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
If we do not hit our goal we will be forced to close the site.

Current status: https://keepboardsalive.com/

Annual subs are best for most impact. If you are still undecided on going Ad Free - you can also donate using the Paypal Donate option. All contribution helps. Thank you.

BE strike [Read 1st post before posting]

1…7071737576…125

Comments

  • #2162
    kiaronh
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 276 ✭✭kiaronh


    punisher5112 wrote: »
    Trains lose even more.

    How can BE compete with all these new operators with non stop routes where BE has to serve all the towns and villages.

    The government have cut subvention so no wonder they are losing money.

    BE get subvention on the PSO routes. Those routes aren't making a loss.

    They are losing money on Expressway which doesn't get subvention. You haven't answered where you expect this money to come from.

    There are three options:

    Stop running loss making Expressway services.
    Cut costs to make these routes break even.
    Raise taxes to pay for these routes. (Would require adding them to the PSO routes and resolving competition questions, changing licenses for competitors when they expire, etc...)
    See the government are happy to let this happen as they want all semi state and state bodies to be mostly privatised and IMO that's a very bad idea.

    Luas is paid for by the tax payer and fare payers who gains from it a private non Irish company.

    The reason this was contracted out is that publicly run train in Ireland make a loss, as you noted earlier. The question is what is cheaper for the taxpayer: paying Transdev to run it (where they will take a profit) or running it as a taxpayer owned public company. In theory a publicly owned company should be cheaper, but as we see in other areas, with no competition there is no motivation to cut costs. So the taxpayer pays more.

    You can argue back and forth on the rights and wrongs of this point, but I can't think of an example where taking something into public ownership cut costs.
    I would rather see that money come back to the state and tax payer as we are been royaly screwed over.

    And if the Luas makes a loss, would you like to see that loss come to the taxpayer? Because at the moment if they make a loss that's Transdevs problem. The taxpayer has paid a fixed price for Transdev to do this and that's all we pay whether they make a loss or a profit.
    Same goes with Irish water they can't just admit they got it wrong and say EU we are not doing it your way and to be honest that excuse is rubbish.

    This new alcohol bill is another push to get more money also as minimum pricing will be brought in.

    I just think people need to look a little deeper and see what is actually going on.

    You don't want to pay more taxes? Makes sense. So where do you suggest we get the money to keep propping up losses in BE?


  • #2163
    aliveandkicking
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 859 ✭✭✭aliveandkicking


    punisher5112 wrote: »

    Luas is paid for by the tax payer and fare payers who gains from it a private non Irish company.
    I would rather see that money come back to the state and tax payer as we are been royaly screwed over.


    You are incorrect. All Luas fares go to the TII. TII pay Transdev to operate the system. The profit from fares - cost paid to the operator goes to TII (public body) to reinvest in transport.


  • #2164
    n97 mini
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,991 ✭✭✭n97 mini


    punisher5112 wrote: »
    I can't afford to live in Dublin where I work but if I quit my job and go on welfare I'll be put up there.

    You're not alone. Property in Dublin is too expensive, where prices are driven by supply and demand. More supply is the answer, not payrises for everyone. Have you contacted anyone about resolving the former? The effective ban on high rise in Dublin for example.


  • #2165
    n97 mini
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,991 ✭✭✭n97 mini


    punisher5112 wrote: »
    The government have cut subvention so no wonder they are losing money.

    Aw here, can we have some facts instead. Subvention has been increasing every year for the last several years to the point where BE is getting more now than it was in 2007, the peak of the bubble.


  • #2166
    amcalester
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,097 ✭✭✭amcalester


    n97 mini wrote: »
    Aw here, can we have some facts instead. Subvention has been increasing every year for the last several years to the point where BE is getting more now than it was in 2007, the peak of the bubble.

    Not to mention the fact that it's thw commercial arm that's losing the most money.


  • Advertisement
  • #2167
    horseburger
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,138 ✭✭✭horseburger


    n97 mini wrote: »
    I'm not sure if you misunderstand. PSO routes are profitable for Bus Eireann (only) as they get paid money to operate them. The only other bus operator in the same position is Dublin Bus.

    Private bus operators would probably love to be paid to operate PSO routes in the same way BE are, but they're blocked from that process. BE has the monopoly.

    You seem to be opposed to anyone other than BE being paid to operate PSO routes, while complaining that you're spending €480 a week on taxis because BE are on strike. There is a large amount of irony there. Bit like turkeys voting for Christmas.

    I'll ask you this question as well, in relation to the charge that "Bus Éireann has the monopoly"

    Do you think it is possible that Sillan Tours - as referenced, in the post by paulboland, http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showp...postcount=2147 - might decide, at some point, to submit an application to the NTA, to operate services from Dublin, much later, than at present, where its last service from Dublin is currently 7.15pm?

    Would the NTA, respond positively to an application by Sillan Tours, to operate later services from Dublin, or perhaps a more regular service throughout the whole day, to and from Dublin and Shercock, in a silimar way to the services by Collins Coaches, to and from Carrickmacross and Dublin, and Matthews Coaches, to and from Dundalk and Dublin?

    Was there anything prohibiting Sillan Tours from making such a proposal, over the last 20 years or so, or in recent years, to operate later services from Dublin, or a very frequent, regular service to and from Dublin and Shercock throughout the day, considering that Sillan Tours serve locations beyond Navan that are not served by the 109 and 107 services, for example, Shercock and Cootehill, as well as a number of locations in Navan, not served by either the 107 or 109 services?

    (This is a sincere question. This is not a criticism of private coach services. I have regularly spoken positively of each of these services, and other private coach services, in previous posts in this discussion, and in different threads.)
    n97 mini wrote: »
    Aw here, can we have some facts instead. Subvention has been increasing every year for the last several years to the point where BE is getting more now than it was in 2007, the peak of the bubble.

    It has been pointed out numerous times that subvention to Bus Éireann has decreased since 2008.

    An Irish Times article, by Barry Roche, cites Joe Kelly of the Cork Council of Trade Unions:

    "Mr Kelly pointed out that the Public Service Obligation subvention to Bus Éireann had been reduced annually from €42 million in 2008 to €33 million in 2015 and said this should be reversed if the company is to have any chance of competing with private operators".

    http://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/ross-urged-to-grant-bus-%C3%A9ireann-non-stop-express-licences-1.2966903

    http://sillan.ie/
    http://www.matthews.ie/
    http://collinscoaches.ie/
    http://www.rte.ie/news/player/2017/0221/21133868-bus-eireann-not-getting-its-fair-share-of-public-subvention-siptu/
    https://www.oireachtas.ie/parliament/media/committees/transport/NBRU-presentation.pdf
    http://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/ross-urged-to-grant-bus-%C3%A9ireann-non-stop-express-licences-1.2966903

    This is an item, dated 24th Fevruary 2017, about the NBRU welcoming a commitment of the Minister Shane Ross to increase subvention.

    Does that not indicate that it has not been increasing in recent years, if previously the NBRU has highlighted that since 2008, that it has been decreasing?

    http://www.kfmradio.com/news/24022017-1328/listen-minister-commits-increasing-subvention-bus-eireann

    This letter indicates that the subvention to Bus Éireann in 2015, was less than it was, in 2007

    http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/letters/bus-%C3%A9ireann-is-crisis-the-policy-1.2995531


  • #2168
    end of the road
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,567 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    JCX BXC wrote: »
    If I'm honest I'm actually quite surprised this has gone on as long as it has. Is it Day 17 today? Fair play to the minister for not budging.

    fair play to the minister for not budging on something he actually can't budge on. that doesn't make any sense. if bailing out the expressway part of the company would constitute illegal state aid then there is nothing to say fair play to him for, as he cannot do anything. i know people believe that he could do something but is choosing not to, when in actual fact he can't. he has been good at convincing people of something that isn't the case.
    n97 mini wrote: »
    I'm not sure if you misunderstand. PSO routes are profitable for Bus Eireann (only) as they get paid money to operate them. The only other bus operator in the same position is Dublin Bus.

    Private bus operators would probably love to be paid to operate PSO routes in the same way BE are, but they're blocked from that process. BE has the monopoly.

    You seem to be opposed to anyone other than BE being paid to operate PSO routes, while complaining that you're spending €480 a week on taxis because BE are on strike. There is a large amount of irony there. Bit like turkeys voting for Christmas.

    it actually isn't. he is likely aware that private operation doesn't stop striking, or doesn't guarantee against a national bus strike. he also believes (and he can correct me if i'm wrong) that it's not our job to subsidize private operators.

    I'm very highly educated. I know words, i have the best words, nobody has better words then me.



  • #2169
    n97 mini
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,991 ✭✭✭n97 mini


    horseburger wrote: »
    I'll ask you this question as well, in relation to the charge that "Bus Éireann has the monopoly"

    Do you think it is possible that Sillan Tours - as referenced, in the post by paulboland, http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showp...postcount=2147 - might decide, at some point, to submit an application to the NTA, to operate services from Dublin, much later, than at present, where its last service from Dublin is currently 7.15pm?

    Would the NTA, respond positively to an application by Sillan Tours, to operate later services from Dublin, or perhaps a more regular service throughout the whole day, to and from Dublin and Shercock, in a silimar way to the services by Collins Coaches, to and from Carrickmacross and Dublin, and Matthews Coaches, to and from Dundalk and Dublin?

    Was there anything prohibiting Sillan Tours from making such a proposal, over the last 20 years or so, or in recent years, to operate later services from Dublin, or a very frequent, regular service to and from Dublin and Shercock throughout the day, considering that Sillan Tours serve locations beyond Navan that are not served by the 109 and 107 services, for example, Shercock and Cootehill, as well as a number of locations in Navan, not served by either the 107 or 109 services?

    (This is a sincere question. This is not a criticism of private coach services. I have regularly spoken positively of each of these services, and other private coach services, in previous posts in this discussion, and in different threads.)

    Those questions can only be answered by the NTA and Sillan. Have you asked them?


  • #2170
    end of the road
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,567 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    kiaronh wrote: »
    The reason this was contracted out is that publicly run train in Ireland make a loss, as you noted earlier. The question is what is cheaper for the taxpayer: paying Transdev to run it (where they will take a profit) or running it as a taxpayer owned public company. In theory a publicly owned company should be cheaper, but as we see in other areas, with no competition there is no motivation to cut costs. So the taxpayer pays more.

    slight correction, trains mostly make a loss in ireland. it's nothing to do with being publically owned but other factors such as lack of encouragement of usage and lack of a quality onboard environment and speeds being slow. however, there is room for growth but it needs the support of all parties and stakeholders. the reason luas was contracted out was nothing to do with making a loss, but as a test bed. we actually do know which is cheeper between private and public in terms of trains thanks to the uk. what we don't know is about light rail, aka luas because no public company exists to bid for the contract to run it, unless irish rail were to do so (if they were even allowed)
    kiaronh wrote: »
    You can argue back and forth on the rights and wrongs of this point, but I can't think of an example where taking something into public ownership cut costs.

    the exact same applies to full private operating of transport with no state alternative.
    kiaronh wrote: »
    And if the Luas makes a loss, would you like to see that loss come to the taxpayer? Because at the moment if they make a loss that's Transdevs problem. The taxpayer has paid a fixed price for Transdev to do this and that's all we pay whether they make a loss or a profit.

    actually it makeing a loss is very much our concern. bidders wouldn't be attracted to bid if there were losses on their side and we would have to take a hit on the premium paid.

    I'm very highly educated. I know words, i have the best words, nobody has better words then me.



  • #2171
    n97 mini
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,991 ✭✭✭n97 mini


    end of the road wrote: »
    it actually isn't. he is likely aware that private operation doesn't stop striking, or doesn't guarantee against a national bus strike. he also believes (and he can correct me if i'm wrong) that it's not our job to subsidize private operators.
    Wrong. It's not our job to subsidise any operator, it's about subsidising public transport.


  • Advertisement
  • #2172
    n97 mini
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,991 ✭✭✭n97 mini


    horseburger wrote: »
    It has been pointed out numerous times that subvention to Bus Éireann has decreased since 2008.
    It has also been increased, but some people have selective hearing because it suits their agenda.

    Subvention to BE
    2008 - 41.8m
    2015 - 33.7m
    2016 - 40.8m
    2017 - 48m (estimated)


  • #2173
    horseburger
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,138 ✭✭✭horseburger


    n97 mini wrote: »
    Those questions can only be answered by the NTA and Sillan. Have you asked them?

    Therefore, you cannot be in any way certain, - in your posts on this forum, where you advocate Bus Éireann be wound down completely, and you suggest that other bus companies would happily take over routes currently operated by Bus Éireann - that such companies would be interested in applying to operate such services.

    That is the concern that I, and others, have highlighted on a number of occasions, but in response, all we get is being accused of scaremongering, for a asking a very relevant and pertinent question.

    Again, I have to stress - in case people deliberately misleadingly respond to me suggesting I have stated something I haven't - I am not crticising private coach operators. I am concerned as to whether or not they would be interested in running PSO routes, if a decision was taken to wind down Bus Éireann completely and offer Bus Éireann routes to other companies.


  • #2174
    n97 mini
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,991 ✭✭✭n97 mini


    horseburger wrote: »
    Therefore, you cannot be in any way certain, - in your posts on this forum, where you advocate Bus Éireann be wound down completely, and you suggest that other bus companies would happily take over routes currently operated by Bus Éireann

    Straw man argument. Asking questions about Sillan and then trying to pin the answer on the bus industry as a whole. :rolleyes:


  • #2175
    roosterman71
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 6,083 ✭✭✭roosterman71


    horseburger wrote: »
    I am concerned as to whether or not they would be interested in running PSO routes, if a decision was taken to wind down Bus Éireann completely and offer Bus Éireann routes to other companies.

    I don't see why they wouldn't be interested. If BE can break even on the PSO routes with their high cost base, I'd imagine that private operators could make a profit for the same service as they have lower costs. Then, that could mean that the subvention offered would be lower. Perhaps!

    I recall reading on this thread that the existing PSO contracts, or some, are due for renewal in 2019. When the time comes, the NTA should say to all the companies, how much will it cost to run this route. Whoever can meet the requirements set out by the NTA, at the lowest cost, should win the contract. Repeat for all other PSO routes who need renewal.

    The NTA should also re-examine existing PSO routes and see if the numbers travelling make them commercially viable without subvention. Same goes for commercial routes deemed necessary that aren't profitable, maybe these need subvention.


  • #2176
    kiaronh
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 276 ✭✭kiaronh


    end of the road wrote: »
    slight correction, trains mostly make a loss in ireland. it's nothing to do with being publically owned but other factors such as lack of encouragement of usage and lack of a quality onboard environment and speeds being slow. however, there is room for growth but it needs the support of all parties and stakeholders. the reason luas was contracted out was nothing to do with making a loss, but as a test bed. we actually do know which is cheeper between private and public in terms of trains thanks to the uk. what we don't know is about light rail, aka luas because no public company exists to bid for the contract to run it, unless irish rail were to do so (if they were even allowed)

    When the Transdev contract runs out then anyone should be able to bid to run it. If Irish Rail could run it for for less than Transdev then they should be awarded the contract for the next 5 year period. But no one should be given a permanent contract because it removes any incentive to control costs.

    the exact same applies to full private operating of transport with no state alternative.

    All monopolies are bad. But if you have several groups competing then I don't really care if they are public or private bodies, as long as they are all tied to provide the same level of service.
    actually it makeing a loss is very much our concern. bidders wouldn't be attracted to bid if there were losses on their side and we would have to take a hit on the premium paid.

    If it makes a constant loss then over the long term it will raise the premium we pay, yes. But costs for Luas strikes last year fell to Transdev. The taxpayer agreed a payment scheme for 5 years and that's what we will pay. So the private operator takes the risk, we get a Luas at a fixed cost.

    Bidders will offer to run it for a figure that makes them a profit, but as long as there is competition we keep the cost to the taxpayer down, while TUPE laws protect employees.


  • #2177
    Jamie2k9
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,886 ✭✭✭✭Jamie2k9


    RTE Reporting (draft proposals):
    *120 drivers to exit company over 12 months (subject to funding)
    *Roster changes to improve driving time efficiency by a whopping 84%
    *Scrap travel/out based relief payments, replace with reduced overnight expense payments
    *Payments for rest days scrapped
    *Drivers to use fuel efficiency equipment, seat resv system, clean litter on bus
    *Operate new rosters immediately even if under protest until binding arbitration is ruled on any disputes

    http://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2017/0409/866409-talks-over-bus-eireann-dispute-continue-at-wrc/


  • #2178
    jackofalltrades
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,274 ✭✭✭jackofalltrades


    end of the road wrote: »
    they actually used the words, "potentially" and "at first"
    Where?
    I did a quick search for those terms and neither of them are used in the article.
    but not long term.
    Considering their guidelines cover the long term (3 years+) then it's safe to say that this paper deals with the long term.


  • #2179
    kiaronh
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 276 ✭✭kiaronh


    horseburger wrote: »
    Therefore, you cannot be in any way certain, - in your posts on this forum, where you advocate Bus Éireann be wound down completely, and you suggest that other bus companies would happily take over routes currently operated by Bus Éireann - that such companies would be interested in applying to operate such services.

    That is the concern that I, and others, have highlighted on a number of occasions, but in response, all we get is being accused of scaremongering, for a asking a very relevant and pertinent question.

    Again, I have to stress - in case people deliberately misleadingly respond to me suggesting I have stated something I haven't - I am not crticising private coach operators. I am concerned as to whether or not they would be interested in running PSO routes, if a decision was taken to wind down Bus Éireann completely and offer Bus Éireann routes to other companies.

    So why not open it up to bidding and find out?

    No one is suggesting we close BE and then try and find someone else to run the PSO routes. But if you announce well in advance that PSO routes are going out to tender then BE and anyone else could bid for them.

    If BE are the lowest or only bidder then they keep the routes. If not, someone else can do it. Repeat every few years to keeps bids low, as they do with the Luas.


  • #2180
    horseburger
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,138 ✭✭✭horseburger


    roosterman71 wrote: »
    I don't see why they wouldn't be interested. If BE can break even on the PSO routes with their high cost base, I'd imagine that private operators could make a profit for the same service as they have lower costs. Then, that could mean that the subvention offered would be lower. Perhaps!

    I recall reading on this thread that the existing PSO contracts, or some, are due for renewal in 2019. When the time comes, the NTA should say to all the companies, how much will it cost to run this route. Whoever can meet the requirements set out by the NTA, at the lowest cost, should win the contract. Repeat for all other PSO routes who need renewal.

    The NTA should also re-examine existing PSO routes and see if the numbers travelling make them commercially viable without subvention. Same goes for commercial routes deemed necessary that aren't profitable, maybe these need subvention.

    What I often wonder, though, what was stopping Sillan Tours from running more services to date, throughout the day to and from Dublin, or even later services from Dublin, in the same way as Matthews or Collins Coaches?

    Other have suggested that private coaches can't start services where there is a Bus Éireann route already in operation, saying that Bus Éireann has a monopoly, but surely that doesn't apply on the case of the Navan Dunshaughlin Dublin route, where Sillan Tours and Bus Éireann operate separate services?


  • #2181
    n97 mini
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,991 ✭✭✭n97 mini


    horseburger wrote: »
    What I often wonder, though, what was stopping Sillan Tours from running more services to date, throughout the day to and from Dublin, or even later services from Dublin, in the same way as Matthews or Collins Coaches?

    Other have suggested that private coaches can't start services where there is a Bus Éireann route already in operation, saying that Bus Éireann has a monopoly, but surely that doesn't apply on the case of the Navan Dunshaughlin Dublin route, where Sillan Tours and Bus Éireann operate separate services?

    Instead of labouring the point, email them and ask.


  • Advertisement
  • #2182
    PeadarCo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,045 ✭✭✭PeadarCo


    horseburger wrote:
    What I often wonder, though, what was stopping Sillan Tours from running more services to date, throughout the day to and from Dublin, or even later services from Dublin, in the same way as Matthews or Collins Coaches?

    How do we know they haven't enquired and been refused money for PSO services? Having looked at their website and compared their prices to bus Eireann where routes overlap they could do it for less money than Bus Eireann. A huge amount of the posts here in favour of the drivers have argued against tendering of services.

    What's stopping them from running more services is demand. They are a private business and have to make money to keep the lights on.


  • #2183
    GM228
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,917 ✭✭✭GM228


    Catherin Martin on The Week in Politics today saying that Shane Ross should extend PSO to cover Expressway services.



    https://twitter.com/rtetwip/status/851044247029465089

    Someone tell her that would be illegal state aid via the back door.


  • #2184
    oppenheimer1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,733 ✭✭✭oppenheimer1


    Jamie2k9 wrote: »
    RTE Reporting (draft proposals):
    *120 drivers to exit company over 12 months (subject to funding)
    *Roster changes to improve driving time efficiency by a whopping 84%
    *Scrap travel/out based relief payments, replace with reduced overnight expense payments
    *Payments for rest days scrapped
    *Drivers to use fuel efficiency equipment, seat resv system, clean litter on bus
    *Operate new rosters immediately even if under protest until binding arbitration is ruled on any disputes

    http://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2017/0409/866409-talks-over-bus-eireann-dispute-continue-at-wrc/
    So redundancies and a major cut back in overtime (driving time efficiency).

    Looks like a huge loss for the union, but then there was no real alternative plan that could save the company.


  • #2185
    kiaronh
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 276 ✭✭kiaronh


    PeadarCo wrote: »
    How do we know they haven't enquired and been refused money for PSO services? Having looked at their website and compared their prices to bus Eireann where routes overlap they could do it for less money than Bus Eireann. A huge amount of the posts here in favour of the drivers have argued against tendering of services.

    What's stopping them from running more services is demand. They are a private business and have to make money to keep the lights on.

    The NTA licenses seem to specifically spread the buses out throughout the day to avoid clashing with other buses on the same route to avoid saturation and give people more options for travelling.

    https://www.nationaltransport.ie/downloads/guidelines_for_licensing_public_buses.pdf


  • #2186
    trellheim
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,213 ✭✭✭trellheim


    So redundancies and a major cut back in overtime (driving time efficiency).

    Looks like a huge loss for the union, but then there was no real alternative plan that could save the company.

    It will need to be balloted ; I wonder what they get in return


  • #2187
    devnull
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 11,911 Mod ✭✭✭✭devnull


    In relation to the Sillian Tours license, this was issued prior to the Public Transport Regulation bill of 2009 and was issued in August 2004. This decision would have been taken by the then Minister for Transport which would have been Seamus Brennan or Martin Cullen, at that time there were no openly published guidelines on licensing and no license types that were made up, there were just licenses, how they were decided on was never shared with the public and never broke down, each one was pretty much decided on a case by case basis.

    As part of the Public Transport Regulation Act of 2009 it was no longer the case and routes that were identical to an existing PSO service or very similar were not approved on the basis that on PSO routes ithe incumbent who gets PSO has an exclusive contract for that route. However, exisiting licenses that were issued before then, would be renewed on a rolling basis, but new licenses would have the publicly defined criteria, enshrined in law based on the 2009 Public Transport Regulation Act, and the NTA's publicly published guidelines.

    I'm not sure you can blame the NTA on this one, what the NTA have done excellently is set a robust set of clearly published licensing guidelines and an act that underpins them, before 2009 that was not the case and the previous arrangement allowed a minister and the department to have discretion, which ultimately was tested out by Swords Express in court and found to be discriminating against them, this was one of the key factors thaht led to the creation of the 2009 Act and clearly published guidelines as opposed to the previous approach of whatever the minister felt on the day he made the decision.

    As for why Sillian don't offer as many services as Bus Eireann, pretty obvious isn't it, because they have to pay for their own vehicles and their own insurance and also their own full costs, so they will never sustain the same frequency against a competitor who has all of these paid for by the state. To even compare both operators is laughable, as per normal you are comparing a company who has free buses, insurance and huge amounts of taxpayer money (apples) with one who has none of them (oranges) and wondering why there are more apples.

    Also I don't agree that the Sillian route is identical, their route services a number of places that the 109 does not serve after Navan, so it's not like the route is exactly the same.


  • #2188
    n97 mini
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,991 ✭✭✭n97 mini


    trellheim wrote: »
    It will need to be balloted ; I wonder what they get in return

    To keep their jobs, and maintain BE's quasi monopoly on bus transport.


  • #2189
    Bass Reeves
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 20,710 ✭✭✭✭Bass Reeves


    trellheim wrote: »

    It will need to be balloted ; I wonder what they get in return

    They get to hold onto their jobs. NBRU's O'Leary complaining that Shane Ross is not at the table. i wonder why,.........Well I not really he wants him to sign a cheque

    Slava Ukrainii



  • #2190
    Heisenberg1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,511 ✭✭✭Heisenberg1


    oppenheimer1 wrote: »
    So redundancies and a major cut back in overtime (driving time efficiency).

    Looks like a huge loss for the union, but then there was no real alternative plan that could save the company.

    120 drivers to exit the company over the next 12 months would imply VS so that will be offered to the more senior drivers who are close to retirement age they will probably get a nice lump to see them on there way.


  • Advertisement
  • #2191
    Stephen15
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,905 ✭✭✭Stephen15


    Jamie2k9 wrote: »
    RTE Reporting (draft proposals):
    *120 drivers to exit company over 12 months (subject to funding)
    *Roster changes to improve driving time efficiency by a whopping 84%
    *Scrap travel/out based relief payments, replace with reduced overnight expense payments
    *Payments for rest days scrapped
    *Drivers to use fuel efficiency equipment, seat resv system, clean litter on bus
    *Operate new rosters immediately even if under protest until binding arbitration is ruled on any disputes

    http://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2017/0409/866409-talks-over-bus-eireann-dispute-continue-at-wrc/

    Litter pick? For God's sake how is that gonna make it more efficent for buses are buses do buses not get cleaned back at the depot any way. Also DB/BE not sure about IE afaik employ their own cleaners rather then contracting it to Filipinos on the Minimum wage.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement