Rashers72 wrote: » I think PPT services have benefited but since they rolled out, Drogheda trains going through Pearse in the 8-9am and 5-6pm slot M-F have all started to suffer from extra 5-10 min in delays most days. Just my experience. IE now refer to it as 'congestion'. Not sure of impact on Maynooth trains. In the morning, the train I get arrives 5 mins early outside Connolly (due to padding), awaits a train from Newbridge, then arrives into Connolly and waits there, and then leaves after 2-3 mins behind schedule into Pearse behind the PPT service. I was told all will be resolved with the new timetable. I would imagine this is impacting DARTS also.
LuckyLloyd wrote: » Ah right, I wouldn't have picked up on the knock on impact to other services. They certainly seem to be running the PPT stuff like clockwork where they weren't before so hopefully they can figure out other issues in due course. There was a sense of utter haywire and mayhem described on this thread in the initial months after they opened the PPT that thankfully seems to have dissipated.
thomasj wrote: » Looking forward to see the new timetable , upgrade to maynooth services off peak in the new timetable, likewise with PPT services.
loyatemu wrote: » is there a revised timetable coming? I noticed the timetable posters in Greystones are dated 2013, was that the last revision?
LXFlyer wrote: » There is a commitment to the 10 minute DART service between Bray and Howth Junction from the NTA, but that won't happen until the current pay negotiations conclude. That will require a full timetable recast. There have been changes since 2013, but mainly involving minor changes to services - no full recast. It may well be that the Greystones services were unaffected by those changes. As a general rule, there would traditionally be a new timetable issued each year, but that practice ceased during the recession.
loyatemu wrote: » I'm in no hurry to see the 10 minute Dart - it will only mean longer journey times with no increase in frequency from Greystones.
LXFlyer wrote: » Well I think you'll find that the "longer journey times" are actually more reflective of the actual running times today and are simply "longer scheduled journey times". The scheduled DART running times aren't achievable due to a variety of reasons - that's what was shown up by the introduction of the PPT services. The impact of late running DARTs was hidden to an extent by other services having more wriggle room.
LuckyLloyd wrote: » I've recently started using the PPT services every day between Pearse and Parkwest and have to say that I find them incredibly reliable and punctual.
loyatemu wrote: » Dart's been bang on time the last few months - I appreciate that is due to reduced dwell times as it's quieter over the summer but the higher frequencies should also reduce dwell times; the only period of the year when they're consistently late is in the autumn - I'm sure that'll still be the case even with the longer schedule.
LXFlyer wrote: » Really? The statistics don't agree with you.http://www.irishrail.ie/about-us/train-performance#dart in the first 8 periods this year to August 13th, DART punctuality has only once exceeded 90% and even that was marginal.
Rashers72 wrote: » Did not realise DART punctuality was it so bad in 2017...wonder how it compares to 2016? Although the other commuter lines have very positive punctuality %'s, I assume the off peak is very reliable bringing this overall up. My experience of peak services, does not match those %'s...
LXFlyer wrote: » They made some platform alterations at Connolly so that the three through platforms (5-7) would be available for use by through services (rather than one of them being used for a service starting at Connolly) that dramatically improved reliability. Whenever the new timetable is introduced (unlikely to happen until after the current IR negotiations conclude), it should be more robust as it had more realistic DART running times (reflecting actual times) than the current one, which in turn will knock onto other services' reliability.
Doltanian wrote: » Is there any plans to expand this service? From what I can see at the moment is that it is morning and evening services Monday to Friday only?
LXFlyer wrote: » Yes, but that will need new drivers. Currently new drivers are not being mentored by existing drivers (as part of their on the job training) as a bargaining chip in the current pay negotiations.
Stephen15 wrote: » Are IE even hiring drivers I've yet to see them advertise or do they just promote station staff etc.
tabbey wrote: » In modern times IR have generally recruited drivers from within the company. There have been exceptions,most notably Brendan Ogle. I suspect restrictive recruitment policies are illegal under EU and domestic law, but can understand reluctance to fully embrace open competition.
Losty Dublin wrote: » Brendan Ogle worked in Dundalk and Athlone stations for several years before he applied and was accepted for driver training. To his credit, he survived the over a year of training, which has a fail rate of about 90%. As regards illegal recruitment policies, well there are countless employers, both private and public, who recruit internally. If it was illegal then you'd expect for it to have been taken to task by now.
Working class heroes wrote: » 90% fail rate? Care to back that up?
Losty Dublin wrote: » Ask some of the inspectors who train staff and they willl concur give or take a few %. This would encompass those who fail the initial test, interviews, medicals, in training assessments or who plain can't hack the rigours of the training itself.
L1011 wrote: » So its not anywhere near 90% then? The failure rate as an idea is only applicable to those who actually start training. Those rejected at initial tests, interviews and medicals do not count - they either weren't suitable or capable to begin with.
tabbey wrote: » We are still waiting for clarification of what is exactly meant by a 90% failure rate. If for example an applicant was allowed to repeat the tests, as with motorist driving tests, and a typical applicant succeeded on the fifth attempt, this would reduce the ultimate failure rate to 50%. Perhaps trainees might fail an essential aspect of rules and regulations, but with coaching might succeed eventually. I do not doubt the integrity of Losty's post, I just feel it needs to be elaborated on to make us more aware of what exactly is the system and how it works in practice.
Working class heroes wrote: » • IR advertise positions internally (CIE Group)
ClovenHoof wrote: » Discrimination and cronyism. No wonder they act like Scientology.
ClovenHoof wrote: » Working class heroes wrote: » • IR advertise positions internally (CIE Group) Discrimination and cronyism. No wonder they act like Scientology.
Infini wrote: » To be honest they should be hiring people for the regular jobs like the platforms and such but over the last 10 years they've butchered the ground staff levels whike hiring managers and consultants etc. To be honest theyre running out of places to hire staff internally for the driving as all the old sources are nearly run dry. Believe they even lowered the bar for the extra dart drivers they took on who sit around nowadays doing nothing as theyre in a limbo themselves. This in itself is a part of the problem with the mentoring as it wasnt just the pay but I heard that if a driver being mentored SPADS for example the mentor ends up with points on their own licence (rail has their own system like normal driving) that can get them taken down even if they arent the one driving. It just isnt worth the risk for the older drivers to do the mentoring so thats partly why things are the way they are now.
