Tickityboo wrote: » The three week slot is 15 of those days.
RobbingBandit wrote: » Needs to be an independent survey carried out on each and every dublin bus route and cross referenced for a full quality assessment
CardinalJ wrote: » "We have informed the inspector on Duty. Our full fleet is deployed this morning" I had a total of 24 full 46a/145/118 or 84x busses go by my stop on the way to/from work over 4 days last week. One day was waiting for 35 minutes and had to get a taxi as so many at the stop that any busses that could stop wouldnt take anyone
devnull wrote: » How long has this policy been in place? The reason I ask is for the last few summers we've seen the same issues with lack of drivers to run contracted public obligation services, from what I've seen on these forums, which suggests that the policy of having everyone take 75% of their leave in the summer has consistently impaired the companies ability to run contracted services. If that is the case, then there is an argument to be had that the current policy should be changed because whilst it may well be serving the staff well, it doesn't meet the needs of the organisation to ensure that operational efficiency and appropriate staffing levels are maintained throughout the year to enable the company to meet it's operational requirements. A properly managed annual leave policy should not leave a company with lots of spare staff for 9 months of the year and then 3 months of the year when they are unable to even run their planned services, let alone have anyone spare to cover for things which could not be foreseen etc.
Tickityboo wrote: » Most driver's don't take the three weeks off. They either take a week or two or cancel them altogether because they don't suit or they can't get a swap. I'm there over 20 years and it has always been this way.
StreetLight wrote: » That's what the Jarrett Walker network review was supposed to be addressing. Anyone hear anything more about it?
devnull wrote: » It's the job of the management to make the staffing and holiday allowances meet the needs of the organisation to ensure that operational efficiency and appropriate staffing levels are maintained throughout the year to enable the company to meet it's operational requirements. It's not the job of the management to give staff everything what they want. If that means annoying a few staff than that is just the way it has to be. Company as a whole comes before any staff member and that's even more the case for public companies, which are supposed to be run for the public, not for the staff at the end of the day and sometimes the harsh reality is that you need to make decisions that will be unpopular with some people but are needed for the benefit of the company as a whole. In my roles in the past working with HR responsibilities I valued every single staff member that we had as people. I did not see the seniors as deserving to get everything and the juniors get nothing else the juniors will never stay. If you give seniors everything it creates a sense of entitlement and they throw a hissy fit when it's taken away and you always have the problem that the juniors are always leaving because the odds are heavily stacked against them and those with the most service only care about themselves so you can't change it.
Del2005 wrote: » Where you working in a company with severe staff shortages and stressful work? Telling people doing a stressful job and severe working hours restrictions they can't have holidays when there children are off will result in a worse service for the public transport users.
Stephen15 wrote: » True but employees are entitled to their annual leave and rightly so. Don't blame employees for taking the leave they are entitled to. Blame the company for not having a proper system in place. DB are running a socially nessecary service not merely a commercial one so having a system in place is crucial for them. I get the impression that there are a proportion of the DB workforce who hold a D licence but don't actually drive a bus in service. Most inspectors are ex drivers I believe so they would have a D licence and the mechanics also have a D licence. If there is a shortage of drivers why not ask these workers to fill in as interim solution perhaps even give them a bonus for doing so.
devnull wrote: » A well managed staff leave process prevents severe staff shortages happening in the first place rather than dealing with the same problem time and time again. I do not like denying people leave, but sometimes it could not be avoided. In a competitive marketplace if you cannot provide the product or service to your customers as you don't have enough staff, ultimately they will go elsewhere and if it keeps happening the staff will end up being laid off. Operational needs will always come first. Most contracts in the private sector or employee handbooks have a passage that specifically say that the granting of leave is subject to the staffing requirements and operational needs of the business to be able to service it's activities.
Del2005 wrote: » By law staff have to get 2 weeks holidays in a row every year.
If you have to give holidays and there is no other staff to cover the shift how is the person supposed to get their legally required holiday that you told them they have to take at a certain date?
In a company with staffing shortages and bad conditions for new entrants you don't want to be loosing the staff you already have by forcing them to cancel holidays they've already paid for.
In the private sector sone companies close for 2 weeks in the summer and a week over Christmas so their customers aren't coming first.
devnull wrote: » I have never worked in a company like this, neither have I known of anyone who does outside manufacturing. If any of the companies I worked in did this the lights would go off in a very big way and our competition would absolutely slaughter us.
devnull wrote: » The rules state that staff should be allowed two weeks holidays in a row every year, but it doesn't state that if an employee can take them when they want. Some employees don't even want to take two weeks of annual leave together and they are free to make that decision. That's why you need to properly manage the allocation to prevent such situations happening. It's common in most workplaces that staff are only allowed to take leave when it does not unduly effect the operation of their business. If it does they will be told to book another time and a good HR system would suggest alternatives or make leave calendars avaliable to access so staff can see when is free to take leave prior to booking unless there is very exceptional circumstances. Staffing shortages are caused by poor annual leave policies that in a lot of situations. I once walked into a department where people took an average of 4 days in the first half of the holiday year and took 19 in the second half. That was unsustainable as it left us with lots of people needing to take a lot of leave in the second half of the year so we couldn't staff our operations. So we brought in the guideline that at least 40% of leave must be used in the first 50% of the year. I have never had to cancel leave that has already been granted because the systems that I have had in place have meant that it's never got that bad. The best way to keep staff is to make sure everyone is getting something rather than some people getting everything and others getting nothing. That's why seniority systems fall down because you're always replacing the people at the bottom of the ladder and recruitment is expensive and time consuming. I have never worked in a company like this, neither have I known of anyone who does outside manufacturing. If any of the companies I worked in did this the lights would go off in a very big way and our competition would absolutely slaughter us.
Del2005 wrote: » DB allocate 2 weeks holidays to each employee. So if an employee is allocated 2 weeks by their employer at the start of the year how else are they supposed to manage holidays? When do you suggest that DB allocates the mandatory holidays to their staff?
devnull wrote: » My point is if the same system has been in place for 20 years, as has been outlined on this thread, and for a number of years now, it results in the same problems, then the system needs changing because it isn't fit for the purpose of delivering contracted public bus services as per the contract. If the same issues kept happening in my company so we could not fulfill our contracts to our customers then ultimately measures would be taken so it did not re-occur. You wouldn't see it happening year after year because our competitors would take advantage of it and use this to their advantage and we would probably not keep the contract when it's next up for renewal. If you have an annual leave system that has large amounts of spare drivers at one time of the year and another time of the year you can barely run standard services let alone have any spare, then there is serious problems with the annual leave system, because a proper workforce management strategy ensures that it is more balanced.
thomasj wrote: » I'm surprised there isn't a superthread where people vent their fury over service issues. There was an issue where I went on twitter to vent my fury over a 39a no-show . It wasn't the first time either last Saturday there was a gap of 45 minutes inbound for a 15 minute frequency . While I was on twitter I was surprised to see the amount of "apologies that service didn't run due to operational difficulties " in the past week there were a large number. Anyone else having these issues with their route?
_Kaiser_ wrote: » Nothing much has changed with the 39 then I see. Back in the days when I was living in that area and using buses daily, I stood waiting for almost an hour one evening while 14 buses went by in the other direction. As for the leave entitlement questions... yes, people should certainly use their annual leave, but the manager is responsible for ensuing that the rest of the team/business doesn't suffer as a result (which may mean saying "No" sometimes). A good manager will be able to schedule things so that he/she can be flexible with staff asks when possible, but with the "deal" being that sometimes it's not and the needs of the business/customer must come first. Good staff will similarly recognize this.
Tickityboo wrote: » There is no pick of holidays in Dublin Bus. Everybody is allocated a 3 week slot between May and September. If you are allocated May this year it skips to a different month the following year. Drivers have to try and swap amongst each other to get the weeks they need.
Bass Reeves wrote: » Looking at it from the outside with staff having an average of approximately 23 days leave it seems in DB staff are allowed to take over 65% of it in a 5 month period. Companies that run all year round service only allow 2 weeks during the summer holiday season with maybe 1-2 flexi days depending on service requirements. Allowing 65% of holiday time to be taken during a 45% time window will always effect service especially nowadays with tourism demands, concerts etc. Senior staff with less all year round demand on there time will always benefit from this system. Reducing theater slot to 2 weeks would have With a few flexi day would bring equilibrium to the holiday season.
Del2005 wrote: » Why would they have a balanced holiday schedule when they have highly seasonal loading? Forcing employees, especially with children, to take 2 weeks in February when you have full loading doesn't make sense. The loadings will drop hugely in the next few weeks so they should concentrate the holidays now.
Wishbone Ash wrote: » devnull wrote: » That's a typical public sector issue. In every company I worked in its been first come first served because it's fair to everyone. . I can't see how 'first come first served' could be fair. An employye with 40 weeks service can sign before an employee with 40 years service? And what determines who's first to come? What if an employee was on annual leave, maternity leave etc. when the leave is being allocated? I've never worked for any employer where the leave was done that way. At least seniority in service is very black and white. There's no grey (employees who began on the same day are done alphabetically). I've never known anyone to dispute where they stand and it provides something to give back to staff with long service.
devnull wrote: » That's a typical public sector issue. In every company I worked in its been first come first served because it's fair to everyone. .
