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
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Dublin Bus Radio nonsense

245

Comments

  • #32
    JustShon
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,404 ✭✭✭JustShon


    Possible to get a poll on this?

    I'm curious to see if opinion is as severely one-sided as the Luas strike.


  • #33
    JustShon
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,404 ✭✭✭JustShon


    weldoninhio wrote: »
    The scobes down the back of the bus aren't in control of a 10 tonne vehicle.

    If the drivers don't like the rule they can leave.

    Inconveniencing passengers who have nothing to do with the ban and zero influence over the lifting/inposition of the ban is pathetic.

    I take it you're opposed to unions / strikes in general?


  • #34
    SB_Part2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,951 ✭✭✭SB_Part2


    I can't understand what's so wrong about them using the radio.


  • #35
    weldoninhio
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,311 ✭✭✭✭weldoninhio


    JustShon wrote: »
    I take it you're opposed to unions / strikes in general?

    I would support the Cadbury workers and supported the Dunnes workers. I don't mind strikes or industrial action for a noble cause/retention of workers rights.

    Strikes/industrial action over not getting a 50% pay rise to an already decent wage or not being able to listen to Adrian Kennedy can pi55 off as far as I'm concerned. These are not big enough to warrant industrial action. As I've said it's quite pathetic.


  • #36
    JustShon
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,404 ✭✭✭JustShon


    weldoninhio wrote: »
    I would support the Cadbury workers and supported the Dunnes workers. I don't mind strikes or industrial action for a noble cause/retention of workers rights.

    Strikes/industrial action over not getting a 50% pay rise to an already decent wage or not being able to listen to Adrian Kennedy can pi55 off as far as I'm concerned. These are not big enough to warrant industrial action. As I've said it's quite pathetic.

    Fair enough I guess.

    I think the bus drivers are being quite reasonable, they're skipping the port tunnel, not refusing to drive at all. I know the public shouldn't have to suffer for it but in this case it's not like it's something the bosses at Dublin Bus can't do. Transdev can't give the Luas drivers the ridiculous pay rise they want. The quick solution to this industrial action is for Dublin Bus to just suck it up and let the drivers listen to the radio.


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    weldoninhio
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,311 ✭✭✭✭weldoninhio


    JustShon wrote: »
    Fair enough I guess.

    I think the bus drivers are being quite reasonable, they're skipping the port tunnel, not refusing to drive at all. I know the public shouldn't have to suffer for it but in this case it's not like it's something the bosses at Dublin Bus can't do. Transdev can't give the Luas drivers the ridiculous pay rise they want. The quick solution to this industrial action is for Dublin Bus to just suck it up and let the drivers listen to the radio.

    And what rule goes next? Surely if a driver does not follow the route he is assigned then he is in breach of his contract and disciplinary action should follow.


  • #38
    m5ex9oqjawdg2i
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,221 ✭✭✭✭m5ex9oqjawdg2i


    Think of the most boring job and then make it more boring, somehow.

    Some H&S díck read a report conducted by another díck or group of, which stated that their findings show using a radio in the cab of public transport increases the risk of a collision by 1.8%.... or some such crap.

    Let them have their radios ffs.


  • #39
    Zombienosh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,911 ✭✭✭Zombienosh


    There's a driver on my route sometimes that passive aggressively sings opera really loud.


  • #40
    JustShon
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,404 ✭✭✭JustShon


    weldoninhio wrote: »
    And what rule goes next? Surely if a driver does not follow the route he is assigned then he is in breach of his contract and disciplinary action should follow.

    You're not even holding to your own attitude of "If it's in the rules then suck it up"

    You said you supported the Dunnes workers, it was in the contract they all signed that they'd work zero hour contracts. Why did they get leeway and the DB drivers don't?

    How else do you propose DB drivers make changes to their working environment?

    I know you're saying that they should just fcuk off and work elsewhere if they don't like it but then you'd have far more than a 1 hour delay while they find new drivers for that route. This isn't the Luas we're talking about here, it's not just pushing a lever and hitting a dead man's button every few minutes, not every gob****e can drive a bus in a busy city without killing people.


  • #41
    TallGlass
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,935 ✭✭✭TallGlass


    weldoninhio wrote: »
    And what rule goes next? Surely if a driver does not follow the route he is assigned then he is in breach of his contract and disciplinary action should follow.

    Would you ever stop and get off that high horse, seriously. Look at your posts, it's a radio.

    By your logic no driver in Ireland should have a radio in there car. I can do just as much damage in my car as a bus that's 10 tonnes.


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    Victor
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 78,490 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    I can see a number of arguments from the Dublin Bus side:
    * Safety / distraction - talk radio is designed to wind people up.
    * Safety - the radio is often plonked on the dashboard in front of the driver, obstructing the view of the speedometer.
    * Noise - drivers need to interact with passengers at stops. This is more difficult with the extra noise.
    * Royalties
    TallGlass wrote: »
    And what if something was to happen on a Dart or an Airoplane for example? The drivers there cannot see or hear what's happening at the ends of the train or plane.

    Trains have intercoms.

    Aircraft over a certain number of passengers are required to have cabin crew.


  • #43
    Aongus Von Bismarck
    Registered Users Posts: 1,794 ✭✭✭Aongus Von Bismarck


    Proper order. You are paid to work, not to listen to some crank talking to Joe Duffy.

    Reminds me of an incident a few years back where this surly IT fellow arrived down to my desk wearing headphones and listening to godawful heavy metal. Didn't even acknowledge me as he started replacing the toner cartridges in the printer. I confronted him about this and followed it up with a sternly worded letter to his line manager.


  • #44
    magentis
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,249 ✭✭✭magentis


    weldoninhio wrote: »
    I would support the Cadbury workers and supported the Dunnes workers. I don't mind strikes or industrial action for a noble cause/retention of workers rights.

    Strikes/industrial action over not getting a 50% pay rise to an already decent wage or not being able to listen to Adrian Kennedy can pi55 off as far as I'm concerned. These are not big enough to warrant industrial action. As I've said it's quite pathetic.


    Well,from speaking to someone within Dublin Bus the drivers are seeing this as the last straw.
    There has been a constant erosion of driver pay and conditions over the last 7 or 8 years.The company also reneged on paying 2 rounds of pay rises under the ppf claiming inability to pay,yet they were able to give pay rises to upper management,and waste money on stupid things.

    I commend them for taking a stand.


  • #45
    weldoninhio
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,311 ✭✭✭✭weldoninhio


    JustShon wrote: »
    You're not even holding to your own attitude of "If it's in the rules then suck it up"

    You said you supported the Dunnes workers, it was in the contract they all signed that they'd work zero hour contracts. Why did they get leeway and the DB drivers don't?

    How else do you propose DB drivers make changes to their working environment?

    I know you're saying that they should just fcuk off and work elsewhere if they don't like it but then you'd have far more than a 1 hour delay while they find new drivers for that route. This isn't the Luas we're talking about here, it's not just pushing a lever and hitting a dead man's button every few minutes, not every gob****e can drive a bus in a busy city without killing people.

    If you can't see the difference between zero hour contracts and listening to a radio then there is nothing I can say to change that. The drivers work for the company. The company makes the rules. Don't like it? Move to a new company.


  • #46
    Lux23
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,134 ✭✭✭Lux23


    In fairness, there are very few Dublin Bus accidents so I don't see the need for banning drivers from listening to the radio, it was a petty of Dublin Bus management to insist on the ban.


  • #47
    magentis
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,249 ✭✭✭magentis


    Aongus Von Bismarck wrote: »
    Proper order. You are paid to work, not to listen to some crank talking to Joe Duffy.

    Reminds me of an incident a few years back where this surly IT fellow arrived down to my desk wearing headphones and listening to godawful heavy metal. Didn't even acknowledge me as he started replacing the toner cartridges in the printer. I confronted him about this and followed it up with a sternly worded letter to his line manager.

    SHOCK HORROR!

    Aongus gets the bus!!!!!


  • #48
    RayM
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,973 ✭✭✭RayM


    weldoninhio wrote: »
    And what rule goes next? Surely if a driver does not follow the route he is assigned then he is in breach of his contract and disciplinary action should follow.

    You are being absolutely ridiculous. Listening to a radio is not going to inconvenience anyone. It's a petty, pointless little rule. It's not like the drivers are demanding that radios are installed in their cabs (which wouldn't actually be that unreasonable, given that coaches have them as standard). All they want is to be able to listen to the radio while driving, and anyone who begrudges them such a harmless pleasure is a pretty miserable individual.


  • #49
    DrumSteve
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,798 ✭✭✭✭DrumSteve


    Ffs just let them use their radio.


  • #50
    JustShon
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,404 ✭✭✭JustShon


    weldoninhio wrote: »
    If you can't see the difference between zero hour contracts and listening to a radio then there is nothing I can say to change that. The drivers work for the company. The company makes the rules. Don't like it? Move to a new company.

    Again, what happens to the route if all of the drivers who serve that route do move to a new company?


  • #51
    weldoninhio
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,311 ✭✭✭✭weldoninhio


    TallGlass wrote: »
    Would you ever stop and get off that high horse, seriously. Look at your posts, it's a radio.

    By your logic no driver in Ireland should have a radio in there car. I can do just as much damage in my car as a bus that's 10 tonnes.

    My logic is that the company they work for has said they can't listen to the radio. Don't like it, leave. Don't add 2 hours a day to my commute over something so pathetic.


  • Advertisement
  • #52
    knucklehead6
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,840 ✭✭✭knucklehead6


    weldoninhio wrote: »
    Dublin Bus drivers are refusing to use the Port Tunnel from next week and looking at non-collection of fares from next week because the drivers are not allowed use a radio in their cabs.

    What is the story with all of the industrial action over the pettiness of things?? Start training up bus and Luas drivers and sack the lot of the whingers. Inconveniencing thousands of people over nonsense.


    You do realise that by non collection of fares they will still be running the buses, the service will still be provided, it just won't cost the users any money. In terms of industrial action, it's actually a good one, as it impacts the company, not the public


  • #53
    weldoninhio
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,311 ✭✭✭✭weldoninhio


    JustShon wrote: »
    Again, what happens to the route if all of the drivers who serve that route do move to a new company?

    It'll have a skeleton schedule for a while, but then hopefully will have decent drivers who abide by what they've signed up for and don't strike over the pettiest thing they can think of.


  • #54
    weldoninhio
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,311 ✭✭✭✭weldoninhio


    knucklehead6 wrote: »
    You do realise that by non collection of fares they will still be running the buses, the service will still be provided, it just won't cost the users any money. In terms of industrial action, it's actually a good one, as it impacts the company, not the public

    Non collection of fares was made illegal a few years ago was it not. I am sure this came up during their last industrial action less than a year ago when they didn't run at all.

    I'm more annoyed at the additional 2 hours added to my commute by not using the Port Tunnel.


  • #55
    Victor
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 78,490 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    knucklehead6 wrote: »
    You do realise that by non collection of fares they will still be running the buses, the service will still be provided, it just won't cost the users any money. In terms of industrial action, it's actually a good one, as it impacts the company, not the public
    If fares aren't collected, the company loses money, making it harder to operate services, thereby risking cuts to services.


  • #56
    RayM
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,973 ✭✭✭RayM


    Aongus Von Bismarck wrote: »
    Proper order. You are paid to work, not to listen to some crank talking to Joe Duffy.

    Reminds me of an incident a few years back where this surly IT fellow arrived down to my desk wearing headphones and listening to godawful heavy metal. Didn't even acknowledge me as he started replacing the toner cartridges in the printer. I confronted him about this and followed it up with a sternly worded letter to his line manager.

    Sounds like the sort of thing 'some crank' would do...


  • #57
    RayM
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,973 ✭✭✭RayM


    Victor wrote: »
    If fares aren't collected, the company loses money, making it harder to operate services, thereby risking cuts to services.

    Alternatively, fares are collected... because the company decides that the implementation and enforcement of such a petty little rule is not worth the hassle, and that allowing drivers such a minor pleasure isn't actually going to cause harm to anyone. That would surely be the most sensible and rational outcome.


  • #58
    ted1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,648 ✭✭✭✭ted1


    VinLieger wrote: »
    So far that hasnt been mentioned at all as a reason and if it was you can bet DB would be using it as its a fair one. The lack of a reason so far is what makes me think its petty

    The IMRO licence is the reason


  • #59
    BattleCorp
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,789 ✭✭✭✭BattleCorp


    ted1 wrote: »
    The IMRO licence is the reason

    I doubt that is the issue here.

    If the driver has a radio in the cab, it is there for his own personal use. I don't think fees have to be paid when you listen to a personal radio. If the driver's radio was piped through the speakers on the bus, then yes there might be IMRO fees to be paid.


  • #60
    ted1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,648 ✭✭✭✭ted1


    BattleCorp wrote: »
    I doubt that is the issue here.

    If the driver has a radio in the cab, it is there for his own personal use. I don't think fees have to be paid when you listen to a personal radio. If the driver's radio was piped through the speakers on the bus, then yes there might be IMRO fees to be paid.

    No, see your thinking you didn't do research .


    http://www.imro.ie/music-users/faq/

    It is irrelevant who in your organisation has access to copyright music via the TV/radio. What is relevant is that the use of music in the workplace is in public and is considered a public performance of the copyright work, because the performance / music use is taking place outside of the domestic environment.


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    Dyr
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,246 ✭✭✭✭Dyr


    The bus driver could be blaring scooter from a boom box for all I care so long as the f**ker turns up


Advertisement