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,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

JP Morgan Boss Slams Dublin Transport Infrastructure

124»

Comments

  • #92
    trellheim
    Registered Users Posts: 5,854 ✭✭✭trellheim


    they serve little or no purpose as they have no power and are effectively run by an appointed administrator (City/County manager) in vague consultation with the council.

    this is not correct; they serve a huge purpose ! the workers on the ground are needed BUT its the only way TDs used to be able to show favouritism so thats why we have tons and tons of councils - I never said it was a nice purpose


  • #93
    daheff
    Registered Users Posts: 5,833 ✭✭✭daheff


    lawred2 wrote: »
    Oh no... not this again
    And not this again either
    bk wrote: »
    No, it is a chicken and egg problem. We have piss poor public transport because too much road space is given too cars and not enough space and priority given to buses and trams.
    And will reducing car access improve (both financially and acessibility) public transport?
    bk wrote: »
    Reduce the cars and give more space to the above and public transport greatly improves.
    If you reduce anymore access on the quays you will remove it altogether. Say what you like, we still need car access to the city centre...otherwise people will stop coming completely and the city centre will be come a ghost town. I guess we don't want that?
    bk wrote: »
    You mean too much money given to social services, public sector employee pay and tax cuts, leaving nothing for infrastructure investment. It is all about priorities.
    In some cases yes....but you try telling that to the guard/teacher /civil servant/nurse on 25k a year they are getting paid too much.

    Like it or not the country only has so much money and has many competing priorities.
    bk wrote: »
    Ironically the better the infrastructure you have, the more high paying, high tax jobs you can attract here, which leads to more tax take and thus money money available for all of the above. But then we tend to be too short sighted for that.
    In some cases...in others not. Infrastructure is only one factor....otherwise there would be excommunist cities ruling the world. A lot of east european countries have an undergrounds...but still low paid jobs.


  • #94
    lawred2
    Registered Users Posts: 24,257 ✭✭✭✭lawred2


    daheff wrote: »
    If you reduce anymore access on the quays you will remove it altogether. Say what you like, we still need car access to the city centre...otherwise people will stop coming completely and the city centre will be come a ghost town. I guess we don't want that?

    Currently - as it stands - do you believe that private cars carry more into the city centre than public transport does? Because that's the central tenet of your point there.


  • #95
    bk
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 22,439 Mod ✭✭✭✭bk


    zetalambda wrote: »
    Yes, I know Ireland is a tax haven and in 2016, not one new company was listed on the ISE. Apple, Facebook, Microsoft and all the other foreign companies that have established their EMEA HQ's here did it for one reason and it wasn't because of our skilled professionals!

    I agree with everything you said about Frankfurt, but I totally disagree with the above.

    Each of those companies individually employ thousands of very well educated, well paid and thus high tax paying people. I can assure you that the vast majority of people they employ are NOT involved in the financial side. They are involved in IT, R&D, Sales, Customer Support, etc. I know because I myself work for a multinational and so do most of my friends.

    Those companies wouldn't need more then 12 staff if there were just here for taxes.

    Google alone employs more then 5,000 people!

    Of course low taxes and business friendly government helps. But they are also here for the very well educated and skilled professionals and in some ways attractive place to come for skilled people from other countries.
    daheff wrote: »
    And will reducing car access improve (both financially and acessibility) public transport?

    Yes, of course it will!

    Give more space to buses and trams which carry 10 to 20 times as many people per lane per hour then cars. Of course that will improve public transport, just like it has in pretty every European city that has limited car access already.

    This isn't new, this is pretty much public transport planning 101 in Europe for the past forty years!

    daheff wrote: »
    If you reduce anymore access on the quays you will remove it altogether. Say what you like, we still need car access to the city centre...otherwise people will stop coming completely and the city centre will be come a ghost town. I guess we don't want that?

    Errr... You do realise that of people who shop in Dublin City Center, only 19% of them got there by car! The other 81% got there by walking, cycling and public transport.

    Ban cars, give more space to trams and buses, make it easier for more people to get too the city center and get around it and I guarantee you Dublin business will be up, up, UP.


  • #96
    jimmycrackcorm
    Registered Users Posts: 14,326 ✭✭✭✭jimmycrackcorm


    daheff wrote:
    And will reducing car access improve (both financially and acessibility) public transport?

    Absolutely. Because it's impossible to improve public transport without removing cars. Which is proven by a cursory glance at the streets that the LUAS runs on.
    daheff wrote:
    If you reduce anymore access on the quays you will remove it altogether. Say what you like, we still need car access to the city centre...otherwise people will stop coming completely and the city centre will be come a ghost town. I guess we don't want that?

    We should suck it and see. But given the vast numbers of people who travel into the city centre via pubic transport already compared to cars, it's a no brainer that it would just become mite popular.

    Again the LUAS is an example whereby once the red line began operating, numbers on the equivalent bus routes dropped like a stone because of the improved service.

    There's simply no excuse for having cars travel in preference to public transport in a congested environment.


  • Advertisement
  • #97
    daheff
    Registered Users Posts: 5,833 ✭✭✭daheff


    bk wrote: »
    Yes, of course it will!

    Give more space to buses and trams which carry 10 to 20 times as many people per lane per hour then cars. Of course that will improve public transport, just like it has in pretty every European city that has limited car access already.

    This isn't new, this is pretty much public transport planning 101 in Europe for the past forty years!

    .
    So you think because there will be more roadspace available by removing cars that public transport will automatically improve? How so? DB/ BE cant just hire drivers at a whim to do this- even if they could afford it. Luas has no possibility of increasing the amount of lines because of the capital costs.
    jimmycrackcorm wrote: »
    Absolutely. Because it's impossible to improve public transport without removing cars. Which is proven by a cursory glance at the streets that the LUAS runs on.
    But what if we actually put all this extra capacity underground?? Then we actually ADD to the commuting capacity instead of just repurposing whats already there. Thats the kind of thing we should be doing...not forcing people onto unsuitable public transport.
    jimmycrackcorm wrote: »
    We should suck it and see. But given the vast numbers of people who travel into the city centre via pubic transport already compared to cars, it's a no brainer that it would just become mite popular.
    I'm not against the idea of public transport. I'm against the idea that it should only be public transport to the detriment of people for whom public transport does not suit.
    jimmycrackcorm wrote: »
    Again the LUAS is an example whereby once the red line began operating, numbers on the equivalent bus routes dropped like a stone because of the improved service.
    I don't disagree that luas >bus>car, but only on a like for like journey. Compare a commuter coming from Lucan. they can get the bus or the car. They don't have a luas/train option. A lot of buses in the morning are full by the time they get to Lucan. So this user decides to drive. And many more examples like this.
    jimmycrackcorm wrote: »
    There's simply no excuse for having cars travel in preference to public transport in a congested environment.
    Assuming you have the required frequency and distributed coverage (which we dont, and wont unless we are prepared to pay much higher transport costs).


  • #98
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 48,222 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    daheff wrote: »
    So you think because there will be more roadspace available by removing cars that public transport will automatically improve? How so? DB/ BE cant just hire drivers at a whim to do this- even if they could afford it.
    well, if it reduces average journey time by 10%, it means 10% more journeys can be made in a given time period. i.e. greater carrying capacity.


  • #99
    bk
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 22,439 Mod ✭✭✭✭bk


    daheff wrote: »
    So you think because there will be more roadspace available by removing cars that public transport will automatically improve? How so? DB/ BE cant just hire drivers at a whim to do this- even if they could afford it. Luas has no possibility of increasing the amount of lines because of the capital costs.

    Of course they can, what are you on about!

    It is relatively quick and easy to hire and train up new bus drivers. It takes just a few months, nothing at all in terms of public transport planning.

    It is one of the major advantages of buses, how relatively flexible it is. Relatively quick and easy to adjust to demand.

    Dublin Bus currently has a recruitment drive on and the NTA has placed an order for 300 new buses for Dublin Bus, the biggest order ever made!

    And then they are the big upcoming plans for the three new BRT routes which will add significant capacity.

    Never mind all the private operators (Aircoach, Dublin Coach, Citylink, etc.) all of whom have been growing like mad over the last 5 years and ordering large numbers of new coaches.
    daheff wrote: »
    But what if we actually put all this extra capacity underground?? Then we actually ADD to the commuting capacity instead of just repurposing whats already there. Thats the kind of thing we should be doing...not forcing people onto unsuitable public transport.

    While of course we should be building Dart Underground and Metro North. The issue is that they will cost billions and look like they will take decades to build.

    Dublin has some of the worst congestion of any city in Europe. We simply can't wait decades for these to be built, we need to fix them now.

    And even when they are built, we will still need buses and trams. Look at London, despite the amazing London Underground service, London Bus still carries significantly more people per day then the Underground!

    There is simply no room in our cities for cars.

    daheff wrote: »
    I'm not against the idea of public transport. I'm against the idea that it should only be public transport to the detriment of people for whom public transport does not suit.

    What you mean, is you are happy for other people to use public transport while you enjoy the comfort of your car!

    Frankly it is a very selfish attitude.

    Sure, fine if we had unlimited space. But we don't, the roads are highly congested and we need to prioritise the most efficient form of transport.

    What you are suggesting is that you have a greater right to the road space then the 10 to 20 times as many people sitting on the bus or Luas next to you.

    What makes you more entitled to that space then all those people?

    daheff wrote: »
    I don't disagree that luas >bus>car, but only on a like for like journey. Compare a commuter coming from Lucan. they can get the bus or the car. They don't have a luas/train option. A lot of buses in the morning are full by the time they get to Lucan. So this user decides to drive. And many more examples like this.

    The reason this happens, is because there simply isn't enough road space for more buses. Remove cars and you have more road space for buses and thus more capacity can be put on routes like this.

    The reason they are trying to remove cars from the city center is because the existing bus lanes have actually reached their max capacity at peak hours. They are going to give more space over to buses, so that more new bus capacity can be introduced.
    daheff wrote: »
    Assuming you have the required frequency and distributed coverage (which we dont, and wont unless we are prepared to pay much higher transport costs).

    We pay some of the highest transport costs in the world, recent report found that we are the second highest in the world!

    The problem isn't cost, it is simply using the road space more efficiently.


  • #100
    daheff
    Registered Users Posts: 5,833 ✭✭✭daheff


    bk wrote: »
    Of course they can, what are you on about!

    It is relatively quick and easy to hire and train up new bus drivers. It takes just a few months, nothing at all in terms of public transport planning.

    It is one of the major advantages of buses, how relatively flexible it is. Relatively quick and easy to adjust to demand.

    Dublin Bus currently has a recruitment drive on and the NTA has placed an order for 300 new buses for Dublin Bus, the biggest order ever made!

    How many of those 300 are for additional capacity and how many are to replace buses who's life expectancy has passed (because DB failed/were unable to invest over the past few years)?

    bk wrote: »

    While of course we should be building Dart Underground and Metro North. The issue is that they will cost billions and look like they will take decades to build.

    Dublin has some of the worst congestion of any city in Europe. We simply can't wait decades for these to be built, we need to fix them now.

    Sure...but if we keep engaging in short-termism solutions we'll never have a proper infrastructure. Just because this is to take decades doesn't mean we don't do it. There is only so much road capacity and its nearly at breaking point.

    bk wrote: »
    And even when they are built, we will still need buses and trams. Look at London, despite the amazing London Underground service, London Bus still carries significantly more people per day then the Underground!

    There is simply no room in our cities for cars.
    I agree there is space for buses, trains and trams as part of the overall solution...but so is there a place for bikes & cars. The way to get people out of cars is to offer a viable alternative...not just a stick approach

    bk wrote: »
    What you mean, is you are happy for other people to use public transport while you enjoy the comfort of your car!

    Frankly it is a very selfish attitude.
    Who says I drive? I use public transport.

    bk wrote: »
    Sure, fine if we had unlimited space. But we don't, the roads are highly congested and we need to prioritise the most efficient form of transport.
    No -we need to prioritise adding capacity to the greatest extent possible...not just repurposing what we have. We will run out of road (to excuse the turn of phrase) on that very quickly and still have poor quality transport.
    bk wrote: »
    What you are suggesting is that you have a greater right to the road space then the 10 to 20 times as many people sitting on the bus or Luas next to you.

    What makes you more entitled to that space then all those people?
    What makes them more entitled to the space than car drivers who have no other alternative?

    bk wrote: »
    The reason this happens, is because there simply isn't enough road space for more buses. Remove cars and you have more road space for buses and thus more capacity can be put on routes like this.

    The reason they are trying to remove cars from the city center is because the existing bus lanes have actually reached their max capacity at peak hours. They are going to give more space over to buses, so that more new bus capacity can be introduced.
    I don't disagree that the bus lanes have reached capacity. Part of the problem is that there are only a couple of routes into /out of the city. Its and old city and has been badly planned over the past 30+ years and we are feeling the impact of that now. More bad planning isnt going to help us long term.
    bk wrote: »
    We pay some of the highest transport costs in the world, recent report found that we are the second highest in the world!

    The problem isn't cost, it is simply using the road space more efficiently.
    Really? What report was that- want to share a link? Compare Dublin transport costs to London -the cost in London is way more expensive.Same with Munich, Same with most other capital cities. And then remember commuters in Dublin can claim tax relief on annual tickets. I'm not aware of this being possible in most other countries (although am open to somebody showing its possibility).


  • #101
    Cookie_Monster
    Registered Users Posts: 24,468 ✭✭✭✭Cookie_Monster


    daheff wrote: »
    Really? What report was that- want to share a link? Compare Dublin transport costs to London -the cost in London is way more expensive.Same with Munich, Same with most other capital cities. And then remember commuters in Dublin can claim tax relief on annual tickets. I'm not aware of this being possible in most other countries (although am open to somebody showing its possibility).

    easy find...
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057737182
    What makes them more entitled to the space than car drivers who have no other alternative?
    It's a far more efficient and environmentally friendly use of space, of course they should have more entitlement. In the list of road space entitlements cars have to come at the bottom for things to change in any meaningful way, both environmentally and congestion-wise.
    No -we need to prioritise adding capacity to the greatest extent possible...not just repurposing what we have.
    BUt turning lanes full of cars into lanes only full of buses and cyclist massively increase capacity and does so very cheaply, easily and quickly. I'll pull out the old favourite picture as a very simple example.
    6a00d83454714d69e2017d3c37d8ac970c-800wi
    How many of those 300 are for additional capacity and how many are to replace buses who's life expectancy has passed
    DB have a needlessly short life span for their assets so technically none of them need to be replacements...

    PS - does anyone know do/will the NTA have the same short lifespan?


  • Advertisement
  • #102
    bk
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 22,439 Mod ✭✭✭✭bk


    Cookie_Monster wrote: »
    PS - does anyone know do/will the NTA have the same short lifespan?

    Ideally they should (reduces maintenance and fuel costs and keeps the fleet looking well with greater reliability).

    However over the last two years they have been instructing DB to hold onto buses longer in order to expand the fleet and this trend is expected to continue with this new big order.

    Eventually the NTA will have to do a bigger order to get rid of these older buses in order to keep the fleet age down. However it is a relatively easy way for them to quickly increase capacity as demand quickly increases.

    On the other hand, the NTA is going to be buying lots of new very high capacity single decker bendi buses for the new BRT routes, so maybe that is where they will be focusing their resources to really increase capacity.


  • #103
    LXFlyer
    Registered Users Posts: 17,541 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    There is some totally wrong and misleading information being posted here by people who ought to know better. But why I am surprised?

    The NTA new bus order is NOT for 300 buses in 2017 - the NTA put out a speculative tender in line with the practice followed by Dublin Bus in recent years. This practice is done to cover for a range funds being made available by the Department of Transport - they don't know until the current year starts how many buses they can actually fund.

    In answer to several parliamentary questions, the Minister has since confirmed that the funding that has been provided in 2017 will provide for 110 new buses for the Dublin PSO bus network and 70 buses for the Bus Eireann PSO network.

    He went on to confirm that of that 110 buses on order for Dublin, 90 would be replacement vehicles and 20 would be for fleet expansion.

    That's a massive difference from the 300 buses that are being quoted here and people should really check their facts before posting complete nonsense figures as they have been.

    Recruiting drivers been a serious issue for Dublin Bus and this has been reported here several times over. A reasonable number of the new recruits have left the company not long after they started, which has meant that they had to go back to square one. At the same time the training school can only cope with so many new trainees at any time. This has probably been one of the main blocks to service expansion.

    Finally, Dublin Bus replace their fleet over a 12 year life span. This is the normal average life cycle that most city operators use - it is not "needlessly short" as some people seem to think. At present some buses have had their useful life extended to 16 years to facilitate expanding the fleet.

    Anyone over 40 will remember what used to happen on a daily basis on the streets of Dublin because the bus fleet was well past their useful lives. The recovery vehicles spent virtually their entire day out on the roads recovering broken down buses to the depots. Let's be honest, that is very much the exception to the rule nowadays.

    Having a modern reliable bus fleet that is replaced every 12 years is important towards instilling customer confidence in the vehicles and attracting new people.

    Finally, reducing roadspace for private vehicles and increasing the space/priority for public transport will have a direct impact, as it will inevitably reduce running times, in other words end to end journey times, which means that you can get more trips out of the existing vehicles and staff than currently. Admittedly the impact of that in the morning peak is limited as vehicles will be on their first round trip, but it will make a difference throughout the day.


  • #104
    HivemindXX
    Registered Users Posts: 1,208 ✭✭✭HivemindXX


    Even if not a single bus was added (which you'd have to be very foolish to believe) clearing cars out of the way would increase the speed of the existing bus journeys. It would be very difficult to argue that isn't an improvement for bus users, which means the majority of people.

    Those who are incapable of moving on from the idea they should be entitled to drive their private car wherever they want, whenever they want are really clutching at straws here.

    I guess that is the unfortunate (for them) other side of the AAs argument that we can't do anything to reduce pandering to private cars until public transport is good enough (whatever that means). Public transport is already good enough in Dublin city centre to transport the majority of people. Now is the time we follow through, making it even better by taking space away from inefficient users of the public space.


  • #105
    bk
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 22,439 Mod ✭✭✭✭bk


    lxflyer wrote: »
    He went on to confirm that of that 110 buses on order for Dublin, 90 would be replacement vehicles and 20 would be for fleet expansion.

    Yes, though it should be pointed out that if there was a sudden increase in demand, that they could instruct DB to hold onto even more.

    Given that they buy buses at a rate of about 100 a year for DB, that gives them the potential ability to increase capacity by up to 10% per year if the demand arises.

    It many ways it doesn't make sense to suddenly increases capacity suddenly if the road space isn't there and the bus lanes are already congested. You just end up queuing the new buses behind old buses and the perennial problem of bunching.

    You really need to free up the road space for more buses first with more bus lanes and more bus priority. Then you can increase the number of buses into that space.

    As I said it is a chicken and egg problem. People drive because buses are full, buses are full because the bus lanes are full.

    You fix this problem by reversing it. You free up road space first, which decreases running times, which means existing buses can be turned around faster, increasing utilisation and capacity and you also increase the number of buses into the more lanes all of which lead to increased passenger capacity and thus public transport becomes "better" and more people take it.

    And of course all of that ignores the new BRT routes where realistically most of the capacity is going to be added.


  • #106
    n97 mini
    Registered Users Posts: 8,295 ✭✭✭n97 mini


    lxflyer wrote: »
    A reasonable number of the new recruits have left the company not long after they started,

    Any idea why?


  • #107
    LXFlyer
    Registered Users Posts: 17,541 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    n97 mini wrote: »
    Any idea why?

    No idea - but several of the driver contributors here have posted that fact.

    Recruitment is an issue - you can have all the buses you want but without drivers to drive them they won't be going anywhere. If they cannot recruit and retain staff there will be problems.

    To date virtually all of the new drivers and buses have been used to maintain existing schedules rather than add extra ones. There have been some limited morning peak extras on certain corridors and three new single departure routes to DCU added, but virtually no expansion of overall service levels.

    At a time when the city badly needs extra services on most routes, the response has been well below what is needed.


  • #108
    BlinkingLights
    Closed Accounts Posts: 910 ✭✭✭BlinkingLights


    BK: It's a vicious circle:

    1) Provide inadequate bus service.
    2) Customers try it a few times.
    3) Customers are late for work / left at bus stop
    4) Customers never use it again.
    5) Causes more cars on the road.
    6) CIE concludes there must be lack of demand (Outlying suburbs, Bus Eireann services in Cork etc suffer this dramatically).
    7) Go to 1.


  • #109
    murphaph
    Registered Users Posts: 19,018 ✭✭✭✭murphaph


    HivemindXX wrote: »
    Even if not a single bus was added (which you'd have to be very foolish to believe) clearing cars out of the way would increase the speed of the existing bus journeys. It would be very difficult to argue that isn't an improvement for bus users, which means the majority of people.

    Those who are incapable of moving on from the idea they should be entitled to drive their private car wherever they want, whenever they want are really clutching at straws here.

    I guess that is the unfortunate (for them) other side of the AAs argument that we can't do anything to reduce pandering to private cars until public transport is good enough (whatever that means). Public transport is already good enough in Dublin city centre to transport the majority of people. Now is the time we follow through, making it even better by taking space away from inefficient users of the public space.
    Exactly. Even without buying a single extra bus you can shift many more people buy banning cars because a single bus can now make more journeys in and out of town in the same period.

    Time some unpopular decisions were made to give massive priority to public transport and cycling.


  • #110
    AlekSmart
    Registered Users Posts: 14,005 ✭✭✭✭AlekSmart


    lxflyer wrote: »
    No idea - but several of the driver contributors here have posted that fact.

    Recruitment is an issue - you can have all the buses you want but without drivers to drive them they won't be going anywhere. If they cannot recruit and retain staff there will be problems.

    To date virtually all of the new drivers and buses have been used to maintain existing schedules rather than add extra ones. There have been some limited morning peak extras on certain corridors and three new single departure routes to DCU added, but virtually no expansion of overall service levels.

    At a time when the city badly needs extra services on most routes, the response has been well below what is needed.

    Busdriver recruitment into Dublin Bus is not quite "the issue" many contributors suggest.

    With recruitment currently "on hold",there remain several hundred existing applicants,awaiting the resumption Training activity.

    Significantly more than 90% of those drivers recruited since the current drive began in 2014 remain in the company,becoming appointed to the permanent staff on completion of a satisfactory 12 month probation period.

    This is an extremely high staff retention rate in an industry where,the mix of highly anti-social shift working,poor image and a,sometimes fickle or aggressve customer base,all contribute to high turnover rates.

    One of the most restrictive elements industry wide,is the age profile for new entrants to the Busdriving world.
    One needs to be 21, if the holder of a valid Certificate of Proffessional Competency or 24 without one.

    These age limits need to be reassesssed at E.U. level,as they exclude a large pool of enthusiastic and eminently trainable 18+ year olds,many of whom would be prepared to make a career within the Industry,but are well established elsewhere by the time their 21st has come around.

    It is 30+ years since Dublin Bus embarked upon the City Swift programme,which was based upon the policy of the then MD,Bob Montgomery,that 10 Minutes,was the maximum waiting time a potential passenger was comfortable with.

    Today,30 years later,we still have far too many routes with 20 - 30 minute headways.

    It is to be hoped that Jarret Walker's review may result in a focus on improved frequencies across the system,but unless it is understood and implemented,then it will be just another report for the Top Shelf.

    Frequency Sells :D !


    Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, and one by one.

    Charles Mackay (1812-1889)



  • #111
    LXFlyer
    Registered Users Posts: 17,541 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    That's good news Alek although some other driver posters here were suggesting otherwise which is what I was basing my comment on. If the issue of retention is not as great as they have suggested, then I'm happy to be corrected.

    However, it still does not change the fact that the lack of expansion of the bus service (in terms of frequency on key routes) is woeful - the service has not expanded to meet the upswing in the economy - it's far too far behind it.


  • Advertisement
  • #112
    AlekSmart
    Registered Users Posts: 14,005 ✭✭✭✭AlekSmart


    lxflyer wrote: »
    That's good news Alek although some other driver posters here were suggesting otherwise which is what I was basing my comment on. If the issue of retention is not as great as they have suggested, then I'm happy to be corrected.

    However, it still does not change the fact that the lack of expansion of the bus service (in terms of frequency on key routes) is woeful - the service has not expanded to meet the upswing in the economy - it's far too far behind it.

    Depending upon the Day,Weather,and frame of mind of the individual,I have been robustly assured that 90%....yes....NINETY PER CENT of ALL the new entrants had left the job within the first 3 months.

    There are always people,staff and outside observers alike,who's Glass is permanently half-full,and emptying rapidly.
    Very little positivity ever lights up their world,and the dark storm clouds of doom'n gloom tend to hover menacingly over each and every topic.

    Reality,when it intrudes,does tend to provide a chink of sunlight,with the reality that Full Time steadily paid Driving jobs with a high degree of Job Security and support are valued as a rule,particularly by those who experienced the worst of our Fiscal Collapse at first hand,of which group,there are now many working as Busdrivers.

    The nature of Busdriving,worldwide,makes it an employment category unsuitable for a large cohort of people.

    Shift Work,often of the most intrusive kind,and the constant requirement to deal effectively,yet firmly & fairly,with a vast swathe of humanity is not something which many people can combine with the actual mechanics of Urban Bus Driving,without at times,suffering a moment of self-doubt and what iff'ery.

    Each year,in Garages throughout the City,Drivers retire after 30 to 40 years service,and do so often with reluctance,whilst in many cases their colleagues of far lesser service grind their teeth in glum exasperation,at the prospect of having to work on...

    Eventually,I feel,Society will recognise the sense in allowing the 66 year old positive and happy Driver to simply work on,whilst facilitating the unhappy,dour uncomfortable staff member to head off to newer and greener pastures,perhaps with a little gratuity (and a smile :) )

    Oh and BTW, you are 100% correct,we...as in Dublin Bus/The NTA/and The Dept of Transport are FAR behind the upswing...but they are playing a cautious waiting game...Just in Case......( It's a Irish thing) :eek:


    Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, and one by one.

    Charles Mackay (1812-1889)



Advertisement