(03 Oct 2023, 2:10 pm)streetdeckfan wrote It would be an absolute shame if they lost the contracts and had to reduce the workforce.So you're telling me you would be happy for drivers to lose their jobs because of loss of contracts, because the drivers want a decent wage for what they have to put up with.
(03 Oct 2023, 6:19 pm)54APhotography wrote Time the Go Ahead Group ended their employ of Feetham. The man is poison.
(03 Oct 2023, 8:48 pm)TEN 6083 wrote MG may have had his faults, but things didn’t get so bad that the drivers went on strike. GNE has regressed a lot more since he came in and aren’t the first operator to go on strike with him there, as GNW did the same a couple of years back.I know MG does get a lot of stick, but one thing you can say he did try with GNE, he tried low fares, increase frequencys tbh apart from a few frequnecy cuts (56/20/53/54/60) really during his tenure GNE had the best timetables.
Sent from my iPhone 13 Pro using Tapatalk
(03 Oct 2023, 8:48 pm)TEN 6083 wrote MG may have had his faults, but things didn’t get so bad that the drivers went on strike. GNE has regressed a lot more since he came in and aren’t the first operator to go on strike with him there, as GNW did the same a couple of years back.
Sent from my iPhone 13 Pro using Tapatalk
(03 Oct 2023, 9:43 pm)Storx wrote Disagree personally. MG caused all this crap.
The fare reductions was one of the most insane ideas ever, literal suicide as if it didn't increase numbers then they're screwed which basically happened as the cancellations that have been consistent which was caused massively by the Chester depot closure - another short sighted idea. People didn't care mainly about the fare reductions but by god do they care about the increases even known it's roughly the same fare. Bad bad decision.
(03 Oct 2023, 9:53 pm)Ambassador wrote Yeah he did some really odd things with fares, not sure who the commercial manager or finance bod was was but they surely should have challenged it?
Chester depot was a masterclass in nuclear employee relations and the associated routes like the 21 et al have never recovered
(03 Oct 2023, 8:10 pm)Unber43 wrote So you're telling me you would be happy for drivers to lose their jobs because of loss of contracts, because the drivers want a decent wage for what they have to put up with.This might be an unpopular opinion, but the drivers were already offered a 'decent wage' and as usual the unions decided to try and push their luck. They've got to make it look like they're doing something otherwise how are they going to rake in their millions?
(03 Oct 2023, 11:36 pm)streetdeckfan wrote This might be an unpopular opinion, but the drivers were already offered a 'decent wage' and as usual the unions decided to try and push their luck. They've got to make it look like they're doing something otherwise how are they going to rake in their millions?
The fact of the matter is GNE are loss making and do not have the money to pay drivers more. More pay for drivers means they can afford less drivers. There is no magic money tree.
While an extra few percent doesn't sound like much, it's an extra £2m a year they're asking GNE to come up with. Actually that still doesn't sound like a lot, but that's an extra 70 full time drivers GNE could hire even after the 9.5% pay rise they were offered, or more likely 70 full time drivers they need to justify keeping around when they're already haemorrhaging money.
(feel free to check my maths, it's late and I didn't fancy breaking out Excel to work it out properly)
As for MG, I really do think his heart was in the right place, but he was screwed over by the pandemic. Passenger numbers had actually started increasing after he implemented the changes, so obviously something was working, had he become MD a year or two earlier, perhaps GNE would be in a much stronger position now?
Sent from my SM-F721B using Tapatalk
(03 Oct 2023, 11:36 pm)streetdeckfan wrote As for MG, I really do think his heart was in the right place, but he was screwed over by the pandemic. Passenger numbers had actually started increasing after he implemented the changes, so obviously something was working, had he become MD a year or two earlier, perhaps GNE would be in a much stronger position now?
Sent from my SM-F721B using Tapatalk
(03 Oct 2023, 11:36 pm)streetdeckfan wrote This might be an unpopular opinion, but the drivers were already offered a 'decent wage' and as usual the unions decided to try and push their luck. They've got to make it look like they're doing something otherwise how are they going to rake in their millions?I do agree, about GNE losing money, but I dont think its about the pay increase I think its the further retractment of employee beneifts, as I am pretty sure they are removing paid meal breaks (personally I think they should be paid if you have it over 30 mins), and extending driving tme (personally I think 4.5 hours) is enough but I can see why GNE are not budging on this as this would have some royal screw ups with the X10/24/26 etc.
The fact of the matter is GNE are loss making and do not have the money to pay drivers more. More pay for drivers means they can afford less drivers. There is no magic money tree.
While an extra few percent doesn't sound like much, it's an extra £2m a year they're asking GNE to come up with. Actually that still doesn't sound like a lot, but that's an extra 70 full time drivers GNE could hire even after the 9.5% pay rise they were offered, or more likely 70 full time drivers they need to justify keeping around when they're already haemorrhaging money.
(feel free to check my maths, it's late and I didn't fancy breaking out Excel to work it out properly)
As for MG, I really do think his heart was in the right place, but he was screwed over by the pandemic. Passenger numbers had actually started increasing after he implemented the changes, so obviously something was working, had he become MD a year or two earlier, perhaps GNE would be in a much stronger position now?
Sent from my SM-F721B using Tapatalk
(04 Oct 2023, 7:01 am)Unber43 wrote I do agree, about GNE losing money, but I dont think its about the pay increase I think its the further retractment of employee beneifts, as I am pretty sure they are removing paid meal breaks (personally I think they should be paid if you have it over 30 mins), and extending driving tme (personally I think 4.5 hours) is enough but I can see why GNE are not budging on this as this would have some royal screw ups with the X10/24/26 etc.
Also I agree with your comments about MG.
(04 Oct 2023, 7:25 am)streetdeckfan wrote Unpaid breaks is pretty much standard across most industries now, I don't get my breaks paid. I personally see it as encouragement to actually take your break since nobody wants to work for free, but I appreciate the breaks are mandatory in some roles.Just because its in the legal limit (which it should be) maybe the legal limit is a bit too high.
As for the driving hours, as long as it's still within the legal limits, then what's the issue?
Sent from my SM-F721B using Tapatalk
(03 Oct 2023, 11:36 pm)streetdeckfan wrote This might be an unpopular opinion, but the drivers were already offered a 'decent wage' and as usual the unions decided to try and push their luck. They've got to make it look like they're doing something otherwise how are they going to rake in their millions?
The fact of the matter is GNE are loss making and do not have the money to pay drivers more. More pay for drivers means they can afford less drivers. There is no magic money tree.
While an extra few percent doesn't sound like much, it's an extra £2m a year they're asking GNE to come up with. Actually that still doesn't sound like a lot, but that's an extra 70 full time drivers GNE could hire even after the 9.5% pay rise they were offered, or more likely 70 full time drivers they need to justify keeping around when they're already haemorrhaging money.
(feel free to check my maths, it's late and I didn't fancy breaking out Excel to work it out properly)
As for MG, I really do think his heart was in the right place, but he was screwed over by the pandemic. Passenger numbers had actually started increasing after he implemented the changes, so obviously something was working, had he become MD a year or two earlier, perhaps GNE would be in a much stronger position now?
Sent from my SM-F721B using Tapatalk
(04 Oct 2023, 5:56 am)Storx wrote Passenger numbers are irrelevant though when you slashed the fares in the process. At the end of the day he was there to make a profit.
If I slashed the fares by half using economics then you need the passenger numbers to double on that route and it didn't happen and never was going to.
At the end of the day it's better to have 15 passengers on the bus all paying an average of £6 than 28 passengers paying an average of £3 especially if 3 of those are unruly little kids pissing everyone off who wouldn't be anywhere near it at the higher price.
If my only task was to get passenger numbers up I'd just make the buses free, I'd do the job but I'd 100% expect to be sacked at the same time.
(04 Oct 2023, 7:25 am)streetdeckfan wrote Unpaid breaks is pretty much standard across most industries now, I don't get my breaks paid. I personally see it as encouragement to actually take your break since nobody wants to work for free, but I appreciate the breaks are mandatory in some roles.
As for the driving hours, as long as it's still within the legal limits, then what's the issue?
Sent from my SM-F721B using Tapatalk
(04 Oct 2023, 7:01 am)Unber43 wrote I do agree, about GNE losing money, but I dont think its about the pay increase I think its the further retractment of employee beneifts, as I am pretty sure they are removing paid meal breaks (personally I think they should be paid if you have it over 30 mins), and extending driving tme (personally I think 4.5 hours) is enough but I can see why GNE are not budging on this as this would have some royal screw ups with the X10/24/26 etc.
Also I agree with your comments about MG.
(04 Oct 2023, 9:51 am)Adrian wrote Taking your point about doubling numbers, I still think he had to look at the fares. They were, and still are, vastly overpriced. It doesn't matter what a business does in trying to justify a fare being X, because it's up to a customer to decide whether that X equals value.
In a way, it's why commercial bus operations are on the most part, on life support. They cannot sustain their business, because they've failed for decades to achieve any decent level of organic growth. Costs are always going to go up; you can't avoid that, but you can improve what is coming in at the other end.
(04 Oct 2023, 2:23 pm)Busu284 wrote 695N by gne didn't run under them. Instead it was ran by Henry Cooper Coaches 3515 HX Instead.I dont think people will care about school services tbh.
Gne cover all school services. Haha yea next joke. Not a good way to say "we will run every school run" to then not. Doesn't look to good to passengers does it
(04 Oct 2023, 3:27 pm)Unber43 wrote I dont think people will care about school services tbh.
As well with the 351/335/359 running they were probably running these as they would get high penalties
(04 Oct 2023, 2:23 pm)Busu284 wrote 695N by gne didn't run under them. Instead it was ran by Henry Cooper Coaches 3515 HX Instead.
Gne cover all school services. Haha yea next joke. Not a good way to say "we will run every school run" to then not. Doesn't look to good to passengers does it
(04 Oct 2023, 2:23 pm)Busu284 wrote 695N by gne didn't run under them. Instead it was ran by Henry Cooper Coaches 3515 HX Instead.
Gne cover all school services. Haha yea next joke. Not a good way to say "we will run every school run" to then not. Doesn't look to good to passengers does it
(04 Oct 2023, 4:12 pm)Dan wrote After seeing videos on social media of some of the malicious acts being carried out by some of those on picket lines, and the abuse that managers, supervisors, clerical staff and any non-union drivers have received, I am not surprised that coverage is worsening.Any links to those videos?
To answer your question, no it doesn’t look good to passengers. Nor does it look good that people can’t get to the shops, their doctors appointment, to work, or otherwise, because no local buses are running.
Strikes are designed to be disruptive, and should be a last resort.
This is what Unite wanted to achieve - and this is what they have achieved.
Here’s hoping both sides can return to talks as soon as possible.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
(04 Oct 2023, 3:04 pm)Storx wrote Yeah don't dispute that but the way he done it by slashing it across the board just doesn't make sense when you're making a loss. The fares now are pretty much just back to where they were before the cuts now so it didn't work but it just left a hole in the middle. Some of the fares were just stupid like £1.70 anywhere in North Tyneside and Northumberland. Without government support it's no wonder the 19 died, when it's £1.70 for a fare from Ashington to North Shields which is just unrealistic.
The County Durham fares were just as bad, £2 from Seaham to Durham, Chester Le Street to Bishop Auckland or Durham to Consett, that's not economical either, unless you've got decker loads of people without government support.
Personally, I'm surprised there hasn't been more of a push of tap in and out like Arriva has, of all operators. Personally I think you'd sell it much better to commuters a system of just tap your card in and out, you'll never pay more than £30 a week or £90 a month or whatever the fares are and if you use it less, we'll charge you less. Takes away all the confusion of zones and bollocks.
(04 Oct 2023, 4:12 pm)Dan wrote After seeing videos on social media of some of the malicious acts being carried out by some of those on picket lines, and the abuse that managers, supervisors, clerical staff and any non-union drivers have received, I am not surprised that coverage is worsening.
To answer your question, no it doesn’t look good to passengers. Nor does it look good that people can’t get to the shops, their doctors appointment, to work, or otherwise, because no local buses are running.
Strikes are designed to be disruptive, and should be a last resort.
This is what Unite wanted to achieve - and this is what they have achieved.
Here’s hoping both sides can return to talks as soon as possible.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
(04 Oct 2023, 5:29 pm)Andreos1 wrote I think the issue boils down to thinking titivations and cheaper fares would be enough to attract customers.
They seemed convinced it would work and somehow stacked up the business case to get the cheques signed off.
Despite not actually doing in-depth research with customers or car-users and finding out if it was what was actually needed or wanted.
I'd argue that if they were used as part of a wider strategy, then they may have had more success.
As it was, they were basically charging less - for the same old, but with a few new toys added.
Those new toys didn't create much desire at all and there didn't seem to be any other strategy or plan other than blind optimism.
Hence no success and a financial hole left over, that must be huge.
I said these things at the time and was told I was wrong.
I was told tables and lower fares were getting the network ready post-covid.
They certainly did that. Ready for failure.
There's so many studies that have been done on the correlation between lower fares and increase in passengers. It worked for Easyjet and Ryanair - the huge difference being, they adapt their network to suit customer demands. Not operational needs.
Whereas GNE, well... They kept the same old, but did some titivating.
Wonder what the uplift, time off in lieu or overtime rate is, for those staff getting behind the wheel?