Brendan Griffin (Kerry, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I remind members and those in attendance to, please, turn off their mobile phones as they interfere with the broadcasting equipment.

We are considering the current situation in Bus Éireann. I welcome all present. This is the third in a series of meetings since Christmas to discuss the challenging situation at Bus Éireann. We have previously heard from the acting CEO of Bus Éireann, Mr. Ray Hernan. More recently we heard the Government perspective from the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport, Deputy Shane Ross.

Today we have representatives from various unions and employee associations. I wish to welcome Mr. Dermot O'Leary, general secretary, National Bus and Rail Union; Mr. Greg Ennis, Services Industrial Professional and Technical Union; Mr. Willie Quigley, regional officer, Unite the Union; Mr. Sean Heading, regional secretary, Technical Electrical and Engineering Union; and Mr. Patrick McCusker, senior Irish organiser, Transport Salaried Staffs' Association. We have had additions to the list, so apologies for names I might have left out. You are all very welcome, and thank you for coming here. I acknowledge that you are due at the Workplace Relations Commission at 3.30 p.m., and need to leave here at 3.15 p.m. The committee gives you its assurance that you will not be kept any later than that.

By virtue of section 17(2)(l) of the Defamation Act 2009, witnesses are protected by absolute privilege in respect of their evidence to the joint committee. However, if they are directed by it to cease giving evidence on a particular matter and continue to do so, they are entitled thereafter only to qualified privilege in respect of their evidence. They are directed that only evidence connected with the subject matter of these proceedings is to be given and asked to respect the parliamentary practice to the effect that, where possible, they should not criticise or make charges against any person or an entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable.

Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the Houses or an official, either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.

I now call on Mr. Dermot O'Leary of the NBRU and Mr. Patrick McCusker of the TSSA to make a joint opening statement.

Mr. Dermot O'Leary:

I wish to thank the members of the committee for receiving our delegation here today. The current situation at Bus Éireann is one which reaches into every home in every community across Ireland. Without Bus Éireann there is no transport network, there is no connectivity in terms of citizens being able to access schools, colleges, the workplace, hospital appointments etc. The National Transport Authority will say, and have said, differently. We will cover that later in our statement.

First things first. Is there going to be mass travel disruption next Monday across the transport network? The answer at this remove must be a qualified, and unfortunate, "Yes". As has already been pointed out, some Bus Éireann depots are shared with Iarnród Éireann.

Even thought we in the trade union group are not in dispute with Iarnród Éireann, and we have advised our members accordingly, there is absolutely no guarantee that Irish Rail staff will attend at work in locations such as Limerick, Tralee, Waterford, Galway, Sligo, etc.

There are many aspects to this crisis. Its creation did not come through the actions of Bus Éireann staff. It is wrong and disingenuous to describe the issue as an industrial relations dispute. The consequences will go far beyond the impact of an old-fashioned trade dispute between employer and employee. While there is an immediate threat to 2,600 jobs, the future of public transport for rural Ireland is equally under threat.

Many statements have been made in the Dáil and through the media to the effect that the problems at Expressway are confined to the advent of a competitive commercial market. While there are issues around competition, they do not tell the full story, nor do they provide a solution to the crisis at Bus Éireann.

Bus Éireann is a company that has three distinct elements, namely, Expressway, the public service obligation, PSO, service and schools. The PSO services are allowed to make what we would say is a reasonable but modest profit by the National Transport Authority, NTA, of approximately €400,000. The schools contract, which is an administrative arrangement with the Department of Education and Skills, covers its costs, and Expressway is the only leg of the company that can, ostensibly at least, chase profit and increase revenue.

What has caused this crisis? The answer is straightforward enough for those of us who work within the industry. It is Government policy. The National Transport Authority, the regulator, has issued licences to commercial operators that have resulted in a saturation of seat capacity across the motorway network. Those licences have been issued without due regard to the existing Expressway services. Consequently, people have migrated from the slower State carrier to the quicker private operator. Bus Éireann services are not slower because of any inefficiencies but because the social aspect of the Expressway service has it calling to towns and villages the length and breadth of Ireland. The private operators cherry-picked the most lucrative segments of the Expressway network and now operate point-to-point for profit without any wider social service obligation.

How can the NTA state that it was cognisant of existing services when issuing licences? Its own guidelines dictate that it will be cognisant of existing services but the reality is manifestly untrue. In recent weeks, the same NTA has been attempting to rebut our contention that it saturated the motorway network by contending that "...we have rejected almost as many applications for licences...as we have granted". In the same press release, a copy of which I have given to the members, it went on to state: "Our primary responsibility in law is to the travelling public, and when we assess an application for a commercial licence, we do so with this in mind, while looking at a whole range of considerations including likely passenger demand, impact on existing services and impact on subsidised services."

That refers to PSO services.

A quick analysis of that portion of the statement gives an alarming insight into the thought process of the NTA. It states that it considered the "likely" passenger demand. The reality, however, is different. The five licences, and it is five, it has issued and the three amendments it has made on the Dublin to Cork, Dublin to Limerick and Dublin to Waterford routes have not met that lopsided likely demand criteria it says it does. In fact, it has increased the seat capacity by double the NTA's own stated passenger numbers for the period 2012 to 2015.

The NTA contention that it looks at the "impact on existing services and impact on subsidised services" is frankly laughable. Why? The following examples of the impact on existing services conflict with the NTA line. On the Dublin to Waterford route, Bus Éireann has ten intermediate stops while the private operator stops only in Carlow. That is because of the location of the college. On the Dublin to Galway route, Bus Éireann has 16 intermediate stops while the private operators have none. On the Dublin to Cork route it has four stops while the private operators have none, and on the Dublin to Limerick route it has four stops while the private operators have none.

Simply put, Bus Éireann cannot compete because the NTA has over saturated the segments of its network that were returning a profit and issued licences to private operators with no social service, unless one happens to live beside a motorway.

Bus Éireann once made a profit. As the table I have circulated to the members demonstrates, Bus Éireann subsidised its public service obligation routes to the tune of over €40 million over a ten year period. That was an integrated transport provider reinvesting profits back into the State. Today, any profits go to shareholders in Hong Kong or London. I say "any profits" because the most recent accounts of one of the main private operators, Dublin Coach, show a loss of €1.6 million, which supports our view that the so-called market is over-saturated.

In media interviews in early January, the NTA stated that if Bus Éireann were to pull a service from rural Ireland then it, the NTA, had a toolkit by which it would quickly move to plug the gap, so to speak. If we examine this wondrous toolkit we see that we have a working, although I question that word, practical example of its magical powers. A number of years ago, Bus Éireann was forced to exit five towns along the Cork route in a futile attempt to compete with the ever-increasing number of private operators. The NTA was forced to issue a tender for replacement services. It is a matter of public record that M&A Coaches won that contract at a cost to the taxpayer of €440,000 per year for a mini-bus service with less frequency to five towns. These services were being provided by Bus Éireann free of charge as part of the integrated network I mentioned earlier.

If those costs were applied to the Dublin to Cork, Dublin to Limerick, Dublin to Waterford, Dublin to Galway and Dublin to Clonmel routes, taking into consideration average kilometres and the number of towns, the approximate cost of providing minimum or basic bus services compared to what currently exists is €88,000 per town. The 38 towns on those routes served by Expressway would cost the taxpayer approximately €3.34 million per year.

In its own recent reports, Bus Éireann estimates that it would cost approximately €5 million per annum to PSO fund towns currently served by routes 4 and the other routes set out in my written submission. That clearly illustrates that there is a role for the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport and the NTA in resolving this crisis.

The Department of Social Protection should be added to the list of those that can contribute to a resolution. The funding received by Bus Éireann from the Department of Social Protection to carry citizens of this State who have free travel has been frozen since 2009. Bus Éireann's Expressway service provides 7 million journeys annually, 2.4 million, or 33%, of which are Department of Social Protection passes, which are essential for those people who rely on this vital Government intervention.

Anecdotal evidence tells us that several private operators do not facilitate the Department of Social Protection passes. Currently, Bus Éireann gets slightly more that 40% of an average fare, that is, €4.81, for the average fare of €11.78 from the Department of Social Protection.

Interestingly, the recent rail review conducted by the National Transport Authority and Irish Rail recommended an increase of 40% in the moneys Irish Rail currently receives from the Department of Social Protection. I would expect Irish Rail to look for more money, but this is the NTA of which I am very critical in my submission. An Irish Rail passenger profile reflects that 11% of the journeys are Department of Social Protection passes. Such an increase to Bus Éireann would constitute an increase of €4.5 million. That is what it would do to Bus Éireann.

The notion that the State has no role in addressing the problems at Bus Éireann is fundamentally wrong. It is simply not good enough for the Minister to state that he has no responsibility in this regard. Such a stance does not move on this debate one jot. It also tells those living in rural Ireland that their current bus service will at best be replaced by a reduced mini-bus service and is therefore not as important, or as relevant, as those in large urban centres. That is simply not good enough.

Brendan Griffin (Kerry, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There are about two minutes left if Mr. McCusker would like to contribute.

Mr. Patrick McCusker:

My colleague has articulated our shared views on the policy failings that have led to what is being called a crisis in Bus Éireann. However, we are very mindful of and want to reiterate that Bus Éireann staff did not create this issue and, therefore, the resolution does not lie in attacking their terms and conditions.

We cannot overlook the real impact these proposals from management will have on the working families in Bus Éireann, and in particular on their take-home pay. The proposed cuts fail to recognise the significant contributions of staff that work unsociable hours, including loss of quality family time. We know that, statistically, shift workers are at risk of significant health issues.

As a trade union that covers the clerical grades, we are concerned that this grade, having the largest concentration of women workers, is being specifically targeted for pay cuts that put the majority of them well below the average wage in Ireland. According to the CSO yearbook, the average wage in 2016 was €45,000 per annum for full-time work. The proposed cuts from management would put the majority of women workers in the clerical grade in a band of €24,500 to €33,000. Currently, most women workers in the clerical grade earn between €38,000 and €50,000. The continuing undervaluing of women in the workplace, particularly with regard to pay, is a worrying trend. It would be quite shocking that a Minister or a Department would stand over that in 2017.

This is also compounded by the attitude on flexitime for women workers in the clerical grade, which is utilised by staff to help facilitate child care and other caring responsibilities. The image of a well-paid male telling our women members in clerical grades that they are overpaid and must take significant pay cuts is not lost on our members.

There is a major issue with the policy, but we cannot lose sight of the damage that will be done to our members and working people in Bus Éireann.

Brendan Griffin (Kerry, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Mr. McCusker. I call on Mr. Ennis of SIPTU.

Mr. Greg Ennis:

On behalf of SIPTU's members in Bus Éireann and the wider CIE group, we thank the committee for the opportunity to outline their concerns about the unprecedented industrial relations situation within Bus Éireann.

The expected strike action of 20 February, which is not in the interests of the travelling public or our members, is avoidable. Our union has consistently requested a mechanism to ensure avoidance of industrial conflict relating to the matter. Regrettably, Bus Éireann has continued in recent weeks to maintain its position of unilateral cuts to our members' pay and terms and conditions of employment. Questionable measures have been implemented since 16 January, which have had a negative effect on our members' earnings and hours of work. From a public transport perspective, a number of PSO routes have not been operable. In recent days, we have seen a further attack on our members' terms and conditions, with management preventing workers on sick leave from returning to work on agreed payment terms.

As Ireland's largest trade union with upwards of 170,000 members, SIPTU has the largest number of front-line members in the CIE group. In Bus Éireann, SIPTU represents more than 1,000 workers across all categories. SIPTU's membership in Bus Éireann's sister CIE companies stands at 1,850 in Dublin Bus and 2,050 in Irish Rail. We also represent the majority of Bus Éireann's 400 school bus drivers, who are not directly affected by this current dispute. Our members in Dublin Bus and Irish Rail and among the Bus Éireann school bus drivers stand resolutely behind our Bus Éireann members and are understandably concerned about these unprecedented attacks within the Bus Éireann road passenger business.

This unprecedented approach by the new and recently appointed Bus Éireann senior management team is further evidence of the complete breakdown of the industrial relations architecture within the company and the wider CIE group. A Labour Court recommendation issued in May 2016 has been ignored by Bus Éireann, another recommendation issued August 2013 has been ignored by Irish Rail and the WRC settlement terms at Dublin Bus have also been ignored. Bus Éireann attended the Labour Court on our members' pay claim on 6 December 2016 and advised the court that it would not engage in the hearing, which was a clear breach of normal industrial relations protocol. Given that the CIE companies are now pursuing an àla carteapproach to Labour Court recommendations and collective agreements, it is becoming clear to our members in those companies that the institutions of the State tasked with resolving disputes are being undermined, if not being made obsolete.

The impending dispute is not the typical industrial relations confrontation between an employer and its employees. It has been in the making for some time and its root cause is a direct consequence of the Government's transport policy, particularly as it relates to rural and intercity services, and the importance of all participants' direct involvement or input into resolving same is imperative. I am referring to the Departments of Transport Tourism and Sport and Social Protection, the National Transport Authority, NTA, Bus Éireann and its trade unions.

The following factors have been instrumental in bringing us to a place where our rural and intercity transport bus service could come to a grinding halt and the risk of contagion across other CIE companies is growing by the day: proposed unilateral cuts to our members' pay, terms and conditions from 20 February 2017, notwithstanding the will of the Dáil pertaining to a recent motion on same and our existing collectively agreed employment terms; Bus Éireann workers have not had a pay increase in almost nine years and are now facing "phase 2 austerity" by way of pay cuts and so on; and a driver who earns €624 for a 39-hour week cannot be expected to subsidise the company by reducing overall earnings by between 20% and 30%. Workers cannot be expected to accept cuts in pay, terms and conditions and agree that they will do whatever the company wants for four years while also accepting that a large number of them may have to be made redundant by compulsory means.

Bus Éireann has seen a reduction of 35% in State subvention from €50 million in 2009 to €33.7 million in 2015. Subvention increased to €40 million in 2016. For the record, the CIE subvention was reduced by circa41%. We either want a public transport system or we do not. If we do, we need to fund it appropriately.

Free Travel accounts for one third of all journeys on Bus Éireann, but a return to the company of €4.86 against an average cost of €11.78 is not sustainable under any business model, particularly when there are currently 1.3 million free travel pass holders and that number is increasing. Our trade union supports those who depend on free travel, but the company needs to be adequately reimbursed for same. Many private operators licensed by the NTA do not carry free travel pass holders.

The 300 plus PSO routes are technically not losing money, as they receive subvention, but Bus Éireann must be afforded the opportunity and resources to compete on a level playing field with other operators. The 23 Expressway routes are losing circa€6 million per annum due to unfair market competition and subvention is not applied appropriately to take account of the PSO sections of these particular routes. Many of these routes should receive subvention, as they continue to service rural towns and citizens who reside off the motorway network. The private operator, licensed by the NTA, in the main drives direct city to city or has minimal stops during the journey. For example, Bus Éireann's Waterford-Dublin service has eight more stops than the private operators.

Many of the workers employed in the private transport sector receive poor terms and conditions and rely on the family income supplement, FIS. This is unfair competition and only serves to hasten a race to the bottom in employment terms and conditions. Surely that is not the sort of culture or transport system that we desire for Ireland. SIPTU believes that a sectoral employment order is necessary for categories such as drivers within the wider transport sector. This approach would ensure somewhat fairer competition.

Numerous times in recent weeks, Bus Éireann has referenced the potential for insolvency within the next 12 to 18 months. SIPTU has, without response, repeatedly called for an examination to explore the potential for Bus Éireann to be subsumed into a CIE holding company so as to create the space for a complete review of the Irish public transport system, which is in a critical state, from a funding and infrastructural position.

The State does not need to run a for-profit public bus service, but it must maintain a properly resourced and adequately funded one. Should future profits arise, they should be reinvested in the particular CIE company from which they were generated. In recent weeks, the Government announced its rural Ireland framework and its Ireland 2040 national planning strategy. Such a positive vision for the future is in conflict with its approach to the funding of our rural transport system and its unwillingness to get involved in the resolution of this intensifying and increasingly bitter dispute is mystifying and untenable.

Bus Éireann needs to remove its preconditions for talks and rescind its letters of 16, 18 and 27 January so as to facilitate an environment conducive to constructive talks. The CIE companies need to honour existing Labour Court recommendations and WRC settlements in order to restore the credibility of those institutions within the wider CIE group.

SIPTU members within Bus Éireann are resolute in their position to take strike action on 20 February should their employer again move to cut their pay, terms and conditions unilaterally from that date. While the conditions of employment in Bus Éireann are nothing more than bearable after almost nine years of a pay freeze, low rates of pay, etc., our members and this union owe it to our predecessors and future Bus Éireann employees to carry the torch and uphold the pay, terms and conditions achieved over many decades arising from sacrifices made during previous Bus Éireann cost saving-survival plans.

It behoves Bus Éireann, its trade unions, our elected public representatives and the Government to ensure that we maintain our national bus transport system through Bus Éireann so as to ensure that the travelling public, who acutely depend on such an essential service, are not disenfranchised or inconvenienced in any way. I trust that my brief submission to the committee will ensure that this is so by encouraging Bus Éireann to remove its written threats to cut our members' pay, terms and conditions of employment unilaterally from next Monday, 20 February and, in so doing, facilitate the overdue and necessary engagement of all protagonists on these most serious of matters.

Brendan Griffin (Kerry, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Mr. Ennis. In my opening remark, I may have introduced Mr. Sean Heading of the TEEU, but I understand that he is not present. Our remaining speaker is Mr. Quigley of Unite, who has five minutes.

Mr. Willie Quigley:

Unite thanks the committee for the invitation to make this submission. We will focus on three areas: Bus Éireann as a provider of public service transport; Expressway as a commercial operation; and a new strategic stakeholder approach.

Just as we showed in October when Unite presented its submission on Dublin Bus to this committee, research shows that our national public transport service is severely constrained due to low subvention levels compared with other European countries. Deloitte, in its report "Cost and Efficiency Review of Dublin Bus and Bus Éireann", found that, in terms of subvention as a percentage of total revenue, Belgium was at 78%, Switzerland was at 51%, the Netherlands was at 49% and Ireland was at 12%. While the subvention in other European countries is 50% or more of total revenue, Ireland's figure had fallen to 10% of total revenue by 2015. There is a measurement issue. Expressway is included in revenue. The Deloitte report does not say whether subventions in other countries also include commercial revenue. Therefore, while we cannot estimate with any accuracy the appropriate level of subvention that Bus Éireann should receive to bring it to European norms, it would be substantial. At the very least, an additional €46 million. From a very low level, the actual subvention has been cut further since 2009. Factoring in inflation, the subvention has been cut by more than €12 million in real terms, or 22%. Whether measured against other European countries or historical subvention levels, State support for public transport services is poor.

Expressway's commercial mandate and the efficient operation of the transport market have been undermined by Government policy, agency oversight and management practices. A significant factor in the company’s finances is the underpayment of the free travel scheme.

According to a report in The Sunday Business Post, the Department of Social Protection reimburses Expressway only 40% of the average fare for journeys taken by pensioners and pass holders. The Department pays €11.4 million for these journeys. Assuming the report is valid, if the full cost were reimbursed, the Department would pay €28.5 million for these journeys, an increase of €17.1 million. In effect, the Government is using a commercial company to subsidise in-kind social transfers.

The joint committee should immediately investigate the regulatory oversight of the transport market. The issuance of licences for private sector operators may be saturating the market. Efficiency requires that the methodology and data sources used to inform the issuance of licences is open and transparent in respect of estimated demand, future projections, optimal level of competing companies, etc. Is the absence of Expressway from profitable non-stop routes due to managerial decisions or market regulation? In either case, the downside is obvious, namely, the market is either being skewed against Expressway or Bus Éireann management is failing to expand into profitable markets.

Expressway accepts free travel passes, whereas private bus operators do not accept them. This places the company at a commercial disadvantage, one which is not acknowledged either by the market regulator, which could require private bus operators to accept free travel passes, or the State, which benefits from below market reimbursement. Put another way, pensioners are denied access to the full transport market as only a public enterprise company vindicates such access, while private operators do not.

Expressway serves a number of communities on loss-making routes. That it continues to do so is a social good but there is no regulatory mechanism to ensure the company, as a commercial operation, is compensated for what should be a public service obligation, PSO, route. This is an example of Expressway being used to subsidise the underinvestment in a public service.

Regarding the failure to monitor the operation of companies, the Cork Council of Trade Unions claimed in a letter to the Minister that serious breaches of the road transport working time directive are taking place. The National Transport Authority replied that this was not a matter for the authority. As the issuer of licences, it is imperative that the NTA take a proactive role towards monitoring the activities of all bus companies as otherwise the market will become degraded and companies will compete on the basis of which one is more effective at breaking the rules.

There are numerous anecdotal reports of low wages being paid by private bus operators. A survey found that one company paid an average wage lower than the living wage. Not only does this drive down employees' living standards but it also undermines companies which pay proper wages. Low wages mean that bus companies impose costs on the taxpayer. For example, wages of less than €30,000 mean that, depending on household circumstances, an employee could be eligible for family income supplement. With lower tax revenue and higher social transfers, low road employers are appropriating benefit at the expense of taxpayers. This requires removal of wages from competitive advantage through a registered agreement applicable to all companies. This would protect workers' living standards save the Exchequer money and ensure competition was based on service quality.

The position in Bus Éireann can be compared to Alice's Adventures in Wonderland. A report commissioned by the Department was shown to journalists but not to employees and Bus Éireann management responded to this secretive report in public. Other reports have been circulated in secrecy but still employees are excluded. Management has leaked information to the media, while the Minister has refused any kind of engagement. Can anyone think of a private company that conducts its industrial and commercial relations through media leaks, while the principal shareholder openly declares complete disinterest in the conduct of the company? Is this a way to operate a modern commercial company?

Expressway cannot be compared to a commercial operation. It subsidises State social transfers, provides access to free travel customers and operates public service routes which should be subsidised by PSO payment. Deloitte reports that Bus Éireann used Expressway profits to subsidise PSO routes, while the National Transport Authority has raided Bus Éireann for funds. We have an opaque regulatory process in which the regulator, the National Transport Authority, refuses to regulate. We have bus companies that can only operate on the basis of depressing their employees' living standards. All the while, members of the public experience a degraded service while employees are left in the dark. It is misleading to benchmark Expressway on a market basis. There is a much better way to manage both the company and the market.

I will now discuss a new strategic stakeholder method.Bus Éireann management claims to have a stakeholder approach. In its 2015 annual report, the company claimed to have developed a"strategic plan to work collaboratively with all stakeholders to return Expressway to profitability." The word "stakeholder" was used 17 times in the report but the company's actions belie its words. It conceals essential reports from stakeholders, makes demands upon employees which it cannot justify or measure and, more important, knows cannot be sustained. It demands that employees enter discussions without conditions while it comes to the table with a suitcase load of conditions. No dictionary in existence would define this behaviour as a "stakeholder" approach.

Bus Éireann management now wants to re-embark on a substantial downsizing strategy. This approach was tried and failed. Between 2009 and 2015, payroll expenditure fell by more than €15 million or 10%. This did not solve the company's problems. Management now wants a further €12 million in cuts to payroll expenditure and a total of €30 million in cuts overall. It is repeating a failed strategy. The real problem for Expressway is not the level of expenditure, which has fallen since 2009, but a decline in revenue of €8 million. If a company cannot generate revenue, no amount of downsizing will save it, as academic scholarship confirms. According to Professor Freek Vermeulen of the London Business School, downsizing does not work and this view is backed up by detailed academic studies. The simple reason is that downsizing incapacitates a company's ability to expand and, without expansion, it is incapable of surviving in highly competitive markets.

There are two complementary approaches to resolving the company’s problems, both of which are grounded in an authentic stakeholder approach in which employees and employers are equal partners. The first is to drive productivity and the second is to expand through investment, market expansion and rolling out new products and services. The best transport companies in Europe increasingly practice what is known as employee driven innovation to achieve these goals. In short, resolution of the company's problems begins with the worker.

While there are a number of models of employee driven innovation, the fundamental starting points are that management and employees must both want to enter the process; a guarantee must be provided that proposals adopted will not lead to job losses or a reduction in earnings; a process of adoption and implementation of the proposals must be agreed in which neither side enjoys a veto; the innovation process must be based on a bottom-up approach that takes place in work units; and the process must be open and transparent, both operationally and financially.

Brendan Griffin (Kerry, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I ask Mr. Quigley to conclude.

Mr. Willie Quigley:

This process can be extended to user driven innovation, under which the general public served by public transport is included through innovative communication tools. This is a radical break from hierarchical decision making structures and one in which trust is essential. If Bus Éireann management is serious about a stakeholder approach and building trust, it should immediately withdraw its letters and demands for downsizing. If this were done, management and employees could sit down and agree a new strategic stakeholder approach. This is not to suggest a solution will be easy. I have no doubt, management will bring to the table proposals which employees will find difficult and we, too, will bring forward issues. For instance, overtime has been abolished in place of outsourcing in maintenance work, yet outsourcing costs more than overtime would cost.

Has Bus Éireann attempted to enter the lucrative non-stop market between major urban areas and, if not, why not? Is this a failing of managerial strategy or the regulatory structure? This process is not only about overcoming divisions between management and employees but also about identifying areas of co-operation. There is much on which we could agree, for example, the low level of PSO support in the public service; underpayments in reimbursing free travel costs; the use of Expressway as a subsidiser of the Exchequer and non-commercial public services; and the race to the bottom process that undermines good employers and good employment. If the company were to speak with one voice on these issues, it could direct the debate to significant issues in public transport services.

Ultimately, the issue extends beyond management and employees. We have identified a number of defects in policy ranging across regulatory, investment and labour market issues. For this reason, we need all those involved in public transport, specifically the National Transport Authority, Department and Minister, to sit down together to resolve these issues. If these parties are not involved, the problems in public transport will persist.

The joint committee has a key role to play in this area by supporting a new stakeholder approach, helping to identify the problems that management and employees face together and urging all parties, including the Minister, to become involved in a new dispensation for public transport. The committee should consider itself a key stakeholder.

Brendan Griffin (Kerry, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Mr. Quigley's time has concluded. I call Deputy Peter Fitzpatrick.

Peter Fitzpatrick (Louth, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the witnesses. The action of Bus Éireann, in sending letters to staff in January, was unnecessary and unhelpful and was not a proper way to begin negotiations. I note from the opening statements that the last thing anyone wants is strike action. The effects of such action would be far-reaching and widespread. I am particularly concerned for schoolchildren, especially those who will sit State examinations this year, as they have already faced strikes by teachers and the last thing they need is further disruption. I urge all sides in the dispute, including the Minister, to sit down and engage in real and meaningful talks to sort out the current difficulties.

I note from the opening statements that all the trade unions represented have ideas on how to improve the current position. I ask all the witnesses to elaborate on these ideas and provide details on what actions need to be taken by all sides?

Brendan Griffin (Kerry, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I ask one spokesperson from each of the organisations represented to respond.

Mr. Dermot O'Leary:

In Deputy Fitzpatrick's constituency, more than 540 services operating on the 100 and 100X routes are under genuine threat. In terms of solutions, while I am speaking on behalf of the NBRU, we are all ad idem on how to resolve this issue. Our message for some months has been that it will not be resolved by the trade unions and the company. There are many strands to finding a solution. The Department of Social Protection, to which we referred today and on our previous appearance at the committee, has a role to play.

I note that the Minister stated recently in the Dáil that he was in discussions with the Minister for Social Protection and one would think that would fit into any solution.

A point we make strongly and will not deviate from is the fact that Bus Éireann is a State provider and carrier. It is a State-owned company that has a social obligation to both its employees and, equally important, to those in rural Ireland that it services. That point was lost in some of the debate I listened to in the House. The examples that my colleagues in SIPTU and I gave about the number of towns being served off-motorway and adjacent to the motorways are examples of a social service. People hide behind Europe an awful lot in this environment but we could not establish any State rule that debars the State from making an intervention in terms of supporting those towns, including the 16 towns between Dublin and Galway, the ten between Dublin and Waterford, the four between Dublin and Cork and the four between Dublin and Limerick. No State aid rules prohibit such intervention. That is another strand to the solution.

Are we on the workers' side afraid in terms of work practices and efficiencies? No. We have been pragmatic and proactive over many years when coming to the table and ponying up, as it were, through the recession, but a once in a generation pay cut will not happen again on our watch. That is what we have been saying. There are many strands to this but throughout our responses today my colleagues and I will make a fundamental point: As long as there are preconditions, which one minute are there but - verbally, at least - the next minute are not, there will be a barrier to the most immediate step to be taken which is to get into the discussions.

Mr. Greg Ennis:

I will not reiterate what Mr. O'Leary from the NBRU has stated. However, the first thing that needs to happen is that the employer, Bus Éireann, needs to take the gun away from our members heads with regard to threats to cut their terms and conditions unilaterally from Monday morning. This was referenced in a recent Private Members' motion and strongly supported in the Dáil. The motion also referred to the company being adequately funded and so forth. However, the first thing that needs to happen is the pressure valve needs to be released. The second thing that needs to happen is for all protagonists, including the Department of Social Protection, to play their role. Third, if we could create the space to do it, in the longer term all parties should be considering the possibility of a sectoral employment order for bus drivers, in which they would be substantially represented. Following a Labour Court decision and ministerial order and approval, such an order would set a rate of pay for bus drivers in the State, be they in the public or private sector. We would always seek to achieve and achieve beyond the base rate, but bringing in a base rate for private operators would mean that some of the current unfairness in the market would go. Many of those who are driving in the private sector are on the minimum wage or just above it. This has been confirmed in public discourse and needs to be examined.

In the context of solution-mode, SIPTU is up for solutions. We have made that clear in our submission and Deputy Fitzpatrick has picked up on it. We do not want a strike to take place. However, for probably the first time in a semi-State company - we have members across the semi-State sector - our members' earnings are under attack to the tune of 20% to 30%, depending on their grade. Drivers with 20 years' and 30 years' service earn €624 a week for a 39-hour week. We will not sit idly by and see those people targeted. The whole thing, including PSO and non-PSO routes, needs to be examined. I am well aware of the direct award contracts that are due to run for the next number of years, but the routes that are not PSO obligated that pick people up in the rural towns and villages need to be examined. It behoves all of us - all the protagonists - to get in and discuss it.

Mr. Willie Quigley:

I welcome Deputy Fitzpatrick's question. In fairness to us, we would be in an awful lot of a better position to answer it. I will focus on his question about what we consider is required to repair the situation. I think everyone in the country knows about the preconditions in the letters, which need to disappear, so I will not dwell on that as it is already referred to in the submission. We cannot make a contribution and respond to the Deputy in as full a manner as we would like to in the current vacuum. A number of reports have allegedly examined everything and outlined the problems to management and it appears that, on foot of them, management has made decisions to target our people with this lot of cuts. It is telling us to swallow this first and that it will tell us at the end of March what is in the rest of the stuff. We cannot work on that premise. We need full disclosure of everything relative to this crisis that is available, that is, every available stitch of information and data on the issues that the consultants have identified. At that point, we will not be found wanting in terms of giving it our all to be part of the solution and reaching a resolution that does not impact the members the way the company has sought to unilaterally impose and without any engagement. However, without the information, we are snookered. We are behind the eight ball, as the man said.

Brendan Griffin (Kerry, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I should have come to Mr. McCusker earlier. My apologies.

Mr. Patrick McCusker:

That is all right. Much like my colleagues, our problem is that there are many facets to the issues at Bus Éireann, but the sort of strategy or policy of Bus Éireann management and others, which is trying to funnel this into an industrial dispute, is compounding the issue. This is not an industrial dispute but a public transport policy issue that has many facets to it. The trade union movement has always been willing to engage, but the engagement must be constructive, genuine and meaningful. Were we to go to the Workplace Relations Commission to be told that the situation remains the same, that there is a gun to our heads and that management are going to cut our terms and conditions on 20 February itwould just create the dispute. We are prepared to engage but the engagement must be genuine and meaningful and that can only occur if people wake up and realise that this is not an industrial dispute but a public transport dispute. Let us deal with it as that.

Peter Fitzpatrick (Louth, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

A common theme in each of the delegates' opening statements is that all of them feel that Bus Éireann currently does not receive enough from the Department of Social Protection under the free travel scheme. They also suggest that there is not a level playing field between Bus Éireann and the private operators, which, they suggest, generally do not carry passengers under the free travel scheme. What data do the delegates have on private operators and the free travel pass? Do they know for sure how many do not carry passengers who hold a free travel pass? Do they contend or suggest that the current difficulty on the Expressway route would be alleviated were more money to be made available from the Department of Social Protection under the free travel scheme?

Mr. Dermot O'Leary:

The Deputy is right in that all of our submissions refer to the Department of Social Protection. The reality is that the Department of Social Protection's free travel scheme was frozen in 2009 and there were no new entrants after that initially. As we understand it, no new company could have a contract with the Department of Social Protection between 2009 and 2015. What happened in 2015 is very interesting. The then Minister for Social Protection, Deputy Joan Burton, came under pressure in the Dáil, the people's Parliament, relented and, as we understand it, allowed some private operators to access the scheme. We believe that came on the back of the PSO contract that was awarded between Portlaoise and Cashel. When the NTA put that route out for tender, in the initial contract - this is an important point that is hard to stomach on behalf of those who are entitled to free travel - the successful bidder, M&A Coaches, was told to charge OAPs and those with disabilities 50% of the fare, which caused uproar. As a result, the Minister relented and allowed some private operators in. I do not have any data - I have anecdotal evidence - but we read an article recently in the The Irish Timeswhere Brian O'Donnell for Feda O'Donnell Coaches is quoted as saying, bizarrely, that the Department of Social Protection covers probably 70% of his costs. We consider it would be worth exploring that further. Whether it was a misprint or otherwise, he was quoted in the article.

There seems to be some variation on the ground. The State provider rightly - we would say - carries those availing of the free travel scheme but it does not get paid enough for it. There are then lots of private operators. There is a company in Waterford that I will not name, but people in this room know it, whose bus stop is as close to the Bus Éireann stop as the Deputy is to me. We have evidence of the driver on the private coach telling those who hold free travel passes to go down to the Bus Éireann coach. That happens daily. That is the reality on the ground.

Brendan Griffin (Kerry, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Does Deputy Fitzpatrick wish to add anything?

Peter Fitzpatrick (Louth, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

To be fair with the time, I am happy enough although I still have a few more questions.

Brendan Griffin (Kerry, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Did Mr. Quigley wish to address that matter further?

Mr. Willie Quigley:

I do not think that any one thing will fix this problem. A lot of issues need fixing. In 2013 members entered the cost recovery plan and took cuts, having had no wage increases since 2008. This was on the basis that the company had told both them and the Labour Court that if doing so would secure the future of the company. The management which presided over the company from 2013 have run out of the door on big packages and we have not been told much about them, which is causing great suspicion.

Peter Fitzpatrick (Louth, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

SIPTU has stated that 23 Expressway routes lose an estimated €6 million per annum. Has an analysis been carried out to identify which routes are losing the most money and why there have been such losses? Have viable proposals been made to tackle the reason for the losses on these routes?

Mr. Willie Noone:

There has been no route-by-route breakdown but there is no dispute over the fact that they are losing money as this came out in the independent report. Apart from an increase in the free pass money, this money also has to be fairly distributed but at this moment Irish Rail is getting a higher proportion of the allocation.

A question was asked about private operators not carrying people and we are calling for this to be monitored as private operators are getting paid to carry passengers without an audit or evidence that they are doing so.

Peter Fitzpatrick (Louth, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I urge all stakeholders in this dispute to sit down and explore all options so that the public, especially schoolkids, are not inconvenienced by strike action. The last thing anybody needs is strike action. It will not help anyone and will further damage everyone concerned in the long term. The Minister, as the major stakeholder, must get involved and act as a mediator between the two sides.

Brendan Griffin (Kerry, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That answers Deputy Barry's question too.

Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I proposed the motion in the Dáil a couple of weeks ago and got cross-party support for it. I agree with the sentiments on how the NTA issues licences, and on increased subventions and increased funding from the Department of Social Protection. I welcome the fact that the unions are going to the WRC this evening and the last thing they or their members want to is be out on strike and to discommode the tens of thousands of people who rely on Bus Éireann to commute to work on a daily basis. It is important that a State company such as Bus Éireann provides an essential, public, integrated transport service but it is in a serious financial situation. I do not blame union members for this for one minute. However, the unions and workers have an opportunity, and a responsibility, to engage on the efficiencies that have to be achieved. One speaker said the unions were in the dark because they had not been party to all the reports that have been issued and I will be calling on the Minister, Deputy Ross, to make available all reports to unions so that they can be fully informed.

A sectoral employment agreement was called for. What is the current basic pay for a bus driver and what maximum amount does that rise to over the years?

Mr. Dermot O'Leary:

The maximum payment is €624

Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

What is the starting pay?

Mr. John Moloney:

Approximately €580. The scale is three years.

Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

To how much does that equate per annum?

Mr. Dermot O'Leary:

The typical bus driver, whom we represent across all grades, works a shift cycle including every second Sunday and half of the nine bank holidays. For this they earn approximately €43,000 but the proposal from Mr. Hernan, the acting CEO, is to take just over €7,913 from those drivers.

Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am trying to ascertain if, in the event of a sectoral pay agreement being introduced across the board-----

Mr. Greg Ennis:

A sectoral employment order would set the base rate for drivers. It came in with the 2015 legislation and would be rubber stamped by the Minister after a Labour Court hearing at which submissions were made by interested parties. It would be utilised by the trade unions to organise workers in the private industry to ensure they got reasonable treatment and it would eradicate some of the unfair competition that currently exists. If a private operator has to pay-----

Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I accept what Mr. Ennis is saying but I am asking if, were it to be introduced, it would make Bus Éireann competitive with the private sector?

Mr. Greg Ennis:

No. It would be an ingredient but it would not do so in itself. Deputy Fitzpatrick asked about the example of the Dublin-Waterford route. Bus Éireann has eight stops on the route but if two private operators go direct on the route it would be nonsensical. Unless we have all the ingredients-----

Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The motion I brought forward in the Dáil acknowledged this fact in the context of licensing but I am talking exclusively about pay.

Mr. Greg Ennis:

It would eradicate the difference between rates of pay in the private sector and what we aspire to.

Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will play devil's advocate. Management will say that some of the proposals it put to the unions and staff are the implementation of pre-existing agreements made with the various unions. They say that these have been implemented at certain depots and not at others.

Mr. Dermot O'Leary:

I will be clear on one thing, about which the unions are ad idem. The Deputy is talking about a briefing of 16 January that did not come through the trade unions but went directly to staff. It was designed to provoke our members into a reaction and to hitting the picket lines. They wanted to push us into an industrial dispute so that they could accuse us of hitting the barricades because overtime had been cut. We did not succumb to this nakedly aggressive act by the company. Our members toed the line, though this was very difficult. A total of 80 services were cancelled, mainly at the Broadstone depot, as a result of the letter of 16 January meaning that some 2,000 people were left without a service. That is what Mr. Hernan, his management team and his paymasters think of the people who rely on those services. It was designed to provoke people and, as Mr. Ennis said, when we go to the WRC this afternoon, this is one of the issues that will loom large. Provoking staff into a reaction and losing 80 services is no way to run a transport system. It is appalling.

The company said the briefing of 16 January was covered by current agreements.

I would dispute that and I would also dispute many of the interventions they have made since.

Mr. Greg Ennis:

All the trade unions, including our union, dispute what is in the letter dated 16 January. This union wrote to the company the following day, on 17 January, about that letter but we have still not received a response. To back up what my colleague from the NBRU said, within a week of that letter of 16 January, on 23 January, in the area where I live in Meath, for example, the Dublin to Ratoath 10.29, the Dublin to Kells 16.30 and 18.30, and the Dublin to Belfast 23.00 buses did not run. They did not run because of the implications of the changes put forward on 16 January. This crisis is escalating day by day without the threats that we believe will kick in from Sunday night, Monday morning. There is a raft of other routes that have not taken place as well.

Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am not saying this is right because I do not know what was agreed under previous agreements, but the witnesses' contention is that what the management is saying is totally and utterly inaccurate.

Mr. Dermot O'Leary:

I do not claim to be an expert in anything, but I think I have more expertise in how bus transport is run in this country than Mr. Ray Hernan has. I understand that he is learning fast, but in the round, on this side of the room with all the trade unions, we have a lot more expertise than that man. I can say clearly that there are many issues of 16 January that are not covered by current agreements.

Brendan Griffin (Kerry, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Before we proceed, I wish to remind members and witnesses about parties that are not here to defend themselves. I know we have had others before the committee but we should be careful in terms of identifying individuals who are not among us.

Mr. Dermot O'Leary:

I will find some other way of addressing it.

Brendan Griffin (Kerry, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

If you could, please bear it in mind.

Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Maybe they could refer to it as management. Since assuming office, has the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport met any of the unions at any stage - long before talking about going to the WRC or the advice that there may be changes to terms and conditions? The Minister says that he cannot get involved in industrial relations, but has he met with any of the unions at any stage?

Mr. Greg Ennis:

Not that I am aware of. In fact, we have asked him on public platforms, including the media, to get involved but he has refused. Therefore, the answer is "no".

Mr. Dermot O'Leary:

The only time I met the Minister, Deputy Ross, was on the fringes of a "Prime Time" programme. He would not debate the issues with me, of course. That was the only time, but it goes further than that. I believe the Minister has not even met the boards of the CIE companies yet - that is, the main board and the three subsidiaries. It is a damning indictment of the man who owns those companies that he has not met the boards yet. I see from the screen that he is in the Seanad and, hopefully, it will get more answers from him this afternoon than us. I am sorry for the long answer but the short answer is "no".

Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The company will suggest that if it was totally and exclusively Expressway this matter could be resolved pretty easily by how the licences are issued, increased PSO and increased DSP. It will say that it needs to examine the cost base in a broader sense because 80% of people are using PSO and 20% are using the commercial line. It is fair to say that we are at one in terms of where the commercial line can be brought back into profitability.

Given that PSO now has to go out for tender, do the unions have concerns about winning tenders when competing with private operators? I understand that the Waterford service is currently out for tender and the Kildare network will be out for tender later this year. Are the unions concerned about being able to compete actively for tenders in order to win future contracts?

Mr. Dermot O'Leary:

I have a habit of jumping in, but my colleagues can answer as well as. In the last interaction he had with the committee, Mr. Ennis mentioned a sectoral employment order. One of the fundamental problems with the tendering process is that people are competing on wages. The direct answer is that it is going to be very difficult for Bus Éireann, or any of the CIE companies, to win any tender in future when that is hanging over them, when people are allowed to pay under the counter, pay a minimum wage and behave inappropriately. The latter is a mild word, but I could use much stronger language than that.

Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That being said, even if a sectoral employment order was brought in at the ceiling of the basic driver's pay of €634, Mr. Ennis felt that Bus Éireann may still not be competitive.

Mr. Greg Ennis:

What I said was that it is an ingredient because the sectoral employment order does not just deal with pay, it will also deal with sick pay and pensions. When that is all rolled into a private operator's costs, it would definitely make Bus Éireann more competitive, if those private operators were organised in trade unions with reasonable terms and conditions. We are talking about reasonable terms and conditions.

Robert Troy (Longford-Westmeath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I support that.

Mr. Greg Ennis:

Some €32,000 a year for driving a bus is just about bearable, but the allowances are being savaged. All the members have not had a pay increase for nine years. Going beyond that, on 1 June 2013, there was a 19-month pay cut to try to keep this company afloat. This has been breaking down for some time. We cannot have a situation where the workers in Bus Éireann are being utilised to subsidise a system that is broken. The only way to fix the system is to get all the protagonists in to solve it. However, if the company continues with its line that it will do this unilaterally from 20 February, then we have no choice but to take all-out strike action. We cannot be in a place where types of industrial action are intermittent and we go back into work on terms that are inferior to those we already have.

Brendan Griffin (Kerry, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I must bring in Deputy Munster because I have four more speakers and we have less than half an hour, so we need to move on.

Imelda Munster (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I want to start off firstly by voicing my support on the public record for the bus workers and their strike action from 20 February. I recognise that they have been singularly targeted in this dispute and that they were not the ones who created the crisis. This crisis was created through bad policy and mismanagement. We are five days away from what can best be described as the chaos which will ensue across the State, affecting workers, commuters, students and hospital patients. In light of that, I wish to reiterate the call to the Minister and the acting CEO of Bus Éireann to set aside the letter that was sent out on 16 January, particularly the inflammatory contents, in order to allow for negotiations.

I wish to ask the various unions some questions. What expectations do SIPTU and Unite have for the WRC talks this evening? It was said earlier that a combination of issues needs to be addressed in order to resolve this matter in the long term and to protect our public transport service and infrastructure. Would the unions agree that these issues include the need for an increased subvention, an increase in the Department of Social Protection's travel pass subsidy, and a review of licences issued on certain routes? Would the unions also agree that, on top of all that, there is a responsibility to examine inefficiencies across the board? Examples were cited of three buses leaving at the same time on one route. That problem was created with licences, as there is one public bus and two private operators. There are nonsensical inefficiencies such as those that have directly resulted in the financial loss. There are inefficiencies everywhere, including in Bus Éireann, every company, every board and in the Government. Do the unions acknowledge that such inefficiencies exist and would they be prepared to examine them in conjunction with all the rest to ensure we secure and enhance our public transport network?

What is the NBRU's view on the role the Department has played in this dispute up until now? On the NTA, National Transport Authority, and the issuing of licences, we know there are several routes which we can identify which have directly contributed to the financial crisis in the company. From the point of view that the NTA has rejected more than it has accepted, what are the unions' opinions on that?

We have not got a straight answer from the Minister, the Department or the NTA but we know they have identified routes for targeting. They have not been open or transparent in disclosing those routes. There is a real fear right across rural communities about these routes and the interconnectivity between cities and urban towns. Private operators only go from city to city or large town to large town.

Brendan Griffin (Kerry, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There is now only four minutes left for answers.

Imelda Munster (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There is a real concern about that.

It was said that services have been cancelled since 16 January. How many of those services have been cancelled?

Mr. Greg Ennis:

Yes, SIPTU agrees with an increased subvention and the review of the free travel pass. On the review of licences, a direct award contract has to run for a period. However, we agree it should be in the mix. On inefficiencies, we rule nothing in and out of negotiations but they will have to start.

On the wider point the Deputy raised about the expectation for the WRC, Workplace Relations Commission, meeting this evening, in this job - I have been in it for 19 years - one becomes an eternal optimist. If one did not, one would not get out of the bed in the morning. While I am optimistic going to the WRC and I welcome the intervention of the LRC, Labour Relations Commission, we also need to be clear that they are exploratory talks. We will not be engaging with the employer directly. We will set out our position.

However, if the company, which may have attended already or be there simultaneously, holds the position that it will implement these cuts from 20 February, it will be a very brief WRC hearing because we will have nowhere to go but back to our members to report and prepare for something that no one wants which is not in the public or the workers' interest. We had to draw a line in the sand but this line has now been passed by the senior management team in Bus Éireann, which is unprecedented.

Mr. Willie Quigley:

We hope the WRC may influence the company to do what it has refused to do for us. Each union has written three times to the company but has not received a response. We want to unhinge the lock where the company has set down preconditions. The Minister says, day after day, that each side should start with a blank sheet. If we could get the WRC to bring about that position, then I think the door will be opened to meaningful engagement.

Mr. Dermot O'Leary:

On the role of the Department, its fingerprints are all over the crime scene. It is akin to a young kid lighting a gorse fire and running off. Thankfully, the helpful leak of the Grant Thornton report gave us knowledge about the role of the Department. It has been all over this for the past 18 months. The Department asked the company to produce report after report, three in total. The context is important here. It asked the company to come up with solutions to the Bus Éireann and Expressway crisis to avoid large-scale industrial unrest. That was the remit the company was given.

Some 18 months later we are facing into that large-scale industrial unrest. Something happened in between. There was the small matter of a general election and the kicking of the can down the road. I accuse directly the Department of being involved in that scenario. It is all over this and it has a responsibility. As long as I am breathing and my colleagues are representing people, I will not let the Department off the hook on that responsibility.

Of course, the NTA has rejected licences. It is its job to do so. That is not the issue, however. The issue is what licences it has approved. I made the point in my submission that it has issued five licences on the motorway network for Dublin-Cork, Dublin-Waterford and Dublin-Limerick while amending three. For those five, plus the three amended, 104 extra services appeared on those routes. That is madness and is just not sustainable.

On rural Ireland and connectivity, there are 3,000 Expressway services a week in this country. A map of Ireland shows how this service goes into every nook and cranny of this country. Without that connectivity, a minibus will not solve the problem or replace the 54-seater coach. As I said in my submission, why the hell should rural Ireland citizens be treated any differently from those who want to live in urban centres?

Mick Barry (Cork North Central, Anti-Austerity Alliance)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The unions' members are under attack from Bus Éireann. The Minister and the Government stand idly by but, by doing so, they aid and abet the attack. From what I have seen in Leinster House over the past two days, we are dealing with a Government which is considerably weaker than it was last week. It is my personal hope that the weakened position of the Government will assist the unions' members in achieving justice and stopping these wage cuts. The unions are now in a stronger position.

The longer this matter goes on and the longer I listen to Mr. Ray Hernan, the acting chief executive, I think there is another issue on the agenda. When I am finished here, I am going around the corner to Baggot Street to talk to the strikers outside the Tesco store there. There is a blatant and obvious attempt at union-busting by Tesco. It is an upfront attempt at union-busting in the sense that union officials have been kept off the premises, no union literature is allowed on store notice boards. I noted this morning in Bray that Tesco stopped union deductions from the payslips and so forth.

It is not as blatant as that in Bus Éireann. In reality, if a company has unions accept €7,000 pay cuts, it has the unions in its pocket and, effectively, it has busted the unions. There is a private sector example and another example with Bus Éireann. It is two sides of the one coin.

I noted Mr. Dermot O'Leary's point on shared depots. Some depots are used by Bus Éireann workers and buses and by Irish Rail workers. I presume the import of what Mr. Dermot O'Leary said is that if there are pickets outside these depots next Monday, then there will be an issue for rail workers crossing a picket line. Will he expand on that? Some of the depots were mentioned. I would like to hear which ones they are because that is a significant issue for the dispute.

I am also aware from my contacts and connections with public transport workers in Cork that while workers in Iarnród Éireann and Dublin Bus are in separate companies to Bus Éireann, there is an element of a band of brothers to it. They were all CIE workers at one stage and everybody knows that if one goes down, then the rest are liable to be next. There is a sense of shared interests. I understand the unions may not want to comment on this because there are talks this afternoon. Is there a degree of pressure on the unions from Dublin Bus and Iarnród Éireann workers to say they do not want the Bus Éireann workers to stand alone?

Are the witnesses under a degree of pressure from below? Would they care to comment on that?

Brendan Griffin (Kerry, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There is about four minutes for answers now.

Mick Barry (Cork North Central, Anti-Austerity Alliance)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

When Mr. Hernan was in here a couple of weeks ago, it seemed to me from what he was saying that the vast bulk of what I called the cuts and what he called the savings were coming from the workers. He was at pains to deny that was the case. He said that 40% of the costs are labour costs and that 40% of what he described as the savings would come from the labour side of things. He is looking for €12 million worth of labour cost savings. In order for the figures to add up it is being said that there are now €30 million worth of savings overall being looked for. For a company that is losing €9 million, looking for savings of €30 million seems a little over the top.

Have the witnesses seen, or has anyone seen, what the exact breakdown of the €18 million worth of savings over and above the labour cost savings? Would they care to comment on those €18 million savings? Do they believe they are there?

Mr. Dermot O'Leary:

Can we share the answers?

Brendan Griffin (Kerry, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

If you could, but I will have to limit them to about three minutes to be fair to Deputies Murphy and O'Keeffe who wish to speak.

Mr. Dermot O'Leary:

We will share. There are two questions. I will take the first and my colleague can take the second. We are on common ground here.

In terms of the question about the shared locations, as we call it, we are under more than a bit of pressure. I, again, have to be very responsible in my role as general secretary of the National Bus and Rail Union and ensure that my members in Irish Rail are very much aware of their obligations to their employer. They are not in dispute with their employer but I cannot dictate, to anybody in this room and certainly not to my members, where their moral compass points or how responsible they may feel to the family that is CIE, a relationship the Deputy rightly mentioned. Despite the ambition of the main party in Government today, and others, to dismantle the CIE family, they will get their answer as to what the family looks like or what it will do in terms of supporting each other very soon. I am at pains, however, to point out that Irish Rail workers are not in dispute, but there are going to be pickets in Limerick, Athlone, Waterford, Galway and the Sligo next Monday, unless the acting CEO withdraws those cuts. Those locations have railway stations direct centre and front of house. People in Irish Rail are telling me, wrongly from a legal perspective I accept, that they are going to have severe difficulty passing those pickets.

Mr. Greg Ennis:

As a divisional organiser within SIPTU looking after four sectors - transport, aviation, energy and construction - I can say that we recently had a divisional meeting and it was clear to me that the delegates from Dublin Bus and Iarnród Éireann at that divisional committee are extremely concerned about this development, as are our colleagues in aviation. Yes, there is pressure. Clearly we have to work within the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. We would always advise our members to stay within the law, but I can assure the Deputy that there is absolutely pressure building on this issue right across SIPTU membership across the public infrastructure network.

With regard to the issue of the €12 million, the first I heard of it, and I think most people heard of it, was on, if I am not mistaken, an RTE interview on the "Six One News". This €30 million figure came out of the blue from nowhere. That is €30 million a year on an indefinite basis in a company that had a problem of €5 million, then €6 million. Within two days it was €7 million and within three days it was €9 million. There is someone making this up as they go along and, instead of looking for the €6 million, they are now looking for €30 million. Deputy Barry is right, 40% of this, to the tune of €12 million, would come from workers who, as we said earlier, earn approximately €30,000 a year. It is not going to be acceptable and will not be rammed down the throats of our members.

Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the witnesses, they are very welcome. To put it on the record, I would have regarded the letter of 16 January as putting down a marker and I am not surprised at the response there has been to it. The one thing that would be very regrettable for everyone, workers and the travelling public, would be a strike, which would have to be solved at some point in any event. Let us hope that the meeting today is fruitful.

To clear my own head on this, when we decided to have several hearings on public transport we were looking at it from the point of view of delivering a sustainable public transport system into the future, not that there was going to be a dispute imminent. That was the context of this and there is an issue of sustainability in regard to the subject matter we are talking about today. Would the 19% of Bus Éireann passengers that travel on Expressway services be the only group affected? Is that correct? They are the only group that are affected by the letter of 16 January? Is that the totality?

Mr. Dermot O'Leary:

Yes.

Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I have a question on the routes that are going to be put out to tender. There are, in fact, quite a few in my own area which is quite lucrative because of a growing population. It would be an area that would be cherry-picked if any were going to be. What happens to the drivers on those routes if Bus Éireann does not get the contract? We are told by the NTA that if some Expressway services are discontinued at local level that it will, as its track record proves, step in and ensure that local demand for public transport is met and that it will not leave any rural community behind. That is not quite dealing with the issue of lucrative routes going out, but what happens to the drivers? What happens to the cost base there?

I do not see how this stacks up. It does not seem logical to me that it will not cost, one way or the other. Mr. Noone spoke about Irish Rail getting a bigger portion. Could the witnesses give us a breakdown on that? It would be acceptable to send it to us at some point in the future. How does that break down? Witnesses have also said that there was a loss of services on 16 January. A number of services were lost where there is a commitment to provide a service but the service being provided at the moment is not necessarily comparable. Do the witnesses have any indication of what services have been lost? Even if that information were provided afterwards it would be useful.

The Minister keeps telling us that the state aid rules prevent intervention. It seems that there is a degree of state aid in regard to the private operator as well by virtue of the fact that they are not required to have a public component to their operation. Is it possible to build that into what the NTA is doing? Could they force fare competition? Has the Minister sought that from it?

Mr. Dermot O'Leary:

The last question the Deputy asked ties in with one of the questions she asked earlier. In terms of drivers who would be discommoded if Bus Éireann does not achieve the contract, for example for the route No. 126 in her area, this is unfortunately nearly a mirror of what happened back in 2015. At that time the same Department, which has now gone to the hills, and the same National Transport Authority, which says it has nothing to do with it, were dragged kicking and screaming to the table. As a result of a dispute, which unfortunately discommoded people that needed the service and people that work in the industry, we got around a table, which we should have done long ago in this dispute as well, and came up with an agreement that allowed for market growth. More importantly this market growth was to be funded by the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport, which was not available before the dispute. Thankfully all that occurred was that some of the drivers involved were discommoded from their locations. That is unfortunate but thankfully, because of that agreement, the market growth is envisaged at this stage to go beyond what may be lost. No drivers will lose their job with Bus Éireann. That is the first aspect.

In terms of state aid, I will say that certain private companies, which the Chairman will rightly not allow me to identify, are getting state aid through intervention from the Department of Social Protection, for example in terms of the family income supplement. To go back to what the Minister said about state aid, and I have said it already, I would like to see the state aid rules in question. I am not a legal expert but I have been reading up on this since the privatisation debate and before. I would like to see them because as far as I am concerned there are no state aid rules. I will say this to Deputy Murphy, we are the best country in the world, certainly the best in Europe, at pointing towards Europe and saying it is its fault and that we have to do such a thing because Europe says so.

There are one or two individuals in the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport who should nearly go over to Europe. I believe they are probably speaking French at this stage they are so in love with Europe.

There are no state rules that debar the NTA from intervening regarding the routes off the motorway.

Mr. Patrick McCusker:

We had dealings in Northern Ireland with Ulster Bus. It has no problem with state aid. It would only take officials from the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport to get on the Belfast train, head North and speak to representatives of the company. There are no problems with state aid.

Mr. Greg Ennis:

Deputy Catherine Murphy raised the issue of the letter on 16 January. The letter of 18 January is even more concerning. The issue of what would happen drivers was dealt with by my colleague, Mr. O'Leary. In the letter of 18 January, it is stated there is no voluntary severance scheme and that the redundancy package will be two plus two - statutory - and so on. This rings of something.

Private operators are using publicly funded roadways to make a killing. Maybe one way of dealing with the private operators is to impose a tariff for using public roadways.

Kevin O'Keeffe (Cork East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the union representatives and commend them on their ongoing national road show to make the public aware of the views of the bus drivers and what is potentially coming down the road.

I am glad Mr. Ennis mentioned the letters issued in January. The letter from 18 January is the one I have to hand. The proposals here are akin, perhaps, to those of the Croke Park agreement back in the noughties when we faced the first financial crisis in this country. The last paragraph of the letter concerns the elephant that was in the room for a while. He is not here now, he is gone back to the Minister, Deputy Ross. In the letter, the acting CEO of Bus Éireann tells the workers that the Government cannot, or will not, provide support and that it is up to Bus Éireann to do what is required. At the same time, he says free travel did not cause the problems and that an increase in revenue for such services will not fix the problems. To address this, let me give a simple example from my own back yard. The Cork-Dublin Expressway bus pulls into Mitchelstown. Recently, there were 45 passengers on the bus but only two paid. How can one justify the Government not intervening and paying a proper subvention in this regard?

The Minister comes back to us and says we are in conflict with EU regulations but one cannot compare the private and public services. Private operators on the Cork-Dublin route are using the motorway and doing a magnificent job. I use their service regularly. The Expressway service has to pull in here and there. How can one say the two are in competition with each other? The NTA needs to elaborate on this issue and the Minister has to get involved.

Mr. Quigley had some interesting figures on PSO supports in other European countries. What is the European average in this regard?

Brendan Griffin (Kerry, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I remind the delegates that it is 3.13 p.m. and they need to be somewhere else in 17 minutes.

Mr. Willie Quigley:

I shall note the question and forward an answer to the committee.

Mr. Greg Ennis:

With regard to public transport generally in the cities across Europe, the rate is 50%. Wallonia in Belgium is of a similar size to Deputy O'Keeffe's province, Munster. It provides a subvention of 78%.

Kevin O'Keeffe (Cork East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Rather than picking out some countries, what is the average?

Mr. Dermot O'Leary:

We were at a meeting last week in Mitchelstown that Deputies O'Keeffe and Sherlock attended. It was part of our national campaign on bus services. All the unions here are fully supportive of the scheme of the Department of Social Protection. We should change the title from the free travel scheme to something about entitlement. A very small example of the value of the scheme was given to us at a meeting in west Limerick by a woman who sat very timidly in the audience on the night in question while listening to our presentation. She was not going to raise her hand but did so since there was a lot of debate over the Department of Social Protection. Listening to what the woman had to say was heart-rending. She is a full time carer of her husband and is in her 50s or 60s. She gets respite for ten hours once every two weeks. The place is called Templeeglantine, a dot in the landscape.

Kevin O'Keeffe (Cork East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I know it well.

Mr. Dermot O'Leary:

The lady uses her bus pass to go to Newcastle West, which is not a metropolis, to do a bit of shopping and engage in some social interaction. The NTA does not even know such people exist. That is the problem. It is for these people that the service is required.

Imelda Munster (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

With the support of members, I propose that the committee write to both the Minister and acting CEO of Bus Éireann expressing its wish, in light of the possible strike action and all that will result from that in five days, that the CEO of Bus Éireann, the Department, NTA and other interested parties agree to meet the unions and set aside the content of, or preconditions in, the letter that was sent out. They should set aside the obstruction to talks. It is important that we express our view on this.

Brendan Griffin (Kerry, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Is that agreed?

Kevin O'Keeffe (Cork East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There should be a letter to the Taoiseach because the Minister, Deputy Ross, is not listening to us.

Brendan Griffin (Kerry, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Have we unanimous agreement on Deputy Munster's proposal? Agreed.

Kevin O'Keeffe (Cork East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Could the Taoiseach be included?

Brendan Griffin (Kerry, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Is that agreed?

Imelda Munster (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We should be explicit that, as far as we are concerned, the obstruction is the preconditions that were sent out to workers. We are asking those concerned to set those aside to allow for negotiations.

Brendan Griffin (Kerry, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am conscious that our witnesses need to leave. I thank them for attending and thank the members. Representatives of the NTA and Department of Social Protection will be before the committee next week to further inform our discussions on this. I wish the delegates the best in their discussions with the Workplace Relations Commission this evening and in their engagements. I thank the delegates and their members for the work they do for the people of this country nationwide. The service they provide is invaluable. I acknowledge it is very important to people throughout the country.