Looking at the services being cancelled each day, it seems Avon are only down by a few drivers so not many tenders need dropping. They will get themselves in debt too as Mtravel will fine them. I know when SC send a bus that is too big on the 163 they get a fine, no bus, get a fine. More debt means they can't employ as many drivers then back to square one so they do need to do something. As others have said, it needs doing fast. Hopefully they have people in the driving school as we speak to make things a bit easier.
EDIT: After seeing today as cancelled buses, it seems they are down by 10 drivers or so. There seems to be a big shortage of drivers. Other bus companies are having the same problem but services are being affected by it as much.
Not good when they are not running the main 10s, the ones they have cancelled are busy with staff from hospital and school children, customers are going to start loosing faith in Avon and use alternative travel, not a good situation
This dont bode well for the Wirral Bus Review if Avon are struggling as im not sure there is much slack in the daytime from Stagecoach and Arriva , evening work could be easier to fill.
As this is looking like a continuing problem you would think Miserytravel would have put emergency tenders out to ride the storm.
Do Avon train drivers to get their cpc? I'd happily work for them part time if they do
(20/06/2017 10:30)iMarkeh Wrote: [ -> ]I know when SC send a bus that is too big on the 163 they get a fine, no bus, get a fine.
Really? That seems a bit bizarre and draconian! I can understand why they'd get penalised for providing one that's too small, but how can a bus be "too big", as long as it fits along the entire route and is not obliged to skip any sections?
(20/06/2017 10:30)iMarkeh Wrote: [ -> ]. I know when SC send a bus that is too big on the 163 they get a fine, no bus, get a fine.
That's not true at all. An operator is only fined for having either:
A) No bus available to run the service completely
B) Failure to run a single service (with the exemption of external factors like breakdowns, vandalism or late running)
C) Late running (as a result of internal factors)
D) A bus not following the full route
E) Using a vehicle that does not meet the minimum requirements for that contract. (Such as "a low floor bus with atleast 29 seats, under the age of 10 years")
Operators are not fined for buses that are "too big".
Any bus other than solo is too big. Sorry, I should have explained it but darts are a tight squeeze and as proved the other week in Torrington area, darts shouldn't be in the area. I knew what I meant.
(20/06/2017 16:20)Raawwwrrr! Wrote: [ -> ]That's not true at all. An operator is only fined for having either:
A) No bus available to run the service completely
B) Failure to run a single service (with the exemption of external factors like breakdowns, vandalism or late running)
C) Late running (as a result of internal factors)
D) A bus not following the full route
E) Using a vehicle that does not meet the minimum requirements for that contract. (Such as "a low floor bus with atleast 29 seats, under the age of 10 years")
Operators are not fined for buses that are "too big".
And that is exactly why Avon have commercialised most of their contracts so they can literally do anything with no worry about merseytravel comeback and losing tenders like HTL and the others before when times get tough like now. They should give up the 91/92 and giveback the 492/495 at least thats a start for some breathing space
Think Merseytravel are hanging back because of there Bus Review.
I know that for one Arriva because they are sharing routes numbers will get tarred with the mess Avon is leaving behind on the 492/5.
The problem with the notice period for withdrawal of services means that by the time the notice period is taken the service will be next to useless due to unreliability anyway , at least they have been proactive about announcing to Merseytravel service cancellations.