EU legislation and bus routes more than 50 km in length

[geoffk]

A previous thread on this subject has been closed. As a reminder, EU drivers' hours/tachograph legislation was drafted to apply to coach services. The UK has historically had many bus routes longer than 50 km and these were also affected by the legislation. Hence bus operators have broken up routes exceeding 50 km into two or more shorter routes. These have the same driver and bus, are timetabled to follow on from one another and routed so that one service ends where the other starts. Through fares are also offered. Although each ‘service’ is under 50 km, together these routes exceed that threshold.

Now that we have left the EU, does anyone expect these long through routes to reappear as they were before? There are too many to list.

 

[peterblue]

The whole thing is a mess and not at all customer friendly. It should be changed. Bus operators do this as work / break requirements are more lenient for shorter <50km routes.

 

[PG]

Now that we have left the EU, does anyone expect these long through routes to reappear as they were before?

Not likely; the previous EU rules have been enshrined in UK legislation so I think the subject would require a vote in parliament to amend the legislation.

 

[cnjb8]

I'm sure it's been said on here that First used to run their Jurrasic Coaster from Exeter to Poole, and Stagecoach ran a Portsmouth to Dover service. But these had to be cut back due to this EU legislation, can anyone clarify because I've probably got these services wrong

 

[RT4038]

I'm sure it's been said on here that First used to run their Jurrasic Coaster from Exeter to Poole, and Stagecoach ran a Portsmouth to Dover service. But these had to be cut back due to this EU legislation, can anyone clarify because I've probably got these services wrong

There has been a compromise solution (granted not very customer friendly, but it works) available for some years now, to get around the 50km limit on local bus services being worked under domestic hours rules.. Hiowever, operators have not really been very keen on re-uniting long routes previously split [20+ years ago]. The reality is that other forces are at play against long routes: unreliability due to congestion and ENCTS re-imbursement amongst others.

 

[Gloster]

Not likely; the previous EU rules have been enshrined in UK legislation so I think the subject would require a vote in parliament to amend the legislation.

Indeed. Any change to the rules now depends on whether anyone has the will, i.e. sees financial advantages in it, and the political clout, i.e. friends in the right places.

 

[158756]

If bus companies are just avoiding the regulations by pretending to split routes what would be the point in repealing it? If anything any review of the law more focused on the UK situation could result in a clampdown on such practices.

 

[M803UYA]

Indeed. Any change to the rules now depends on whether anyone has the will, i.e. sees financial advantages in it, and the political clout, i.e. friends in the right places.

Well, the friends in right places might work? In 2007 the SNP had a policy of wanting bus franchising for Scotland. This policy ended when a donation was made by Sir Brian Souter to the SNP.... so there are precedents.

If bus companies are just avoiding the regulations by pretending to split routes what would be the point in repealing it? If anything any review of the law more focused on the UK situation could result in a clampdown on such practices.

It is more to do with requiring less drivers to operate a long distance service under domestic hours regulations compared with EU hours. Driving times are longer under domestic, so drivers can drive more hours. For the company that is a good thing as it means they get their drivers to drive longer than those working EU hours.....

Whether that helps the driver who chases their tail for 5 and a half hours, but as we all know, the driver is considered expendable by the larger bus companies and doesn't figure at all in the scheme of things!

 

[Bletchleyite]

If bus companies are just avoiding the regulations by pretending to split routes what would be the point in repealing it? If anything any review of the law more focused on the UK situation could result in a clampdown on such practices.

Because it would avoid the misleading and confusing "connects with" tripe in the timetables?

 

[RT4038]

If bus companies are just avoiding the regulations by pretending to split routes what would be the point in repealing it? If anything any review of the law more focused on the UK situation could result in a clampdown on such practices.

A 'clampdown' seems a little unlikely, as the DfT have specifically acquiesced to the 'workaround', and have no desire to increase the cost of operation of such services because this may lead to their attenuation or withdrawal.

operate a long distance service under domestic hours regulations compared with EU hours. Driving times are longer under domestic, so drivers can drive more hours. For the company that is a good thing as it means they get their drivers to drive longer than those working EU hours.....

Whether that helps the driver who chases their tail for 5 and a half hours, but as we all know, the driver is considered expendable by the larger bus companies and doesn't figure at all in the scheme of things!

It is not only the maximum number of driving hours per day, but also the amount of driving between break times, the length of breaks and the length and frequency of rest periods between duties. Aside from the implications on driver numbers, it also constricts the amount of overtime that staff are permitted to work, and therefore their earnings, which is not exactly popular with them. The record keeping requirements are more onerous which is reflected in higher administration costs.

Because it would avoid the misleading and confusing "connects with" tripe in the timetables?

You are right, but they are stuck a little 'between a rock and a hard place' in not wanting a relaxation which may allow long distance express services (which the EU rules were really designed for) to get around the requirements. It should be possible to reword the legislation to prevent this, but it is hardly a priority I should think.

 

[DunsBus]

My local service through Duns, the 60, operates on a split registration - Galashiels to Duns and Duns to Berwick.

 

[Boo_]

I also use the rule on Rail Replacement. As so long as each stop is within 50km as crow fly's you can runs buses and coaches on GB regs ( But you do get issues with Coach drivers not wanting to work on GB as they don`t like mixing it with EU my TOC`s works on GB apart from one route as it a motorway run more then 50km as they plan to use London buses for most of the runs )

 

[padbus]

A 'clampdown' seems a little unlikely, as the DfT have specifically acquiesced to the 'workaround', and have no desire to increase the cost of operation of such services because this may lead to their attenuation or withdrawal.

As the DfT have acquiesced to the workaround, who is going to enforce the regulations regarding destination displays? After all, the destination shown is going to have no bearing on the safe operation of the bus. By not having the ultimate destination shown, a valuable piece of advertising is lost. A bus in Exeter showing Barnstaple might attract people to investigate and try the route for a day out whereas one showing Winkleigh probably doesn't. As a first step perhaps the destination font sizes could be adjusted to show Winkleigh for Barnstaple instead of Winkleigh for Barnstaple.

 

[Megafuss]

Firstly there is nothing wrong with what bus operators are doing. It's no different to a driver driving lots of interworked city services in a piece of work.

Could wording in publicity be better? Probably. But I think this is a fuss about nothing

 

[Bletchleyite]

You are right, but they are stuck a little 'between a rock and a hard place' in not wanting a relaxation which may allow long distance express services (which the EU rules were really designed for) to get around the requirements. It should be possible to reword the legislation to prevent this, but it is hardly a priority I should think.

Very easy indeed to legislate that - the whole route must be a single registered local bus service for the rule to apply. Coach routes are often part-registered, but putting the passenger stops in at the maximum distance apart would be too much of a faff to bother on the full route of most motorway coach services - it would cause too much delay and increase the PVR, adding other costs, plus they'd have to take free passes which they probably wouldn't want to. (The X5 isn't really a coach route, it's an express bus service using coaches, registered throughout, and the now-separated Cambridge leg was just a stopping local bus route with fancy vehicles! ).

Probably not a priority, but easily enough done. There wasn't really a problem before it was applied, so just rolling back to the previous rules would be fine.

 

[CBlue]

As the DfT have acquiesced to the workaround, who is going to enforce the regulations regarding destination displays? After all, the destination shown is going to have no bearing on the safe operation of the bus. By not having the ultimate destination shown, a valuable piece of advertising is lost. A bus in Exeter showing Barnstaple might attract people to investigate and try the route for a day out whereas one showing Winkleigh probably doesn't. As a first step perhaps the destination font sizes could be adjusted to show Winkleigh for Barnstaple instead of Winkleigh for Barnstaple.

Operators do the former more than the latter anyway as far as destinations are concerned.

 

[RT4038]

As the DfT have acquiesced to the workaround, who is going to enforce the regulations regarding destination displays? After all, the destination shown is going to have no bearing on the safe operation of the bus. By not having the ultimate destination shown, a valuable piece of advertising is lost. A bus in Exeter showing Barnstaple might attract people to investigate and try the route for a day out whereas one showing Winkleigh probably doesn't. As a first step perhaps the destination font sizes could be adjusted to show Winkleigh for Barnstaple instead of Winkleigh for Barnstaple.

The DfT acquiesced on the condition that the destination blind rules were complied with, so operators are not going to push it.

Very easy indeed to legislate that - the whole route must be a single registered local bus service for the rule to apply. Coach routes are often part-registered, but putting the passenger stops in at the maximum distance apart would be too much of a faff to bother on the full route of most motorway coach services - it would cause too much delay and increase the PVR, adding other costs, plus they'd have to take free passes which they probably wouldn't want to. (The X5 isn't really a coach route, it's an express bus service using coaches, registered throughout, and the now-separated Cambridge leg was just a stopping local bus route with fancy vehicles! ).

Probably not a priority, but easily enough done. There wasn't really a problem before it was applied, so just rolling back to the previous rules would be fine.

There was a problem - local bus routes over 50km were being worked under EU rules, and bus companies were gradually reducing and/or eliminating these services due to the additional costs.

 

[philthetube]

I also use the rule on Rail Replacement. As so long as each stop is within 50km as crow fly's you can runs buses and coaches on GB regs ( But you do get issues with Coach drivers not wanting to work on GB as they don`t like mixing it with EU my TOC`s works on GB apart from one route as it a motorway run more then 50km as they plan to use London buses for most of the runs )

Not that they don't like it. most would probably like the hours, however if they do anything on uk hours then they are stuck on them until their wok pattern gets that out of the system and cannot do any coach work until that happens. They are not allowed to mix, it is one or the other.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Not that they don't like it. most would probably like the hours, however if they do anything on uk hours then they are stuck on them until their wok pattern gets that out of the system and cannot do any coach work until that happens. They are not allowed to mix, it is one or the other.

For what it's worth I would question whether we need two sets of hours anyway. I'm not clear why driving all day on local bus routes is considered to be OK for an hour longer than driving all day on a motorway coach service - indeed, the former, in a big city, would be considerably more stressful and tiring (though rural work or work in an uncongested place like MK is probably fairly relaxing).

Should the UK perhaps consider applying domestic rules to all wholly domestic timetabled PCV services, and indeed non-timetabled services but using a tacho?

 

[RT4038]

For what it's worth I would question whether we need two sets of hours anyway. I'm not clear why driving all day on local bus routes is considered to be OK for an hour longer than driving all day on a motorway coach service - indeed, the former, in a big city, would be considerably more stressful and tiring (though rural work or work in an uncongested place like MK is probably fairly relaxing).

Should the UK perhaps consider applying domestic rules to all wholly domestic timetabled PCV services, and indeed non-timetabled services but using a tacho?

The reasoning for having two different sets of rules is no different now than it was then - no desire to increase the costs of operating local bus services.

Opinions on stress levels is, of course, highly subjective, but I think that driving 60mph in traffic dense motorway conditions, without stopping, is much more stressful and tiring than 25mph in urban conditions constantly stopping in traffic and at bus stops and 'laying over' at terminals etc. The concentration required at 60mph is much more than at local bus speeds. My personal opinion, having done both activities. However I also recognise that some long distance or private hire activities are much less stressful than some local bus work, but you can't cater for everything!

Local bus operators, and drivers, are quite keen not to use tachographs, due to the more onerous (and therefore costly) administration and compliance standards.

 

[Geordie driver]

From time to time you get articles in local papers with councillors complaining about driving hours mean routes can't be ( cost effectively) extended due to driving hours and wanting things changed.

I can see the current mob in charge changing the rules to suit big business but I don't imagine it's going to be a big priority.

I know I bang on about this, but 5 ½ hours without a toilet break or even the chance to stand up is wrong, as someone up thread said, chances are you are chasing your tail for the whole time and still have to sell tickets and deal with the " great" British public. By the time you get off your body is moulded into the driving position.

Then a 30 minutes break ( break facilities optional, we were just permitted 30 minutes off the bus) then back on for several more hours.

 

[Ken H]

The reasoning for having two different sets of rules is no different now than it was then - no desire to increase the costs of operating local bus services.

Opinions on stress levels is, of course, highly subjective, but I think that driving 60mph in traffic dense motorway conditions, without stopping, is much more stressful and tiring than 25mph in urban conditions constantly stopping in traffic and at bus stops and 'laying over' at terminals etc. The concentration required at 60mph is much more than at local bus speeds. My personal opinion, having done both activities. However I also recognise that some long distance or private hire activities are much less stressful than some local bus work, but you can't cater for everything!

Local bus operators, and drivers, are quite keen not to use tachographs, due to the more onerous (and therefore costly) administration and compliance standards.

a local bus will have a lot of ticket issuing stuff to do too. That can be quite stressy. do national express drivers handle cash much these days? or is it all online?

 

[Eyersey468]

The reasoning for having two different sets of rules is no different now than it was then - no desire to increase the costs of operating local bus services.

Opinions on stress levels is, of course, highly subjective, but I think that driving 60mph in traffic dense motorway conditions, without stopping, is much more stressful and tiring than 25mph in urban conditions constantly stopping in traffic and at bus stops and 'laying over' at terminals etc. The concentration required at 60mph is much more than at local bus speeds. My personal opinion, having done both activities. However I also recognise that some long distance or private hire activities are much less stressful than some local bus work, but you can't cater for everything!

Local bus operators, and drivers, are quite keen not to use tachographs, due to the more onerous (and therefore costly) administration and compliance standards.

I agree about driving longer distances in a coach on motorways being more tiring than local buses

a local bus will have a lot of ticket issuing stuff to do too. That can be quite stressy. do national express drivers handle cash much these days? or is it all online?

NX coach drivers don't handle much cash, nearly all tickets are prebooked

 

[Ken H]

From time to time you get articles in local papers with councillors complaining about driving hours mean routes can't be ( cost effectively) extended due to driving hours and wanting things changed.

I can see the current mob in charge changing the rules to suit big business but I don't imagine it's going to be a big priority.

I know I bang on about this, but 5 ½ hours without a toilet break or even the chance to stand up is wrong, as someone up thread said, chances are you are chasing your tail for the whole time and still have to sell tickets and deal with the " great" British public. By the time you get off your body is moulded into the driving position.

Then a 30 minutes break ( break facilities optional, we were just permitted 30 minutes off the bus) then back on for several more hours.

the lancaster - skipton buses take a 5 minute break in settle. the drivers get out. many have a fag. but no toilets for them - its quite a step to the public loos at Whitefriars. assume they have a break at Kirkby Lonsdale. I assume they can use the loos at Booths supermarket.

 

[Unstoppable]

I do long distance coach driving. Regardless if any rules changed I know my operator would not expect us to drive so long at the wheel. When doing double manning my company recommends changing driver every 2 hours to prevent fatigue and distraction. Driving down the M6 non stop for nearly 4h30 is something only very few drivers are willing to do. There is a lot of concentration required to stay focused/motivated for such a long period of time on a straight motorway

 

[ajrm]

There's a lot of hidden costs for operators who had a mixture of EU and domestic work because it's very difficult to mix drivers between the two (if you usually drive under domestic rules, for example, and do a shift under EU rules you're then within scope of the EU rules for the next couple of weeks even if you return to driving under domestic rules). So you end up with two sets of drivers at each depot and much less operational flexibility.

To answer the OP's question, I think I read that the deal confirms retention of the EU drivers' hours regime so no immediate prospect of a change.

 

[PG]

Should the UK perhaps consider applying domestic rules to all wholly domestic timetabled PCV services, and indeed non-timetabled services but using a tacho?

Aside from the other considerations that have been mentioned that would incur a one-off cost of fitting tachographs to all buses; and a recurring cost of maintaining them.

Local bus operators, and drivers, are quite keen not to use tachographs, due to the more onerous (and therefore costly) administration and compliance standards.

Yes indeed, the admin involved is not inconsiderable. Some firms employ the services of specialists to handle it.

I know I bang on about this, but 5 ½ hours without a toilet break or even the chance to stand up is wrong

Totally agree. If I need to go then I will happily stop outside a shop/pub and after explaining to passengers get off and politely ask the establishment if I can use their facilities. Same goes for stretching my legs - inform passengers and most will understand. Too bad if the company doesn't like it or incurs the wrath of the beak (Traffic Commissioner) for not running to time. The solution is to devise a workable schedule not one that has the driver at the wheel non-stop with miniscule turnaround times.

 

[Boo_]

On GB regulations you can even make drivers count there turn round time as breaks.
I had a bus doing a run every 30mins that was timed to have a 10min break after the 20min loop. and they did that full shift

 

[Simon75]

I do long distance coach driving. Regardless if any rules changed I know my operator would not expect us to drive so long at the wheel. When doing double manning my company recommends changing driver every 2 hours to prevent fatigue and distraction. Driving down the M6 non stop for nearly 4h30 is something only very few drivers are willing to do. There is a lot of concentration required to stay focused/motivated for such a long period of time on a straight motorway

I travelled by National Express from London to Stoke-on-trent (think the bus went to Manchester) June 2019.
It was double manned, and with a scheduled stop at Leicester St Margaret's, drivers swapped over
I

 

[Bletchleyite]

Aside from the other considerations that have been mentioned that would incur a one-off cost of fitting tachographs to all buses; and a recurring cost of maintaining them.

Sorry, I wasn't quite clear enough. I wasn't proposing fitting tachos to buses, rather applying the same hours rules to all UK PCV operation (i.e. everything that isn't international), but for non-scheduled services a tacho would be required.

Requiring people to drive for 5.5 hours straight without using the loo is indeed unacceptable, and probably physically impossible for most people, certainly as they get older. But that is I think slightly separate from the need for a longer break for genuine rest rather than a quick trip to the loo, and the provision of that should arguably just be covered by standard workplace H&S law, because working for 5.5 hours solid with no toilet breaks is unacceptable in any industry, that isn't specific to buses.