Brendan Griffin
Question:171. Deputy Brendan Griffin asked the Minister for Finance when he expects bankers will take a pay cut as per the Mercer report; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [25444/13]
View answerTuesday, 28 May 2013
Questions (171, 183, 194)
Pearse Doherty
Question:183. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Minister for Finance further to Parliamentary Questions Nos.117, 188, 189, 190, 191 and 192, of 21 May 2013, in which he stated it would not be appropriate or realistic to specify a timeframe for the savings to be delivered in bankers' pay, if he will provide a timeframe in which he expects the required savings to be delivered from banks, for example, within three months, within six months, by the end of the year or by the middle of next year; if he will indicate whether he intends the 6% to 10% savings to be once-off savings or if there will be further savings next year; and his views on whether there is a dual approach being applied to savings in the public sector, which have clear timeframes and deadlines set upon them for delivery, and savings in the State-supported banking sector, in which he appears willing to allow the banks to set their own deadlines and timeframes. [25550/13]
View answerPearse Doherty
Question:194. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Minister for Finance with regard to each of the responses received from banks to the Mercer report, if he will outline the way their proposals would cut total remuneration in each pay grade, and the proportion of proposed cuts in each bank to those earning each of less than €100,000, between €100,000 and €200,000, between €200,000 and €300,000, between €300,000 and €400,000 and more than €400,000. [25657/13]
View answerWritten answers
I propose to take Questions Nos. 171, 183 and 194 together.
As I stated in earlier replies to Parliamentary Questions on this matter I can confirm that the three State supported banks responded with their individual strategies, designed to achieve the required savings, by the due date of 30 April as requested by the Government in response to the Review of Remuneration Practices & Frameworks at the Covered Institutions. I was not prescriptive in how this was to be achieved respecting their differing State ownership and investment and paths to profitability.
It is not possible at this stage to reveal precise individual details bar what has been put into the public domain. I can confirm that all three institutions have put forward pension changes to varying degrees as part of their respective overall responses.
As I have said previously I am constrained as to what I can say presently due to commercial sensitivities and perhaps, more critical at this stage, industrial relations concerns as the normal protocols continue and need to be respected and observed by all parties. This is something I have advocated throughout this process. I am anxious, therefore, that all the participants in these discussions are given space and time to conduct these critical negotiations.
The Government readily acknowledges the sacrifices and changes made by bank employees to date at all levels and recognises that this has been achieved without major industrial unrest in what is a critically important sector. Therefore, I would encourage all sides to engage in these discussions proactively through the appropriate forums in view of the serious and critical consequences for all concerned.
At this stage, it would not be appropriate or realistic to specify a timeframe for the savings to be delivered. However, in view of the fact that the three institutions continue to be loss making the timely delivery of such savings which will have an ongoing impact on the cost base is critical to their viability, the availability of credit to the economy and to the future employment prospects of their employees.