Irish Airlines Superannuation Scheme

Dáil Éireann Debate, Tuesday - 3 February 2015

Tuesday, 3 February 2015

Questions (125)

Clare Daly

Question:

125. Deputy Clare Daly asked the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport the reason the initiative proposed on 2 December 2014 by the Secretaries General of his Department and the Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation to the expert panel in relation to the IASS dispute was not acted on until 14 January 2015, creating needless anxiety for workers at the three State airports; and if he will direct the DAA and the Shannon Airport Authority to lift the imposed deadline of 15 March 2015 for signing waivers to allow the process to take place. [4687/15]

Oral answers (12 contributions)

Deputy Clare Daly

The Minister will be aware that thousands of workers employed by the DAA and the Shannon Airport Authority have been instructed that they must sign a waiver by 15 March or they stand to lose lump sum payments into a new pensions scheme. On 2 December 2014 the Secretary General of the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport sought to initiate a process aimed at addressing some of the concerns that remained outstanding for the workers who were members of the Irish airlines superannuation scheme. Why was the Secretary General's invitation not acted on? Why has SIPTU not been involved in the process and what will the Minister, as the sole owner of these companies, do to lift the gun from the heads of these workers?

Deputy Paschal Donohoe

I must again make it clear that the IASS and its funding are primarily matters for the trustees, the companies participating in the scheme, the scheme members and the Pensions Authority.  Following SIPTU’s recommendation last November to its members in the DAA and the Shannon Airport Authority to reject the IASS trustees' proposal, the Secretaries General of my Department and the Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation wrote to the expert panel on 2 December to clarify certain industrial relations issues which were the subject of the expert panel report completed last June.  The panel was asked to re-engage with SIPTU and ICTU and provide clarity on these matters.  Discussions took place immediately before Christmas between the Departments, members of the expert panel and ICTU on this engagement which helped to refine the areas of focus for the panel. 

Given the unavailability of the relevant personnel over the holiday period, I understand it was not until just after Christmas when arrangements could be agreed for the panel to engage with ICTU and establish the relevant position of the unions involved, the DAA and the Shannon Airport Authority.  That process is ongoing and it is for the panel to complete this work as effectively and efficiently as possible.  Given that the trustees' proposal was implemented with effect from 31 December, it is vital that the industrial relations issues among certain DAA and Shannon Airport Authority staff are resolved at the earliest opportunity.  In that regard, the deadline of 15 March for the signing of waivers is a matter for the DAA and the Shannon Airport Authority.  At this stage, it is important that there be clarity on the areas of concern in order that IASS members, with all other DAA and Shannon Airport Authority staff, have visibility and certainty on their future pension arrangements.

Deputy Clare Daly

I do not think the Minister will be able to kick this matter solely to the trustees. I am not sure whether he was ill-informed or deliberately misled on was what the position. The facts are that the Secretaries General of his Department and the Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation contacted the expert panel to ask it to engage in a process aimed at resolving some of the difficulties that had arisen. That process has allegedly started, but it has not involved the people who represent the majority of workers who have issues. The problem is twofold. Substantial changes are being proposed to the contracts of airport fire and police service workers who are all represented by SIPTU. They have not been involved in any process. Furthermore, even though we are dealing with one pensions scheme, IASS, involving two companies, Aer Lingus and the DAA, an entirely different set of assumptions prevails in respect of each. This meant that workers in the DAA who had rejected the proposed changes by a majority of 90% were faced with the prospect that a worker aged 53 years with seven years of service would receive a lump sum of €95,000 if he or she worked for Aer Lingus but only €65,000 if he or she worked for the DAA, even though he or she would be on higher pay in the latter. How could this be a realistic assumption for a pensions scheme covering workers in both companies? Clearly, one set of assumptions was wrong. This issue has to be addressed, but holding a gun to workers' heads is not the way to address it.

Deputy Paschal Donohoe

The concerns workers had expressed and the fact that many of these concerns had been instrumental in the ballots which had taken place in the DAA and the Shannon Airport Authority formed the background to the decision taken by the two Secretaries General to ask the expert panel to engage in a process of clarification.

For the Deputy's own information, the particular matters they were asked to clarify and engage on related to the actuarial assumptions used for the purposes of lump sums, the applications for proposals towards the lower paid, the proposed contributions to the new defined contribution scheme and the implementation of medical fitness testing procedures for airport fire and police service over the age of 60 and retirement arrangements between the ages of 60 and 65. In relation to a point the Deputy put to me on engagement on the initiative from other parties with the expert panel, my information is that to date ICTU has provided a statement on behalf of IMPACT, Unite, Mandate and the TEEU while SIPTU has provided a separate statement.

Deputy Clare Daly

These were the issues which were being sought to be addressed, but the problem is that SIPTU has not been asked to engage in this process or to contact the panel. In fact, while it is the only body to have put in a submission, meetings have been held from which SIPTU has been excluded. That is a recipe for disaster given that the workers whose living standards are being impacted by the airport fire and police service and the members of the DAA are primarily organised by SIPTU. The Minister may be misinformed by his Department. Since his Secretary General took the initiative at the start of December, there has been a meeting held under the auspices of ICTU on 16 January. While we accept that around Christmas people will have been away, it does not explain why SIPTU was not invited to that meeting. I note that 90% of the workers have voted against the proposal and they are still not happy. What happens there has yet to be determined. If the Minister is serious about resolving these issues, I ask him to go back and ask the DAA and SAA to lift the embargo. There is supposedly a process, poor and all as it is, and the Minister is the boss of the DAA and SAA on foot of 100% State ownership. If the embargo is not lifted, there cannot be meaningful talks to resolve this.

Deputy Paschal Donohoe

It is at least possible that the Deputy might be misinformed on this as well.

Deputy Clare Daly

I am absolutely not.

Deputy Paschal Donohoe

I am glad to hear that she has such certainty. I am struck by such certainty on this matter. I have my own information that I have put on the record of the House and I have answered each of the questions the Deputy has put to me. When I have answered them, she has then-----

Deputy Clare Daly

Why was SIPTU not at the meeting?

Deputy Paschal Donohoe

I have given the Deputy the answer on that. My information on the process that is taking place is that SIPTU has provided a statement to the expert panel.

Deputy Clare Daly

I said that but SIPTU was not invited to the discussion.

Deputy Paschal Donohoe

In the communication that my Secretary General and the Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation made to the expert panel, we requested that engagement take place between the expert panel and senior officials within SIPTU to facilitate engagement. This is the information that I have. I understand that the process of engagment is under way. If the Deputy has information to the contrary, it would be something I would be interested in understanding further. I make the concluding point to her that while it is correct to say the Dublin Airport Authority is a State body, it has complete operational independence. It has a board of directors and a management team whose job it is to make decisions on the long-term interests of the airport and the objectives I have set forth.