Dáil Éireann Debate, Tuesday - 3 July 2018
519. Deputy Eamon Scanlon asked the Minister for Employment Affairs and Social Protection if the finance required to fund overdue pension entitlements for community employment supervisors has been approved and ring-fenced in budget 2019 Estimates following the passing of a motion in Dáil Éireann; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [28970/18]
View answerAs the Deputy is aware Community Employment (CE) scheme supervisors are employees of private companies in the community and voluntary sector that receive public funding. They are not employees of my Department or public servants, and as such were not subject to pay reductions under the provisions of the Financial Emergency Measures in the Public Interest (FEMPI) which only applied to public servants.
While the motion called for the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform to meet with unions with a view to addressing the issue of CE supervisors’ pension provision, the issue is currently being examined by a Community Sector High Level Forum, chaired by the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform. A number of Departments including my own Department are represented on this group, as are the unions and Pobal.
A detailed scoping exercise was carried out with input from the Irish Government Economic and Evaluation Service (IGEES) on the potential costs of providing Exchequer support for the establishment of such a pension scheme for employees across the Community and Voluntary sector in Ireland. The exercise clearly illustrated that this matter presents very significant issues for the Exchequer, with a potential cost to the State of €188 million per annum in respect of funding to enable an employer pension contribution in State funded Community and Voluntary organisations, excluding any provision for immediate ex-gratia lump sum payment of pension as sought, which could, depending on the size of the sector, entail a further Exchequer cost of up to €318 million.
I am very conscious that while the issue relates to Community Employment supervisors and assistant supervisors, such individuals comprise of just one small group within the wider Community and Voluntary sector.
The Deputy should note that any provision of State funding for such a scheme in respect of those employees could potentially give rise to claims for similar schemes on the part of those in the broader sector, thus crystallising the potential level of liability. Any solution to this issue will require careful consideration, in particular the implications for scarce Exchequer resources.
I trust this clarifies the matter for the Deputy.
