Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 17 Dec 1996

Vol. 473 No. 1

Adjournment Debate. - Packard Electric Redundancy Entitlements.

Mrs. O'Rourke

Thank you, a Cheann Comhairle, for your courtesy. I recognise that you do not wish to create a precedent. I thank Deputies O'Keeffe and O'Dea and both Ministers of State for giving way.

This issue is of great importance to a number of people. At a time when we are told there is unprecedented growth in the economy and hear announcements of thousands of jobs on a daily basis which would almost make one's head reel, it is sad to note the workers at Packard Electric, which closed nearly six months ago, await £1.5 million which was promised to them as an extra redundancy payment in June.

The Minister of State, Deputy Rabbitte, will be aware the deal was sold to the workers on the basis that the Labour Court recommendation would be fulfilled. They voted on that and accepted it. We lamented in this House in a debate on 28 June that it looked as if management were refusing to accept the recommendation in its fullest terms. Following that, the Government and the Minister of State put on pressure to ensure the parent firm and European management would pay this surplus, which was in pension funds, to the workers; they are still waiting. They expected it in July but it is now December and the money, £1,000 to £3,000 approximately for each worker, has not been paid. They genuinely believed they were getting this money and many people have made arrangements to spend it. There is a moral imperative on the Government to ensure the money is paid. It was promised by the trade union, management and the Minister of State on behalf of the Government.

The Minister of State has done his best in this instance but his best has not been good enough to date unless he has some good news for us this evening. My information is that the ground has been cut under the workers' feet on the money due.

One can imagine what a difference that money would make to many people. The back to school season came and went as people waited for their money. Will Christmas come and go? Is there a moral compulsion the Government should exercise on this firm to see the money is paid to the workers?

Minister of State at the Department of Enterprise and Employment (Mr. Rabbitte)

I thank the Deputy for raising this matter. I hope I will have good news because as the Deputy says, it is overdue. I hope discussions with the company and other parties concerned will result in an agreement that will be the subject of a meeting tomorrow.

The Labour Court recommended redundancy terms for Packard Electric workers of five weeks' pay per year of service, in addition to statutory entitlements. The payment actually made to the workers had been five weeks, including statutory entitlements. At the request of the unions, I intervened last June to seek company implementation of this Labour Court recommendation, following which an agreement was reached at the Labour Relations Commission on 28 June. Under the terms of this agreement the company agreed to "the use of any excess funds" in the pension scheme as part of the overall redundancy settlement. This agreement by the company was "subject to the decision of the Trustees (of the Pension Fund) within the rules of the Pension Scheme".

I was informed at the time, following contact with senior management of the company, that arrangements necessary to secure payment of the pension fund surplus would take a matter of weeks. I made this information available to the workforce on 15 July and the trade unions, following their own contacts with the company, advised the workers on 2 August that it might be mid to late August before the additional payments were made.

Payment was not, however, made in August, and from early September I recommenced regular and frequent contact with the company to secure payment. I have been in contact with, among others, Mr. Carlos Ferreira, managing director, Delphi Packard Europe, the personnel manager, Mr. Dolan at Packard, the Irish Pensions Trust and legal advisers to try to secure transfer of the money in question. Although it appeared clear that the major delay was due to concerns expressed by the trustees, I wrote on 6 November to the company seeking to have payment made.

In that letter I expressed the view that it was "difficult to believe that the reported legal queries to be dealt with are so difficult or unusual that they would take such a lengthy time to process". In a reply of 14 November the managing director of Delphi Packard stressed the "total independence" of the trustees, but stated that the company had "given all the assurances requested by the Trustees".

The trustees, who have a legal responsibility to act in the best interests of the members, met several times in recent months and have been considering legal advice on the distribution of the surplus.

At a meeting of the trustees on Friday, 6 December 1996, I am advised that a proposal was agreed which was put to the company solicitor, through legal channels, last Friday. Following consideration by the company advisers of the proposal, the matter of making some changes to the trust deed amendment has been referred back to the trustees who have arranged a further and, I hope, final, meeting for tomorrow, Wednesday, 18 December 1996. If these changes are accepted, my understanding is that this will lead to a resolution of the matter and payment of the moneys to the workforce before Christmas. Obviously I am hopeful of an immediate resolution of this outstanding matter and will keep in close touch with the position. While I have done and continue to do everything humanly possible to find a satisfactory resolution of this matter, at the end of the day it is a matter for the trustees of the pension fund and the parties to the agreement reached under the auspices of the LRC.

Deputy O'Rourke referred to the drama and heartbreak of the Packard closure. I have lived with that drama and heartbreak in my constituency and I hope tomorrow's meeting will be the final chapter in this phase of a tragic event in the constituency.