# What do Bank Staff think of ICTU's Campaign against them?



## Deas (3 Nov 2009)

Given the nature of this site, I'm sure there are many bankers both contributing to it and reading it regularly. I have a question for you. ICTU's current campaign 'Get Up Stand Up' specifically targets you as an element of what's wrong in society. My question has two facets - How do you feel about being targeted like this and why is your union (provided you are in it), IBOA/Unite etc. who are affiliated to ICTU allowing you to be targeted?

If we look at wider society, you can guarantee that ICTU would not dare target any other specific group, Nurses/teachers etc. when problems occur in the Health/Education services, so why the bank staff when there is a problem in the banking sector/economy.

I'm also very surprised that the Institute of Bankers has not picked up on this as the largest professional body in the country (anyone who is a member is a banker, which includes most if not all front-line bank staff in the country).

I know if I was in one of the unions supporting bankers I would feel agrieved, so how do others feel?


----------



## Kine (3 Nov 2009)

Fortunately, we're an easy target. However, as I tend to ignore anything that ever comes out of a unions mounth (i.e. increase taxes...don't cut pay!!) I didn't even know they were targetting bankers!


----------



## Latrade (3 Nov 2009)

I suppose in the same way that when "high earners" are talked about we're supposed to perceive super rich evil CEOs with off shore accounts and not the Union leaders themselves, when they mention "bankers" we're supposed to think of thieving CEOs and not all those in the banking sector.

Of course it could well just be a straw man argument in order to create a new enemy for the public at large rather than the public servants.


----------



## Sunny (3 Nov 2009)

You would want to be a sensitive soul to take it personally. They are not talking about ordinary bank staff. They are talking about bank executives and even as a banker myself, I find it hard to have any sort of sympathy for them.


----------



## csirl (3 Nov 2009)

You can understand why ICTU are using bankers to get people behind their campaign. There is a lot of resentment out there that even though the banks got us into this mess, some banks have the gall to give pay rises to staff and there have been few compulsory job losses or salary cuts in the banking sector. 

Personally I dont buy the "its not the fault of the ordinary bank employee" line. This is akin to the "I was only following orders" defence at the Nurenberg Trials. Every employee in every bank in Ireland contributed and benefited, to a greater or lesser extent, to the banking culture that prevailed. Also, its not as if the people running the banks were outsiders brought in at executive level. As we have seen in recent reports, the majority are lifers with their banks who joined as regular employees. So there must be some systemic issues within Irish banking if these are the people that the system produces.


----------



## Deas (3 Nov 2009)

Sunny said:


> You would want to be a sensitive soul to take it personally. They are not talking about ordinary bank staff. They are talking about bank executives and even as a banker myself, I find it hard to have any sort of sympathy for them.


 
They are not saying this though, they specifically quote bankers, not Bank Executives/Management/topline in their campaign material.


----------



## Sunny (3 Nov 2009)

csirl said:


> Personally I dont buy the "its not the fault of the ordinary bank employee" line. This is akin to the "I was only following orders" defence at the Nurenberg Trials. Every employee in every bank in Ireland contributed and benefited, to a greater or lesser extent, to the banking culture that prevailed. Also, its not as if the people running the banks were outsiders brought in at executive level. As we have seen in recent reports, the majority are lifers with their banks who joined as regular employees. So there must be some systemic issues within Irish banking if these are the people that the system produces.


 
So bank employees are comparable to Nazis? Tell me what a bank teller in your local branch did to contribute to the crisis or what any ordinary bank employee did. I obviously missed the regulator and the central bank and the Government and most economists shouting stop the maddness. And yet someone on €20k a year was supposed to save the Country?




Deas said:


> They are not saying this though, they specifically quote bankers, not Bank Executives/Management/topline in their campaign material.


 
Let them off. I couldn't care less.


----------



## Sunny (3 Nov 2009)

csirl said:


> there have been few compulsory job losses or salary cuts in the banking sector.
> 
> .


 
I know of plenty of salary cuts that haven't made the papers and you will get your wish about compulsory job losses if you are patient.


----------



## csirl (3 Nov 2009)

> Tell me what a bank teller in your local branch did to contribute to the crisis or what any ordinary bank employee did


 
In my branch, they were asking every customer who appeared at the counter if they'd like a bank loan, credit card, mortgage etc. To be honest, at times it was difficult to go into the bank, do your business and leave - you often had to be very rude just to cut the sales pitch short. I would imagine that a lot of vulnerable people would have given into the sales pitches.


----------



## Sunny (3 Nov 2009)

csirl said:


> In my branch, they were asking every customer who appeared at the counter if they'd like a bank loan, credit card, mortgage etc. To be honest, at times it was difficult to go into the bank, do your business and leave - you often had to be very rude just to cut the sales pitch short. I would imagine that a lot of vulnerable people would have given into the sales pitches.


 
So it is the bank tellers fault that mature adults made a decision to take on more debt or whatever they signed up for. If anyone mis-selled, they should never work in banking again but I don't see the problem with trying to sell products. 
Anyway, not exactly the cause of the current crisis is it though. Can't really see Liam Carroll popping into his local branch and asking a 21 year bank employee for a couple of billion.


----------



## Deiseblue (3 Nov 2009)

Sunny said:


> You would want to be a sensitive soul to take it personally. They are not talking about ordinary bank staff. They are talking about bank executives and even as a banker myself, I find it hard to have any sort of sympathy for them.


 + 1 , they are talking about decision makers.


----------



## Complainer (3 Nov 2009)

Sunny said:


> So it is the bank tellers fault that mature adults made a decision to take on more debt or whatever they signed up for. If anyone mis-selled, they should never work in banking again


So if you exclude all those who were misselling, how many are left?


----------



## Sunny (3 Nov 2009)

Complainer said:


> So if you exclude all those who were misselling, how many are left?


 
You are the same person who moans in every thread about generalisations in the public sector aren't you? Have you ever been mis-sold a financial product?


----------



## Complainer (4 Nov 2009)

Sunny said:


> Have you ever been mis-sold a financial product?


They certainly tried their best - repeatedly.


----------



## z101 (4 Nov 2009)

csirl said:


> Personally I dont buy the "its not the fault of the ordinary bank employee" line. This is akin to the "I was only following orders" defence at the Nurenberg Trials.


 
I agree but seems like everyone was getting a bonus of some kind so nobody wanted to speak against the goose with the golden eggs.
likewise people did not have to buy a house. Anyone who bought into the hype only have themselves to blame not anyone else. Nobody made anyone else buy a house. I know a few people who believed house prices were inflated and are now in a good position and are waiting still renting. For some reason unions are using this to justify their members not been able to take pay cuts, when nobody only themselves signed on the dotted line. Cant blame the banks for that when there are plenty on people who didn't buy into their bull over the last 10 years.


----------



## Sunny (5 Nov 2009)

Complainer said:


> They certainly tried their best - repeatedly.


 
Salespeople keep *trying *to sell me things too. Go figure. 

If someone tried to mis-sell you a financial product, I presume you reported them?


----------



## BONDGIRL (5 Nov 2009)

csirl said:


> there have been few compulsory job losses or salary cuts in the banking sector.
> .


 
Lots of job losses in the bank I work in.... actually horrible time in here since last June... All the big fish have been sorted with big pay offs though and all the little goldfish like me where all basically told apply for another job in here  or get the hell out. People treated like dogs.........
Also did you see in Anglo Irish the **** redundancy package they are being "offered"... Sure its all compulsory in the end like


----------



## Sunny (5 Nov 2009)

BONDGIRL said:


> Lots of job losses in the bank I work in.... actually horrible time in here since last June... All the big fish have been sorted with big pay offs though and all the little goldfish like me where all basically told apply for another job in here or get the hell out. People treated like dogs.........
> Also did you see in Anglo Irish the **** redundancy package they are being "offered"... Sure its all compulsory in the end like


 
Can't really give out about the redundancy package when plenty of people are lucky to get statutory. The bank failed. There has to be consequences. Obviously not for the executives though because they are very important people and it wasn't really their fault.


----------



## BONDGIRL (5 Nov 2009)

Sunny - the executives will get the nice pay off, where the likes of back office people who dont have any involvment in the lending process etc will suffer.........................


----------



## Sunny (5 Nov 2009)

BONDGIRL said:


> Sunny - the executives will get the nice pay off, where the likes of back office people who dont have any involvment in the lending process etc will suffer.........................


 
Four weeks on top of statutory per year of service is generous considering the Bank has been Nationalised. I am all for executives being made pay for the mistakes but at the end of day businesses fail every day and workers are kicked out onto the street with no package. I know some people in Anglo and they have no complaints.


----------



## BONDGIRL (5 Nov 2009)

I didnt know that was the package?  I heard off a friend in there that it was 5 weeks for 1st two yrs and 1 week after that for rest of service, so four weeks is very good in this "climate"..


----------



## Sunny (5 Nov 2009)

BONDGIRL said:


> I didnt know that was the package? I heard off a friend in there that it was 5 weeks for 1st two yrs and 1 week after that for rest of service, so four weeks is very good in this "climate"..


 
Not according to the Irish Times. To be honest, I didn't ask the people in Anglo directly what it was but like I say, they said people were happy enough with the terms considering what the bank has been like since this all began.

[broken link removed]


----------



## Latrade (5 Nov 2009)

BONDGIRL said:


> Sunny - the executives will get the nice pay off, where the likes of back office people who dont have any involvment in the lending process etc will suffer.........................


 
This is going to sound heartless and inappropriate, but it's all about contracts and golden handshakes are a necessary evil for executives.

Taking on the role of a senior exec, director etc is a huge risk. It's much easier to get rid of a director than an employee. Your position is vulnerable to any single downturn in figures, profits, performance, etc. This is well recognised and in a sense you put your head on the block (rightly so) taking that role.

For years it was actually harder to get a mortgage as a "director" because the job security was so weak.

So the contracts tend to have an incentive in not just the pay, but if you are fired, you get a nice parachute. It's the only way to get people to fill the jobs and its a gamble on both sides.

Not making excuses for their performance or the size of the compensation, but in many cases those packages were agreed a long time ago and wouldn't have been too extreme from the norm in a similar operation/size.


----------



## Sunny (5 Nov 2009)

Latrade said:


> This is going to sound heartless and inappropriate, but it's all about contracts and golden handshakes are a necessary evil for executives.
> 
> Taking on the role of a senior exec, director etc is a huge risk. It's much easier to get rid of a director than an employee. Your position is vulnerable to any single downturn in figures, profits, performance, etc. This is well recognised and in a sense you put your head on the block (rightly so) taking that role.
> 
> ...


 
To be fair, that might be true for ordinary businesses but is certainly not the case in Irish banks. Irish bank executives were well overpaid relative to the size of their organisations compared to other Countries (I know the same can be said about most people). There is also no evidence that executives of large Irish companies expecially the banks faced the consequences for failures on their watch (apart from Mike Snoden for checking out an escort agency online). How many AIB executives were held accountable for the Rusnack affair or the overcharging etc. Golden handshakes and paracute payments just encourage people to not do their jobs. At the end of the day, what do Anglo executives care about the cost to the taxpayer because of their decisions when they are off on pensions of over €500k a year. 

Executives should be paid a high basic salary (mainly performance related) but these clauses in the contracts with regard pension payments and pay offs in the case of dismissal need to end. Thats what the Government and regulator need to clamp down on. Not the fact that someone can earn €1.5 million a year. Good luck to him/her if they do their jobs.


----------



## Latrade (5 Nov 2009)

Sunny said:


> To be fair, that might be true for ordinary businesses but is certainly not the case in Irish banks. Irish bank executives were well overpaid relative to the size of their organisations compared to other Countries (I know the same can be said about most people). There is also no evidence that executives of large Irish companies expecially the banks faced the consequences for failures on their watch (apart from Mike Snoden for checking out an escort agency online). How many AIB executives were held accountable for the Rusnack affair or the overcharging etc. Golden handshakes and paracute payments just encourage people to not do their jobs. At the end of the day, what do Anglo executives care about the cost to the taxpayer because of their decisions when they are off on pensions of over €500k a year.
> 
> Executives should be paid a high basic salary (mainly performance related) but these clauses in the contracts with regard pension payments and pay offs in the case of dismissal need to end. Thats what the Government and regulator need to clamp down on. Not the fact that someone can earn €1.5 million a year. Good luck to him/her if they do their jobs.


 
Couldn't agree more in the effectiveness of controlling the executives, but the contracts would have been the contracts. 

I suppose in a similar sense, any objections to the "perks" of the PS (sorry to bring it back, but there is some hypocrasy in demonising one section and not the other) is more against the contract and the enforcement or management of that. Is it the executives fault they were never punished? 

But the realities of a senior executive is to shoulder the burden of complete operations. As such their contracts offer not just generous pay, bonuses and other perks, but also termination terms. The boards never enforced this, heck who would when the shares were doing so well? And neither did the regulator.

I'll be honest and say that if I were offered such a pay and termination package I'd probably break a finger trying to get my pen out too quickly.


----------



## Sunny (5 Nov 2009)

Latrade said:


> Couldn't agree more in the effectiveness of controlling the executives, but the contracts would have been the contracts.
> 
> I suppose in a similar sense, any objections to the "perks" of the PS (sorry to bring it back, but there is some hypocrasy in demonising one section and not the other) is more against the contract and the enforcement or management of that. Is it the executives fault they were never punished?
> 
> ...


 
I agree with you. I would of only being too happy to sign a contact that basically says no matter what happens, you will never have to worry about money again!

I just hope those days have passed and a new sense of accountability comes in to the upper levels of business and public life. I have my doubts though.


----------



## Locke (5 Nov 2009)

csirl said:


> Personally I dont buy the "its not the fault of the ordinary bank employee" line. This is akin to the "I was only following orders" defence at the Nurenberg Trials.


 
-1

Ridiculous comment. Hardly compareable killing someone to dealing with someone on a desk.

Do you really think that the executives were going to listen to someone who is scanning documents, delivering post, working on foreign exchange, answering phones?


----------



## Deiseblue (5 Nov 2009)

BONDGIRL said:


> Lots of job losses in the bank I work in.... actually horrible time in here since last June... All the big fish have been sorted with big pay offs though and all the little goldfish like me where all basically told apply for another job in here or get the hell out. People treated like dogs.........
> Also did you see in Anglo Irish the **** redundancy package they are being "offered"... Sure its all compulsory in the end like


 Very poor redundancy package when compared to the recent Ulster Bank package which was 7.25 weeks per yer of service capped at 3 years salary plus a retraining grant of euro 9,280 whereas the Anglo package seems to be 4 weeks per year of service capped at 1 year.
Ulster Bank are of course unionised whereas Anglo are'nt.


----------



## terrontress (5 Nov 2009)

Ceatharlach said:


> I agree but seems like everyone was getting a bonus of some kind so nobody wanted to speak against the goose with the golden eggs.


 
I worked in AIB for 8 years, leaving in 2008. In those eight years I got a bonus once. To get the bonus, we had to agree to change our terms and conditions under a process called "Career Framework". This change in terms and conditions included possible cuts in pay if we were deemed to be underperforming. Since I left, the bonuses have been suspended indefinitely. My former colleagues are not even getting a Christmas party this year.

Believe me when I say that at Bank Official Grade in AIB, few people were earning big money.

There were those who had got in early and stayed at Bank Official Grade for years and had got a good staff mortgage in the early 90s so had a lot of disposable income. Since 2000 with low interest rates the staff loans are of no real benefit. The pensions are "defined contribution" and with all of our contributions having been used to buy banking shares you know what state the pensions are in.

The majority of people in AIB on the bottom rung benefitted very little from the Celtic Tiger and were simply chasing an elusive dream to get a step up the ladder and try to be the next Robbie Henneberry or Eugene Sheehy. 

The most worthwhile benefit that junior bank staff have is a free uniform and not getting penalty charges when your account goes out of order.


----------



## Kine (5 Nov 2009)

For those who think Banks are not letting anyone go:

http://news.efinancialcareers.ie/newsandviews_item/newsItemId-22139

hope the link works!


----------



## AgathaC (5 Nov 2009)

Sunny said:


> There is also no evidence that executives of large Irish companies expecially the banks faced the consequences for failures on their watch (apart from Mike Snoden for checking out an escort agency online).


I am probably going off-topic here, but if I remember correctly Soden got a very good settlement from BOI at the time?


----------



## bamboozle (6 Nov 2009)

it amazes me how the country seems to think the bankers are responsible for so much damage to the Irish economy.
are we forgetting about the Central Bank and Financial Regulator who failed in the roles as regulatory bodies of the Irish Banking System, not to mention the Department of Finance who are responsible for the Central Bank and Fin. Regulator.  Finally govt policy for the guts of 10 years was to promote & assist the property boom through so many different incentive schemes and tax breaks.

Yes, bankers were reckless, yes Sean Fitz should be facing criminal charges but however culpable the banks are, equal blame should be apportioned to the Central Bank, Financial Regulator, Dept of Finance and our Government.

for the record i am not a banker and never have been


----------



## Complainer (7 Nov 2009)

Sunny said:


> If someone tried to mis-sell you a financial product, I presume you reported them?


Yep, I did make an complaint to the CEO, which was pretty much ignored.


----------



## bogle (7 Nov 2009)

bamboozle said:


> it amazes me how the country seems to think the bankers are responsible for so much damage to the Irish economy.



You must be joking! 
I suggest you have a read of Banksters by David Murphy and Martina Devlin or read some of the articles in the Financial Times over the last 12 months!


----------



## capall (7 Nov 2009)

i cant see how there will not be big layoffs down the track in aib and boi.

With the losses they're making and the reduction in business activity .
Because they were jobs for life like the civil service there would be a fair bit of overstaffing and inefficiencies in the head offices anyway.

It is like the public sector now in that everyone else is paying to support them. It is not the employees fault but they are being protected ,compared to construction industry workers who have felt the full force of the free market


----------



## Complainer (7 Nov 2009)

bamboozle said:


> it amazes me how the country seems to think the bankers are responsible for so much damage to the Irish economy.
> are we forgetting about the Central Bank and Financial Regulator who failed in the roles as regulatory bodies of the Irish Banking System, not to mention the Department of Finance who are responsible for the Central Bank and Fin. Regulator.


While the regulators aren't blameless, they were operating within the legal environment  set by the Government, and the whole ethos of 'light touch regulation', where it was deemed unthinkable for a mere civil servant to tell one of the captains of industry what to do.


----------



## micmclo (8 Nov 2009)

capall said:


> i cant see how there will not be big layoffs down the track in aib and boi.



1,700 staff have left BOI in the last 12 months
Redunancies may be inevitable but staff turnover in banks was always high

And to address the OP, if you're working in a bank then the unions are blasting the executives and top decision makers. They certainly aren't out to get the ordinary staff like the cashier in the local branch.


----------



## Deas (9 Nov 2009)

micmclo said:


> And to address the OP, if you're working in a bank then the unions are blasting the executives and top decision makers. They certainly aren't out to get the ordinary staff like the cashier in the local branch.


 
I don't know that I believe this.  Many frontline staff are being harassed on the back of campaigns like this - remember what happened in Irish Permanent due to the media - it wasn't managers that were spat at.  Did posters here not state they were moving funds from AIB recently because lower paid staff received a small increase.

Did any bankers turn up at the march last week?  From what I say there was public anger and chanting against them.


----------



## nlgbbbblth (13 Nov 2009)

Deas said:


> I don't know that I believe this.  Many frontline staff are being harassed on the back of campaigns like this - remember what happened in Irish Permanent due to the media - it wasn't managers that were spat at.  Did posters here not state they were moving funds from AIB recently because lower paid staff received a small increase.
> 
> Did any bankers turn up at the march last week?  From what I say there was public anger and chanting against them.



yes, some of us were on the march.

Re abuse - A trade union leader (IBOA) *should not* have to write a letter to a national newspaper pleading for members of the public to differentiate between high level bankers and ordinary officials. 

The fact that he did speaks volumes for the intelligence of some of those sheep out there.


----------

