# Waterford Crystal Pensions



## Deiseblue (25 Apr 2013)

Brilliant news !

Unite Trade Union/Waterford Crystal workers have won their case versus the State in the European Court on all counts - the matter is now to go to the High Court to decide the percentage pension to be paid to the Crystal pensioners.


----------



## callybags (25 Apr 2013)

Have you a link?

Does it say where the pensions are to be paid from?


----------



## orka (25 Apr 2013)

callybags said:


> Have you a link?
> 
> Does it say where the pensions are to be paid from?


The government aka the taxpayer. Up to €280M cost.
http://www.independent.ie/business/...-ecj-battle-over-pension-losses-29221584.html


----------



## Omega (25 Apr 2013)

Great news for the WG workers. Fair play to them for persevering with the case.
In a way, pensioners in insolvent companies may now be better off than those
in underfunded schemes which are closed. They have no legal protection whatever.
In the De Beers/Element Six case, losses were up to 60%


----------



## ashambles (25 Apr 2013)

> The government aka the taxpayer. Up to €280M cost.


No doubt they'll just levy a charge on owners and prospective owners of DB pensions. That'd be fair.

Why would they make someone on minimum wage with no pension contribute, or make an OAP on the state pension contribute? I've no doubt the unions would shut the country down if such unfairness was contemplated.


----------



## orka (25 Apr 2013)

Omega said:


> In a way, pensioners in insolvent companies may now be better off than those in underfunded schemes which are closed. They have no legal protection whatever.
> In the De Beers/Element Six case, losses were up to 60%


The case has been sent back to the High Court here to decide what % should be point;  I suspect your comparison will be one of the things taken into account: it is not reasonable to expect 100% cover for an insolvent company when other 'solvent but badly funded' schemes are taking % reductions.  There was a similar case taken by a UK woman (referenced in the article) - she won a case that 49% cover was not sufficient so I guess our High Court has to decide what % between 49% and 100% is appropriate.


----------



## orka (25 Apr 2013)

ashambles said:


> No doubt they'll just levy a charge on owners and prospective owners of DB pensions. That'd be fair.
> 
> Why would they make someone on minimum wage with no pension contribute, or make an OAP on the state pension contribute? I've no doubt the unions would shut the country down if such unfairness was contemplated.


Really? You think unions care about anyone but their members? (And in fairness, they are only there to represent their members and should make no apology for this - that's all they are paid for; but there seems to be a naive assumption that unions somehow represent the good of society). There may well be a levy rather than a general taxation impact but it sure won't be because of unions lobbying for the interests of OAPs.


----------



## DerKaiser (25 Apr 2013)

Deiseblue said:


> Brilliant news !
> 
> Unite Trade Union/Waterford Crystal workers have won their case versus the State in the European Court on all counts - the matter is now to go to the High Court to decide the percentage pension to be paid to the Crystal pensioners.


 
I think it's great news for the Waterford Crystal employees and other employees in a similar situation. I can only imagine the frustration of working for 35 years only to see your pension up in smoke.

I also think the state has an obligation to protect pensions adversely impacted through poor regulation. This is the same as taking responsibility for guaranteeing bank deposits.

But there is a sad reality behind all of this at a national level. The only ones left standing to 'bail out' the waterford crystal pensioners are their fellow beleaguered citizens of Ireland. 

Even sadder is the fact that the most likely outcome of this is that it will largely end up as a transfer of wealth to people who will be above the average level of income. I have some basic local knowledge and know that a job in Waterford Crystal was much envied and, even without most of their pensions, former employees would be better off than most around them.

Still this sad reality does not take away from the fact that these employees earned their right to a full pension and losing it would be a serious anomaly relative to the measure the state has taken elsewhere to protect depositors, etc.


----------



## callybags (25 Apr 2013)

Does this decision now take away all responsibility from pension fund managers to act in the best interest of their clients, knowing that if they screw up their clients will be bailed out by the taxpayer?


----------



## DerKaiser (25 Apr 2013)

callybags said:


> Does this decision now take away all responsibility from pension fund managers to act in the best interest of their clients, knowing that if they screw up their clients will be bailed out by the taxpayer?


Isn't it the trustees who are accountable?


----------



## pudds (25 Apr 2013)

callybags said:


> Does this decision now take away all responsibility from pension fund managers to act in the best interest of their clients, knowing that if they screw up their clients will be bailed out by the taxpayer?




From what I heard it only applies to Defined* Benefit* pensions as opposed to DB Contribution Pensions 

And apparently DB Pensions are not being 'sold' anymore because they give a guarantee.

How many existing ones are still around one wonders.


----------



## Deiseblue (9 Dec 2014)

Pending a vote by the Glass workers a deal has been hammered out at the  Labour Court & agreed by cabinet which will apparently see a tax free sum of € 1,200 per year of service paid to each of the 1,700 workers involved plus 90% of their pension up to €12,000 & a sliding scale thereafter ( the part concerning the pension is informed comment but has yet to be confirmed ) , the overall cost being €178,000,000

These workers in addition are entitled to the State OAP .

Huge congrats to the courage & perseverance of the workers & their Trade Union Unite & in particular the inimitable Jimmy Kelly & Walter Cullen - heroes all !

The sun has come out in Waterford today & there is a spring in all our steps , large bottles & blaas all round.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (9 Dec 2014)

One would think that this money has come from nowhere. 

What about the taxpayer who has to pay for this? 

These workers were very well paid. And now they are getting pensions based on this very high pay. 

Less money will be spent on other more deserving areas as a result.

I have sympathy for the workers who lost out and our pension rules are crazy, but I really don't see why the taxpayer should pay for them.  As for that matter, I don't see why I should have had to bail out the depositors in Anglo and Irish Nationwide.


----------



## 44brendan (9 Dec 2014)

To be fair to Deiseblue he is looking at this from the viewpoint of the Waterford workers who lost out on pensions through no fault of their own. On that side of the arguement they are entitled to celebrate the outcome.
On the other hand BrendanB has a point. There is no legal or logical rationale as to why the taxpayer has to pick up this bill. If Europe make the legislation, then surely should bear the cost.


----------



## Deiseblue (9 Dec 2014)

Unfortunately this all stems from FF failing to legislate for a pension protection scheme as required by a EU directive , a case of booting the can firmly down the road.

The EU court found against the State on all counts & as such there was no alternative but to fund the negotiated shortfall out of State Funds either by way of taxation funds received or in this case via the pension levy ( or Government's central funds as Ms. Burton says ! )- as the EU Court has ruled I cannot see any other funding alternative , can you ?


----------



## Deiseblue (9 Dec 2014)

The pension details are as follows , 90% of any pension up to €12,000 , pensions of up to €24,000 - 90% up to 12k & 67% of the balance up 24k & for pensions in excess of €24,000 - 50% of the balance over 24k .

Unite are to recommend a vote in favour of the offer .


----------



## ashambles (9 Dec 2014)

Deiseblue said:


> I cannot see any other funding alternative , can you ?


You could create a levy that only applies to DB funds? Perhaps an extra tax for people with DB pensions. Make having a DB fund a new BIK? It's not hard to think up any number of fair ways of doing this.




> She said the deal would be funded by a two-year levy paid by members of defined benefit schemes, introduced in the 2013 budget.


If those were her words in the indo piece then she seemed to be misleading people. The levy applied to all members DB or DC and only DC members were definitively worse off as a result.

Pension funds were around 80B a couple years ago, a 0.15% levy over two years would be around 250m, this bailout seemingly cost 180m. At this point they're only half way into the two year period so don't even have the full amount collected. 

Anyone can see now that the 0.15% levy was a one off Waterford Glass levy. It does not solve any wider problem.

If another double insolvency comes along (and this case clearly encourages double insolvencies), then they'll need another levy for the next badly run company and pension scheme. You just need one every two years and there'll be non stop levies.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (9 Dec 2014)

Deiseblue said:


> I cannot see any other funding alternative , can you ?



The existing pensioners of Waterford Glass could have had their pensions reduced to share the underfunding in the pension scheme. That would seem to me to be the fairest solution. 

Brendan


----------



## Gerry Canning (9 Dec 2014)

Once anyone starts tinkering on what is construed as (safe) funds in a Pension fund ,it would mean very few people would make any real contribution to any pension other than State Pension.
I think the Waterford Pensioners have simply got a fair deal , I do accept that AGAIN taxpayers may take a hit .
Maybe our so called Regulators in Central Bank/Government/Dial etc should have their actions queried or should it be past we query their inaction over the years?
It is telling that AIB put 1Billion  of OUR money into their DB fund , there was no query here?


----------



## ashambles (9 Dec 2014)

Gerry Canning said:


> It is telling that AIB put 1Billion  of OUR money into their DB fund , there was no query here?


Here, as in this site?

AIB - taxpayers money used to fund pension scheme
http://www.askaboutmoney.com/showthread.php?t=174323


----------



## Gerry Canning (9 Dec 2014)

ashambles said:


> Here, as in this site?
> 
> AIB - taxpayers money used to fund pension scheme
> http://www.askaboutmoney.com/showthread.php?t=174323


 Well spotted , what I meant was there was no general fuss.
As always AAM was first to comment , so take a clap!


----------



## ashambles (9 Dec 2014)

Gerry Canning said:


> I think the Waterford Pensioners have simply got a fair deal , I do accept that AGAIN taxpayers may take a hit .


Taxpayers in general aren't taking the hit. DC pension fund owners and companies funding DB pension schemes took the hit. They're using the 0.15% Waterford glass pension levy.

It's over 100k per employee. How many non DB retirees have retirement savings of that amount. 

If every retiree in the state is handed 100k then that's a fair deal, if employees of one company get that amount it doesn't seem particularly fair.


----------



## Deiseblue (9 Dec 2014)

Brendan Burgess said:


> The existing pensioners of Waterford Glass could have had their pensions reduced to share the underfunding in the pension scheme. That would seem to me to be the fairest solution.
> 
> Brendan




Impossible  as such existing pensions were protected under the pension rules to which you referred previously , once the EU court ruled that the State had failed in it's duty to the Glass Workers it was inevitable that the State would have to fund the pension scheme shortfall .

And the fact that the dogs in the street knew that the State had no defense to the case brought by the Glass workers & Unite to the EU court as a precedential case along the same lines had been lost by the UK meant that is was simply a matter of time until a deal was done, the Government behaved badly in defending this case as this matter could have been dealt with by mediation far earlier.

Done & dusted now thankfully - Ireland's oldest city celebrates


----------



## ashambles (9 Dec 2014)

Deiseblue said:


> Impossible  as such existing pensions were protected under the pension rules to which you referred previously
> Done & dusted now thankfully - Ireland's oldest city celebrates


So to get this clear they couldn't reduce the existing pensions, so instead they reduced the pensions of all DC pension owners - the vast majority of which are poorer than these retirees?


----------



## Deiseblue (9 Dec 2014)

ashambles said:


> So to get this clear they couldn't reduce the existing pensions, so instead they reduced the pensions of all DC pension owners - the vast majority of which are poorer than these retirees?



And all because the FF led Government failed to legislate for a pension protection scheme as required by an EU directive.

The whys & wherefores of how the funds required to raise funds to meet the shortfall have nothing to do with the Glass workers or Unite as their representatives - after all the EU court found in favour of the workers on all counts.

All blame should be channelled towards the previous Government & indeed the current Government who attempted to defend what was always going to be a hopeless task at the EU court generating large legal costs - mediation should have been the first rather than the last option !

Off to the pub now for a huge celebratory night !


----------



## Delboy (9 Dec 2014)

Deiseblue said:


> The whys & wherefores of how the funds required to raise funds to meet the shortfall have nothing to do with the Glass workers or Unite as their representatives - after all the EU court found in favour of the workers on all counts.



Ah, the 'magic money tree' so beloved of those on the Left will pick up the tab...so move along, nothing to see here!

Is there many more black holes like this out there in pension land that the taxpayer could end up taking more hits on, does anyone know?


----------



## Deiseblue (9 Dec 2014)

Delboy said:


> Ah, the 'magic money tree' so beloved of those on the Left will pick up the tab...so move along, nothing to see here!
> 
> Is there many more black holes like this out there in pension land that the taxpayer could end up taking more hits on, does anyone know?



Left , right or centre - it doesn't matter , as soon as the EU court ruled in favour of the Glass Workers then the State had to fund what was eventually a negotiated settlement .

EU Laws/EU directives are binding on the State , the brand of politics espoused by any of it's citizens don't really amount to a hill of beans !


----------



## DerKaiser (10 Dec 2014)

Deiseblue is 100% correct on this topic.

The workers were failed by their trustees, their employer and the state. Retired members of the same scheme, other DB schemes and other DC schemes were in no way responsible for the failure of the employer to set aside adequate pensions funding or for the state to oblige employers in general to do so.

The state is therefore partly liable and the court ruling reflects this. In this instance, the state has been bailed out by the pensions levy on DB and DC schemes (neither of which are particularly well placed to cover other scheme losses given they have been subject to the same pressures of volatile equity markets and falling interest rates).


----------



## Delboy (10 Dec 2014)

And to think people were complaining about the pension levy and the raid on their private pensions. They'll be delighted to see it going to such good use!


----------



## Palerider (11 Dec 2014)

Delboy said:


> And to think people were complaining about the pension levy and the raid on their private pensions. They'll be delighted to see it going to such good use!



+1, fair dues to the Waterford Glass guys for sticking with it, well deserved but the tab is being picked up by all private sector workers who are retired or paying into retirement pots some of which are small....like my own.

Private sector employees carry the can once more.

I cannot wait for the next election...


----------

