# ESB Wages



## SteveW9 (15 Sep 2011)

Do you think if a private company takes a 25% share in ESB they will be able to cut the insane wages the staff in ESB are on?


----------



## TarfHead (15 Sep 2011)

Not while Brendan Ogle is around


----------



## Deiseblue (15 Sep 2011)

Under TUPE Regulations employees Terms & Conditions are protected when their employment is transferred from one employer to a new employer ...... and of course the company is hugely unionised which is a major advantage when it comes to protecting terms & conditions.


----------



## colm5 (15 Sep 2011)

I think they have those magic super contracts (like the judges and top civil servants) that can, in no way, be touched. Its illegal!
Unlike everyone else in the real world who can be shafted any which way the government feels.


----------



## Mpsox (15 Sep 2011)

Given that the new owners will only have a minority stake I doubt if the can do much for existing staff. They could decide to implement new T&Cs for new staff coming in so that in time, the impact of existing T&Cs are lessened. Note as well that be selling a minorty stake it is doubtful if TUPE would apply, since the employer is still the ESB.

The only way changes can occur with existing staff is either under negotiation with the unions or to try and force them through at the risk of a strike. Govt will not want the latter.

However, what new owners might try to do is clear out the management who negotiated and agreed such deals in the past


----------



## Sunny (15 Sep 2011)

I am more interested in who in their right minds would buy 33% of the ESB. Maybe some pension funds would be interested but can't see any European energy company running in to invest for a minority stake.


----------



## Delboy (15 Sep 2011)

eircom staff are highly unionised but they're taking paycuts and reductions in their T&C's for the past few years


----------



## Sunny (15 Sep 2011)

Delboy said:


> eircom staff are highly unionised but they're taking paycuts and reductions in their T&C's for the past few years


 
Eircom is a different kettle of fish because of ESOP. The employees of Eircom have had tax free payouts worth hundreds of millions to them since privatisation.


----------



## Shawady (15 Sep 2011)

Sunny said:


> I am more interested in who in their right minds would buy 33% of the ESB. Maybe some pension funds would be interested but can't see any European energy company running in to invest for a minority stake.


 
Why not? I thought ESB (and Bord Gas) were profit making.


----------



## Deiseblue (15 Sep 2011)

Delboy said:


> eircom staff are highly unionised but they're taking paycuts and reductions in their T&C's for the past few years



The Employee Share Ownership Scheme has paid out out €627 million to date - certainly enough to soften the 10% pay pay cut in 2011 ( the only pay cut to date ).

Even that pay cut was introduced via a decrease in working hours - Eircom employees only work 9 days per fortnight now.


----------



## Deiseblue (15 Sep 2011)

Mpsox said:


> Given that the new owners will only have a minority stake I doubt if the can do much for existing staff. They could decide to implement new T&Cs for new staff coming in so that in time, the impact of existing T&Cs are lessened. Note as well that be selling a minorty stake it is doubtful if TUPE would apply, since the employer is still the ESB.
> 
> The only way changes can occur with existing staff is either under negotiation with the unions or to try and force them through at the risk of a strike. Govt will not want the latter.
> 
> However, what new owners might try to do is clear out the management who negotiated and agreed such deals in the past



TUPE applies whether all or part of a business is transferred - even if such were not the cases & if the ESB remained as employers then T & C's would remain unchanged.


----------



## Sunny (15 Sep 2011)

Shawady said:


> Why not? I thought ESB (and Bord Gas) were profit making.


 
They are profitable but not so profitable that you would have the largest energy companies rushing to invest a couple of billion to own a minority stake of a company where the Government would own 67% which brings it's own political pressures. You will be minority shareholder looking to maximise dividend payouts against a majority shareholder who might not share the same objective (historically the ESB have been poor at paying dividends to the State because they had to invest in politically driven projects). And of course you have a highly paid workforce who would seek to protect T&C's and who also own some of the company through an ESOP. (Think they own 5%)


----------



## Mpsox (15 Sep 2011)

Deiseblue said:


> TUPE applies whether all or part of a business is transferred - even if such were not the cases & if the ESB remained as employers then T & C's would remain unchanged.


 
It depends on how the sale is handled. If, for example, they sold say 5 power stations, then the likelihood is that stiaff in those power stations would be covered under TUPE. However if they sold 20% of the entire ESB to a new investor, Tupe may not apply as the ESB would still be the employer.


----------



## horusd (15 Sep 2011)

The asset stripping of Eircom (which happened  under the union's watch) might cool the heels of anyone wanting to sell-off a majority ESB  stake. It's not neccessarily a good thing. Altho I would love to see the lard sliced off the backsides of the ESB workers.


----------



## Delboy (16 Sep 2011)

Deiseblue said:


> The Employee Share Ownership Scheme has paid out out €627 million to date - certainly enough to soften the 10% pay pay cut in 2011 ( the only pay cut to date ).
> 
> Even that pay cut was introduced via a decrease in working hours - Eircom employees only work 9 days per fortnight now.



the ESOP certainly softened the blow but eaten bread is soon forgotten! They were'nt given much choice on taking the 10% pay cut, even if it's only to last for 18 months (or so it says right now).
Plus there has been huge staff reductions and no replacements even in some critical roles. Unions not fighting that either


----------



## Deiseblue (16 Sep 2011)

Delboy said:


> the ESOP certainly softened the blow but eaten bread is soon forgotten! They were'nt given much choice on taking the 10% pay cut, even if it's only to last for 18 months (or so it says right now).
> Plus there has been huge staff reductions and no replacements even in some critical roles. Unions not fighting that either



Still on the bright side the working hours have also been reduced by 10% , 647 million is a hell of a sweetener ( 647 million ! - I always have to pinch myself when I see that figure ) for the ESOP members & a promise exists to reverse the pay cut & the reduction in staff numbers have been achieved on a voluntary basis in very difficult times - all in all not a bad achievement by the Unions & Management involved.

Anyway back on thread - the ESB are in a hugely different financial position to Eircom & as such comparisons are largely invalid.


----------



## shnaek (16 Sep 2011)

The fact that EIRGRID wasn't seperated from the ESB is a national disgrace. I hear Gilmore on newstalk this morning and Rabbit on yesterday waffling about it and I realise that nothing has changed in this backwater of ours, where public 'services' are run for the benefit of employees and not for the public. 
You'd think they would have learned from Eircon (sic).
But no, we join Greece and Latvia as the three countries in the EU who haven't separated their grid from power genaration. I pray Europe will save the Irish people from this, but I fear they won't interfere. 
And then they want to electrify rail and motor transport - handing the ESB monopoly even more power to shut down the country when they please! No company, private or public should have this power. No company. 
And yet what we hear is 'The government have made a decision'.
Well, this being the caliber of their decisions there is only one way this country is going. Every increase in tax to pay these people to continue making the same terribly policy decisions year after year, government after government just gauls me. The sheer hopelessness of it all. If they haven't learned by now, even after all this termoil, then is it time to just throw up our hands and join them?


----------



## Purple (16 Sep 2011)

55% of the ESB's costs are wages. 
ESB employees are paid, on average, 200% of the national average industrial wage. (pensions are on top of that).
That means that 25% of your electricity bill goes to paying excessive wages for ESB staff.


----------



## ajapale (16 Sep 2011)

Deiseblue said:


> TUPE applies whether all or part of a business is transferred



This is correct but TUPE does not apply when some or all of the _*shares *_are transferred which is what is being considered in this trade sale. It the exact same company it just has a different set of owners. think of it like this : would you expect TUPE to apply every time a share was traded on the ISEQ or FTSE?


If ESB were to sell all or some of ESBI for instance then the terms of TUPE would apply (& note TUPE does not cover pension arrangements).


----------



## Deiseblue (16 Sep 2011)

ajapale said:


> This is correct but TUPE does not apply when some or all of the _*shares *_are transferred which is what is being considered in this trade sale. It the exact same company it just has a different set of owners. think of it like this : would you expect TUPE to apply every time a share was traded on the ISEQ or FTSE?
> 
> 
> If ESB were to sell all or some of ESBI for instance then the terms of TUPE would apply (& note TUPE does not cover pension arrangements).



Thanks for the clarification.

So am I right in thinking that if shares are transferred that the effected employees terms & conditions including pensions will remain unchanged as the ESB will remain as the employer ?


----------



## Firefly (16 Sep 2011)

Deiseblue said:


> Still on the bright side the working hours have also been reduced by 10%



So either overtime is needed or additional staff to work the day lost. All of this is paid for by the end customer and helps to explain why we have the highest pre-tax electricity prices in Europe

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electricity_pricing#Price_comparison



Deiseblue said:


> 647 million is a hell of a sweetener ( 647 million ! - I always have to pinch myself when I see that figure ) for the ESOP members



You do realise that this is not "free" money..and will not be going to the taxpayer (who has to borrow so much)?



Deiseblue said:


> a promise exists to reverse the pay cut & the reduction in staff numbers have been achieved on a voluntary basis in very difficult times - all in all not a bad achievement by the Unions & Management involved.


So some people got large payoffs for voluntary redundancy and they will ultimately be replaced by other workers entitled to pensions as well. Doesn't seem like a good deal for the taxpayers and electricity customers of this country to me


----------



## Firefly (16 Sep 2011)

Deiseblue said:


> So am I right in thinking that if shares are transferred that the effected employees terms & conditions including pensions will remain unchanged as the ESB will remain as the employer ?



All sing along now...."Money for nothin and the chicks are free"


----------



## Deiseblue (16 Sep 2011)

All very interesting Firefly , but you seem somewhat confused -  my quotes that you refer to in your first post pertain to Eircom not the ESB !


----------



## Firefly (16 Sep 2011)

Deiseblue said:


> All very interesting Firefly , but you seem somewhat confused -  my quotes that you refer to in your first post pertain to Eircom not the ESB !



My bad as they say. Post 22 still stands though!


----------



## Deiseblue (16 Sep 2011)

Firefly said:


> My bad as they say. Post 22 still stands though!



To be honest simply quoting from that dreadful Dire Straits song was not sufficient to draw me into a discussion !


----------



## ajapale (16 Sep 2011)

Deiseblue said:


> So am I right in thinking that if shares are transferred that the effected employees terms & conditions including pensions will remain unchanged as the ESB will remain as the employer ?



Much depends on what entity is set up prior to the trade sale.

If a new entity is set up say called _*ESBNua*_ then the employees transferring to the new entity from ESB are protected under the terms of TUPE. If however shares in the existing ESB or one of its limited company subsidiaries are sold then TUPE does not apply.


----------



## onq (16 Sep 2011)

Firefly said:


> All sing along now...."Money for nothin and the chicks are free"



Its "Money for nothin' and chicks *for* free  "

I'm in pedantic mode today.


----------



## Marion (16 Sep 2011)

> I'm in pedantic mode today.



Did you "a" forget something? 

Marion


----------



## hastalavista (18 Sep 2011)

The simple way to address the power of the utilities is for joe customer to stop paying the bills.

eircom could very easily be forced into receivership if its customers stop paying and it runs out of cash.

Withholding payment from the esb is the only way to get the camel-coated cosseted commies in Unite to realise that its the screwed customer who is paying their inflated wages


----------



## Sunny (18 Sep 2011)

So you are happy for them to turn off your power? Energy is a regulated industry because of it's importance to the country. It's not up to consumers to force the companies to reduce their prices. It is up to the regulator to insist on cost cutting to help offset the rise in energy prices. I don't know enough about the industry or the way it is  regulated to really comment but I am curious as to why the regulator is not being questioned as to why they are granting the ESB large price increases when everyone seems to be of the opinion that they are not as efficient as they should be.


----------



## TRS30 (18 Sep 2011)

Pensions are not covered under TUPE.


----------

