AIB Staff 3% Pay Increase

D

DonDub

Registered User
Messages
66
Irish Indo
Tuesday October 20 2009

AIB's decision to grant employees a 3pc pay increase threatens to destroy the last fraying threads of national solidarity because it is so patently immoral as well as being unwise and greedy.
It should be stopped and it can be stopped and it must be stopped if capitalism is to retain a scintilla of credibility.
Not content with playing a leading role in destroying the country's finances, these out-of-touch executives appear bent on destroying the country itself.

Is paying this increase as crazy as it seems or am I missing something?
 
You're missing something

AIB agreed this increase last year.
And then went back on it and wanted to introduce a 5% cut. They didn't manage to do this

BOI gave this increase last year, were there posters calling that crazy here last year? I haven't searched past threads

This is for lower grade staff below management level.
All they are getting is what was agreed in 2008, no more and no less
 
micmclo said:
You're missing something

AIB agreed this increase last year.
And then went back on it and wanted to introduce a 5% cut. They didn't manage to do this

BOI gave this increase last year, were there posters calling that crazy here last year? I haven't searched past threads

This is for lower grade staff below management level.
All they are getting is what was agreed in 2008, no more and no less
Click to expand...

Fine, pay the 3% as agreed and then cut wages by 13%. If I was a shareholder I'd be withdrawing my capital, as a taxpayer I'm equally upset about propping up the whole operation.

Also what's special about lower grade staff? I'd assume that they are a large proportion of the wage bill, same as anywhere. Cutting 1,000 staff from €30k to €27k saves a lot more than cutting 50 from €100k to €75k.
 
micmclo said:
You're missing something

AIB agreed this increase last year.
And then went back on it and wanted to introduce a 5% cut. They didn't manage to do this

BOI gave this increase last year, were there posters calling that crazy here last year? I haven't searched past threads

This is for lower grade staff below management level.
All they are getting is what was agreed in 2008, no more and no less
Click to expand...

Plenty of things were agreed last year that are no longer possible. AIB is effectively insolvent - only kept afloat by tax payers. Regarding the 'lower grade' staff - it is quite clear that AIB needs to reduce its costs and headcount drastically. The only reason it hasn't enforced wide scale job cuts is that it the government has leaned on it to retain jobs.
I don't wish ill to anyone - but it absolutely unreasonable and unfair to expect workers across the economy to prop up jobs in an insolvent business. The government needs to put a stop to this madness!
 
micmclo said:
You're missing something

AIB agreed this increase last year.
And then went back on it and wanted to introduce a 5% cut. They didn't manage to do this

BOI gave this increase last year, were there posters calling that crazy here last year? I haven't searched past threads

This is for lower grade staff below management level.
All they are getting is what was agreed in 2008, no more and no less
Click to expand...
Great - I presume you are supporting going back to the 6.5% increases agreed in social partnership in Aug 2008, and dropping the pension levy cuts brought in since.
 
Cool, I was quoted for three posts in a row :cool:


Complainer said:
Great - I presume you are supporting going back to the 6.5% increases agreed in social partnership in Aug 2008, and dropping the pension levy cuts brought in since.
Click to expand...

Pension levy?
I never brought a public service issue into this thread

DonDub said:
Plenty of things were agreed last year that are no longer possible.
Click to expand...

True, employers can claim an inability to pay. Maybe AIB management should have done this.
They have legal teams and advisors so they must have been aware.

DonDub said:
Regarding the 'lower grade' staff - it is quite clear that AIB needs to reduce its costs and headcount drastically. The only reason it hasn't enforced wide scale job cuts is that it the government has leaned on it to retain jobs.
Click to expand...

Lower grade staff doesn't need to be in quotes, that's what they are, and that's what I've done in the past. It's their job title, a job in sector of AIB is like maybe some government departments, everyone has a grade
Tis an average job for average pay.
I'd agree that headcount and costs will be reduced. Last year RBS and Ulster Bank announced hundreds of job cuts.
I didn't know about that government policy to retain jobs, interesting
 
Yes, AIB made an agreement in 2008 and now staff are going to get it
Yes, the government made an agreement in 2008 and now staff won't get it and will probably get a salary reduction also.

Either way, look at the thread title.
There are many other threads about public service issues on this site, post away
 
micmclo said:
True, employers can claim an inability to pay. Maybe AIB management should have done this.
They have legal teams and advisors so they must have been aware.
Click to expand...

You are right, they can claim inability to pay, however, as they are nominally profitable (but in reality insolvent), the Labour Court would almost certainly find that AIB has the 'ability' to pay. It is one of the many ilogical fatures of the this agreement i.e. it is incapable of responding to drastically changed circumstances. If for example a business's profitability falls by 99% - the agreement allows unions to argue 'ability' to pay, as the business is still in profit.
 
Complainer said:
But you want to turn the clock back for AIB to 2008 - right? So why just AIB - If it is fair for them, it is fair for public servants - right?
Click to expand...

I see.

So it actually is OK to compare public and private sector employees and conditions when it suits you?
 
If a private employer is being propped up by taxpayers' money then the comparison complainer is making is valid.
 
liaconn said:
If a private employer is being propped up by taxpayers' money then the comparison complainer is making is valid.
Click to expand...

I agree, the two are comparable in these circumstances.

AIB has received money from us to keep as going concern and the public sector requires massive borrowing to keep as going concern (which we all pay for). In short neither could operate without the massive borrowing on behalf of the government.

Both sets of employees are receiving increments in the worst possible economic times at our expense due to agreements that were in place before the current crisis.

Both sets of employees are generally left free from media critique for refusal to accept current circumstances.
 
Well if that's the only criteria sure the entire public and civil service is paid for by tax payers money - come on!

I assume then that Complainer would also be in favour of 'turning back the clock' for annual automatic PC/CS increments - still being paid.

I love it when 'social partnership' is invoked - you can't cherrypick your favourite bits and ignore the rest.
 
AIB is owned by the State, so the staff should be paying the public service tax (pension levy)/
 
All we're saying is that Public Servants had to forego a pay agreement made in 2008 so it is valid to argue that this should also apply to AIB as both pay increases would be coming from exchequer funds, directly or indirectly.

Sorry, that's a response to Caveat's post.
 
DonDub said:
x
I don't wish ill to anyone - but it absolutely unreasonable and unfair to expect workers across the economy to prop up jobs in an insolvent business. The government needs to put a stop to this madness!
Click to expand...

Indeed. Hopefully they will take a hatchet to the public sector pay and stop this madness! Now there's an insolvent business for ya! ;)
 
Instead of people shouting abuse at AIB, why don't they direct their anger at the real cause of the problem i.e. trade unions and social partnership. AIB went to the Labour Court looking for a pay cut which of course was resisted by the Unions and the Labour Court told AIB to pay the award.

People can argue and with some justifcation that AIB could have ignored the Labour Court but there is a tradition in this Country that the Labour Court has the final say with regard to these sort of disputes. And to be fair, there needs to be a final arbitor or else there would be chaos. If AIB ignored the findings, no party would have engaged in the industrial relations process and there would have been chaos.
 
Caveat said:
I assume then that Complainer would also be in favour of 'turning back the clock' for annual automatic PC/CS increments - still being paid.
Click to expand...

I can't speak for Complainer but as a Public Servant myself, I wish the clock could be turned back. I'd rather not have received the various payrises if I'd thought they would one day be snatched back. Individually, none of them ever changed my lifestyle but taking them back collectively is is a big hit.

I wouldn't begrudge AIB staff their payrise if their employer's very existence didn't rely so directly on the public purse.
 
Sunny said:
Instead of people shouting abuse at AIB, why don't they direct their anger at the real cause of the problem i.e. trade unions and social partnership. AIB went to the Labour Court looking for a pay cut which of course was resisted by the Unions and the Labour Court told AIB to pay the award.

People can argue and with some justifcation that AIB could have ignored the Labour Court but there is a tradition in this Country that the Labour Court has the final say with regard to these sort of disputes. And to be fair, there needs to be a final arbitor or else there would be chaos. If AIB ignored the findings, no party would have engaged in the industrial relations process and there would have been chaos.
Click to expand...


I agree that the unions are also at fault - one would expect real leaders to tell their members in the banks that they are in a precarious position and that they cannot expect to receive pay increases for the next few years. Instead, they parrot the same old clap-trap about what they are 'due'.
Speaking of chaos - if thats what it takes to radically reform the way we do business in this country, then so be it. Its abundantly clear that two decades of consensus and partnership has created a monster i.e. a union movement that is hell bent on screwing the majority in favour of the few....even if means bankrupting the country into the bargain......
 
Last edited:
ou're missing something

AIB agreed this increase last year.
Click to expand...

Indeed. I too, in private sector company, was due a pay rise last year. Unsurprisingly it didn't happen. In fact I offered to take a pay cut.

I find the 3% pay disgusting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top