AIB Staff to receive 3% pay increase?

Re: AIB Staff to receive 3% pay increase?
Have I missed something. Were AIB not ordered by the Labour Relations Commission to pay the award. Blame so called social partnership for it. The award only applies to people below management level as well.

Sunny - this is spot on and some posters have missed the point completely. AIB went to the Labour Court to argue not paying this increase. BOI had a similar case a few months back with their Life division. This increase is being forced on them.
 
The negotiations that resulted in the agreement for the 3% pay increase were triggered by AIB not paying the last installment of the national wage agreement. My understanding, which is open to correction, is that the 3% was a recommendation from the Labour Relations Commission. There is nothing that forces AIB to pay this now although it would not lead to a basis for trust in future negotiations.
 
Do not know all the facts in this case so can someone clarify that it is the Labour court that is 'forcing' AIB to pay the increase. I thought labour court recommendations are not leaglly binding?
What basis are they making the judgement on? Is it the case the pay increase was aggreed some time ago when we had inflation in the economy? Where is the logic in giving a 3% increase when we have defaltion at 6%?
 
pinkie123 said:
I think this thread is a disgrace - extremely petty. I know an employee of AIB that works 60+ hours a week, and this 3% amounted to about €60 extra a month. Hardly even worth having! To think you are begrudging that is unfathomable.
Click to expand...

We have all taken pay cuts in order to bail out the banks. It is wrong that some of that money is being used to increase the pay of bank clerks. I know they didn't cause the problem but neither did the people paying the income levy.
 
I love all the anger against the "ZOMG we own the bank so we will not pay increases, bonuses etc....". Most banks in the UK and the US received some form of bailout or another. From what I'm hearing, pay conditions are beginning to bounce back in some of the british banks, as if they don't the banks not paying will lose all their quality employees. Just look at GS, their bonus pool is at the same level as their 2007 pool.
 
Government should tell the bank to cut all staff salaries by at least 30% until such time as they are back on their feet. Remember that the LRC decision, like any pay decision, is still dependant on AIB having the ability to pay. If the Government mandates that bailout money should not go on pay, then they cant pay. Any employees who arent prepared to take a 30% cut should be made redundant with only statutory redundancy paid.

This is a disgrace. The rest of us will be hit with huge tax increases in December to pay for it. Shame on AIB and shame on their staff.
 
Deas said:
Bank of Ireland have not paid it.
Click to expand...

I read something earlier in the year about Anglo paying low and middle earning staff 5% pay increase in Feb. Was surprised at the time that it did not provoke too much of a reaction.
 
Deas said:
Not the payment that was subject to LC proceedings.
Click to expand...

As far as I know BOI were not subject to any LC proceedings. They didn't try and get out of paying the award like AIB. They paid it around the same time as the ESB. I am open to correction though.
 
Sunny said:
As far as I know BOI were not subject to any LC proceedings. They didn't try and get out of paying the award like AIB. They paid it around the same time as the ESB. I am open to correction though.
Click to expand...
You are quite correct Sunny.
Bank of Ireland paid the 3.5% due under the first tranche of the National Wage Agreement towards 2016 and as such the Labour Court were never involved.
 
Kine said:
I love all the anger against the "ZOMG we own the bank so we will not pay increases, bonuses etc....". Most banks in the UK and the US received some form of bailout or another. From what I'm hearing, pay conditions are beginning to bounce back in some of the british banks, as if they don't the banks not paying will lose all their quality employees. Just look at GS, their bonus pool is at the same level as their 2007 pool.
Click to expand...

We are objecting to the fact that we had to take pay cuts to bail out the banks and their staff are now getting pay increases.
 
liaconn said:
We are objecting to the fact that we had to take pay cuts to bail out the banks and their staff are now getting pay increases.
Click to expand...

We had to take pay cuts (and will have to take more pay cuts in the future) to sort out the mess that is the public finances. The budget deficit would be there even if the banks had not engaged in reckless lending.
 
And a large part of the mess was caused by the banks. I'm not saying junior staff should be penalised, I just think a pay rise at the moment is highly inappropriate for anyone.
 
liaconn said:
We are objecting to the fact that we had to take pay cuts to bail out the banks and their staff are now getting pay increases.
Click to expand...

With respect .. I doubt anyone has had their pay cut to fund the bank bailout.

I assume you mean the reduction in net salary in respect of the new & increased levies ? I thought they were introduced to bridge the gap between Government income and expenditure, not specifically to bail out the banks.

And, if I heard him correctly, Conor McCarthy asserted on The Frontline a few weeks ago that that gap was not due to the bank bailout.

So, levies are not funding the banks ?
 
One way or the other, the taxpayers have had to bail out the banks. When the HSE staff looked for a pay rise recently there was huge disapproval (and rightly so) on these boards about people 'not living in the real world'. Yet, when bank staff look for a pay rise it's suddenly okay.
 
liaconn said:
One way or the other, the taxpayers have had to bail out the banks.
Click to expand...

I agree, but I am not clear how NAMA will will burn a hole in the public pocket, annually. McCarthy wasn't allowed to complete his point on The Frontline because Pat Kenny was happy to let audience roar at him.

liaconn said:
.. Yet, when bank staff look for a pay rise it's suddenly okay.
Click to expand...

Only okay according to the Labour Court and the IBOA. And, if it's paid, those lucky enough to benefit from it.
 
pinkie123 said:
I think this thread is a disgrace - extremely petty. I know an employee of AIB that works 60+ hours a week, and this 3% amounted to about €60 extra a month. Hardly even worth having! To think you are begrudging that is unfathomable.
Click to expand...

based on that figure, then the rises would cost AIB somewhere in the reason of €13m. Were AIB not to pay them, then it is reasonable to assume that this is €13m that the Irish govt would not have to use to fund AIB, and that it would be €13m less in cuts that would not be required in the December budget.
 
liaconn said:
And a large part of the mess was caused by the banks. I'm not saying junior staff should be penalised, I just think a pay rise at the moment is highly inappropriate for anyone.
Click to expand...

What part of the difference between current expenditure and current tax receipts is attributable to the banks?

The bail out was a very costly once-off hit (and I agree that the fact that the taxpayer had to pick up the tab makes the concept of pay increases at the banks unpalatable), but the income levy and pension levy etc. were introduced to deal with the gap between day to day income and expenditure.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top