Consumers Association of Ireland lays off all its staff

[Complainer]

Dermot Jewell is protected by Irish labour laws as an employee and it would be difficult to remove him.

If he's not doing the job that's defined in his contract or elsewhere, it's not that difficult to remove him, once you go through the right process.

The Chairman, Michael Kilcoyne, is a full-time trade union official, so it would be against his nature, to challenge an employee's performance.

I'm pretty sure that if anyone else posted a post like this, the moderators would be all over it, and rightly so. It really is very poor example for a personal attack like this to come from the site owner. Unless you have direct and fairly extensive personal experience of Michael Kilcoyne, and in-depth knowledge of what he did or didn't do with Jewell, you shouldn't be making comments about what is in his nature, and what is not in his nature.

I'm also wondering about how much direct dealings you have with full-time trade union officials over the past say 5-10 years. Do you know that they get their education in such hotbeds of leftwing thinking as the Smurfit School of Business, U.C.D.? Do you know that several trade unions, including SIPTU where Kilcoyne works train their officials and representatives on 'ethical representation', i.e. deciding when it is right to support a member and when it is wrong to support a member. This is a fairly outrageous slur on an entire profession, and I strongly suspect that it is based on little or no recent experience.

 

[smiley]

The magazine was poor, very poor.

I subcribed to the magazine from 2001-2003. Back then it had a place in the market.

BUT with the web really took off it became very redundant.

They put the magazine on the web....hardly very innovative!


Why is there a CAI when we have a National Consumers Association anyway??

 

[Time]

CAI is a business not a quango. No one appointed them.

 

[Complainer]

Why is there a CAI when we have a National Consumers Association anyway??

I honestly thought they were one and the same. Why are they so many duplicate services in this country, it just seems like one quango after another.

You're thinking about the National Customer Agency. It's not an 'Association' - it is a Government body.

The CAI is an Association. They have no mandate from Govt, and they get no Govt funding. They are a private organisation.

 

[Brendan Burgess]

If he's not doing the job that's defined in his contract or elsewhere, it's not that difficult to remove him, once you go through the right process.

Earlier in the thread, you said

It is effectively a private business - one that has latched onto a particular niche, but hasn't performed very well in living memory.

Hi Complainer

Most people would agree with you that the CAI has not performed very well in living memory. But it would be extremely difficult to remove the Chief Executive. They would have to justify the decision to terminate his employment and the general view that the organization has not performed well would probably not be justification enough, even if "the right process" is gone through.

I'm pretty sure that if anyone else posted a post like this, the moderators would be all over it, and rightly so. It really is very poor example for a personal attack like this to come from the site owner. Unless you have direct and fairly extensive personal experience of Michael Kilcoyne, and in-depth knowledge of what he did or didn't do with Jewell, you shouldn't be making comments about what is in his nature, and what is not in his nature.

Complainer

This is what I actually said

The Chairman, Michael Kilcoyne, is a full-time trade union official, so it would be against his nature, to challenge an employee's performance.

I have not said that he did not challenge any employee's performance. I am just saying that it would be against his nature, as a trade-union official, to do so.

There are a few possiblilities here

• Michael Kilcoyne thinks that Dermot Jewell is doing a great job and deserves a pay rise.
• Michael Kilcoyne thinks that Dermot Jewell is not doing a good job and is involved in a performance improvement programme with him
• Michael Kilcoyne thinks that Dermot Jewell is not doing a good job and is not doing anything about it.

I do not have an insight into the workings of the CAI's board, so I don't know. But the orientation and training of trade union officials is to defend employees and so Kilcoyne would have to overcome this if he feels that Dermot Jewell is not doing a good job.

I'm also wondering about how much direct dealings you have with full-time trade union officials over the past say 5-10 years. Do you know that they get their education in such hotbeds of leftwing thinking as the Smurfit School of Business, U.C.D.? Do you know that several trade unions, including SIPTU where Kilcoyne works train their officials and representatives on 'ethical representation', i.e. deciding when it is right to support a member and when it is wrong to support a member.

I don't really need to go back over the last 5 - 10 years. My aunt was a shop steward in the 70's and without any ethical or other training, she did speak to members who were dossing.

This is a fairly outrageous slur on an entire profession, and I strongly suspect that it is based on little or no recent experience.

I think that most people would agree that it is against the nature of trade union officials to challenge an employee's performance. And I am sure that the training they get counteracts this to some extent. But it's still against their nature.

The headline in the Sunday Business Post was

Chief of consumer body gets €80,000 in pension top-up



Calico said

If he is a trade union official, in my opinion I don't think was looking after the interests of employees by sanctioning an €80,000 pension top-up for one of them.

I hope you noticed that I disagreed with this comment by pointing out that it might have been justified if it extracted the company from a defined benefit liability.

 

[Brendan Burgess]

I lost all respect for them around 2003 when the then Chairperson (Kilcoyne I think) called on the Govt to compensate Equity SSIA holders who had lost money in normal market falls.

I don't remember that one, but I do remember objecting to their campaign to abolish DIRT at an AGM in 2007 as reported here

Mr Jewell said the CAI would launch a campaign in 2008 to abolish the 20% DIRT tax on savings interest after the levy was described as a tax on those unable to afford an SSIA over the past five years.

Members questioned whether the CAI should be campaigning on taxation but chairman Michael Kilcoyne said: "We campaign on a whole range of issues and DIRT is a tax that affects those on low incomes.

 

[Complainer]

I have not said that he did not challenge any employee's performance. I am just saying that it would be against his nature, as a trade-union official, to do so.

There are a few possiblilities here

• Michael Kilcoyne thinks that Dermot Jewell is doing a great job and deserves a pay rise.
• Michael Kilcoyne thinks that Dermot Jewell is not doing a good job and is involved in a performance improvement programme with him
• Michael Kilcoyne thinks that Dermot Jewell is not doing a good job and is not doing anything about it.

I do not have an insight into the workings of the CAI's board, so I don't know. But the orientation and training of trade union officials is to defend employees and so Kilcoyne would have to overcome this if he feels that Dermot Jewell is not doing a good job.

Brendan, your clarification is helpful. I picked up a significant implication in your post that you believed Kilcoyne was not doing his job. I see now that this is not the case.

But the orientation and training of trade union officials is to defend employees and so Kilcoyne would have to overcome this if he feels that Dermot Jewell is not doing a good job.

This comment is inappropriate. You don't have any difficulty in separating your role on AAM from your professional roles. If I or anyone was to have made a general assumption about your activities on AAM given your 'nature' as a recruiter or as an accountant, that would be inappropriate, and I'd imagine that you wouldn't like it.

As I said, I don't know Kilcoyne or Jewell from Adam, so I can only draw my own conclusions from things they have done, or not done.

 

[Brendan Burgess]

"CAI chief "inflated" online statistics" - Sunday Times

An interesting Sunday Times article today.

Druing an interview on RTE Radio on July 3rd, Jewell claimed that the CAI had receive more than 3,000 complain online from Ulster Bank customers.

...

"Our online complaints started at hundreds and by close of business yestereday, they would be just over 3,000..." Jewell said

The National Consumer Agency received a total of 99 complaints about Ulster Bank between June 20 and July 26th

When the Sunday Times asked Jewell about his claims that the CAI received more than 3,000 complaints, he issued a statement explaining that the figure included "estimates" that were "canvassed" from media and industry sources.

He said that the CAI had canvassed them and relayed the areas of complaints, the level and estimates of the number of contacts received. ... He denied that he overstated the level of complaints received.

 

[Time]

I think the public needs educating to the fact that the CAI is not the place to be complaining to.

 

[Complainer]

I see the property in Ranalagh is up for sale as 'residential'. Did the organisation own the bricks and mortar;

[broken link removed]

 

[Brendan Burgess]

I see the property in Ranalagh is up for sale as 'residential'. Did the organisation own the bricks and mortar;
[broken link removed]

Yes. They own it.

 

[SinKav1]

Here's the full article:

CAI chief ‘inflated’ online statistics

Dermott Jewell ‘exaggerated’ the number of complaints the consumer body received about Ulster Bank

DERMOTT JEWELL, the chief executive of the Consumers’ Association of Ireland (CAI), has greatly exaggerated the number of complaints his organisation received about the Ulster Bank systems failure, according to sources within the CAI. The CAI, a registered charity, is struggling to survive and has laid off most of its staff. During an interview with Morning Ireland on RTE Radio on July 3, Jewell claimed the CAI had received more than 3,000 online complaints from Ulster Bank customers. However, sources within the CAI told The Sunday Times the organisation would not normally get that number of complaints in total in a year. The sources said in the first three weeks of July, the CAI received a total of 108 online complaints and not all of them were related to Ulster Bank. In his radio interview, Jewell was asked whether the CAI’s complaints were received via email given that it had only one operational phone. He said they had been received “online”. The CAI has an online form on its website where complaints can be made. “Our online complaints . . . started at hundreds and by close of business yesterday they would just be over 3,000 and that’s quite a significant amount of contributions from consumers who are worried about their bank account,” Jewell said. Following the programme, the figure of 3,000 complaints cited by Jewell was reported by RTE and other media in coverage of the Ulster Bank story. In the following day’s Irish Independent, Jewell was quoted saying the CAI had received 3,200 complaints about Ulster Bank. Verona Hanlon, the manager of consumer protection at the Central Bank of Ireland, emailed Jewell after his Morning Ireland interview seeking further information on the number and type of complaints received. The National Consumer Agency (NCA), a statutory body set up to handle g issues, received a total of 99 complaints about the Ulster Bank problem between June 20 and July 26. While the CAI has one part-time employee working with Jewell, the NCA has eight manning a helpline. The agency deals with an average of 1,074 calls and 111 emails each week. On July 7, Bill Prasifka, the Financial Services Ombudsman, said he had received a “handful” of complaints about Ulster Bank. When The Sunday Times asked Jewell about his claim that the CAI received more than 3,000 complaints, he issued a statement explaining this figure included “estimates” that were “canvassed” from media and industry sources. Jewell said he and the CAI's chairman had a large network of contacts, which included consumers, representative bodies, reliable media and industry sources. He said the CAI had canvassed them and relayed the areas of complaints, the level and estimates of the number of contacts received. The CAI undertook to highlight and act upon this information, he said. [He denied he overstated the level of complaints received. Jewell has blamed a lack of state funding for the CAI’s problems. Last month, he accused Richard Bruton, the minister for jobs, enterprise and innovation, of “completely and inconsiderately” ignoring the CAI. The department’s records show, however, that between 2007 and 2010 the CAI received €230,000 from the state. It said no application for funding had been received from the CAI in 2011 or this year. Last week, it was reported the CAI had made provision for an €80,000 lump sum pension payment for Jewell. However, Michael Kilcoyne, the CAI chairman, said the sum had never been paid. Jewell declined to answer any questions on salary or pension payments from the CAI.

 

[Time]

Why should they receive funding from the state?

 

[Padraigb]

There might be a case if they were providing a useful service to the public.

 

[SinKav1]

The CAI is planning facilitating a class action against Ulster Bank according to a new press release.

PRESS RELEASE

The Consumers’ Association of Ireland (CAI) UB ‘Class Action’ Initiative

Our CEO reported in the course of a Morning Ireland interview that there were some 3000 + complaints advised to the CAI with regard to Ulster Bank problems & difficulties.

The comment referring specifically to the CAI, in context of our telephone outage, was that most of the CAI complaints were through emailed comment.

However, not referred to were all sources of CAI complaints. The Association has, of necessity and through it’s Chairman and CEO , over years forged a large network of contacts and interaction with consumers and their representatives as well as reliable media, and industry sources that we canvassed and who relayed the level, estimates and area of complaints they were receiving and which the CAI undertook to highlight and act upon. This we are now committing to taking further.

What is of concern to the CAI is that third parties have sought to denigrate the extreme difficulties of consumers of the service of Ulster Bank by suggesting the level of complaint was overstated by the CAI. It was not. It is clear that many consumers affected by the system failure are not direct customers of Ulster Bank but are nonetheless impacted. We are now concerned that the figures are higher than countenanced. In addition, we now have very real concerns that the realities and compensatable faults and responsibilities of the bank, as well as the lack of Central Bank activity, are being actively and maliciously diminished in value by third parties.

Therefore, by way of independently and actively determining that this cannot happen the CAI is today requesting that all consumers, whether they be customers of Ulster Bank or otherwise, advise:

the detail of their loss, their interaction with their bank and the Ulster Bank to date the offer of refund and assistance –current and future- together with compensation offered and/or received-directly by email cai@thecai.ie or send by letter post to 43-44 Chelmsford Road, Ranelagh,Dublin6 in order that the Association can compile a comprehensive file for presentation to the Department of Finance, the Central Bank, the National Consumer Agency, the Irish Bankers Federation and the Ulster Bank and in order that full transparent and definitive understanding of the losses and response to those losses can be determined for further consideration and, where deemed necessary, further action.

We will also upload a template on our website which consumers can simply provide the basic information and, should they wish, make additional relevant comments.

The Consumers’ Association of Ireland will guarantee anonymity and that we will respect the requirements and rights of consumers under data protection requirements.

This will be the first ‘class action’ type initiative undertaken that will, we hope, offer future opportunities for a Group Action procedure to be established in Ireland.

The Consumers’ Association of Ireland will meet with the Ulster Bank at the earliest opportunity to explore how we can assist in bringing this difficult situation to a positive conclusion on behalf of all banking customers affected.

 

[serotoninsid]

The CAI is planning facilitating a class action against Ulster Bank according to a new press release.

They can organise what they like but they should not be supported whilst there is not total transparency. Until this thread, I knew very little about the CAI. However, for any NGO or charity, one key fundamental thing in this day and age is transparency. If he won't disclose what salary he is taking, then nobody should support such an organisation - on that basis alone.

 

[Calico]

They can organise what they like but they should not be supported whilst there is not total transparency. Until this thread, I knew very little about the CAI. However, for any NGO or charity, one key fundamental thing in this day and age is transparency. If he won't disclose what salary he is taking, then nobody should support such an organisation - on that basis alone.

Simply disclosing salary isn't really enough though. All that happens then is that fees/pension payments/perks etc. are all just bumped up to make the remuneration appear less. All of this would need to be looked at in context of the size of the organisation etc. too. It seems the whole charity/NGO sector is badly in need of proper regulation. Something you would think the Consumers Association would support given it regularly calls for transparency in others.

As for a class action against UB, I don't know if the CAI is the best placed organisation to administer this given the report that it greatly exaggerated the complaints it received about the bank.

 

[Brendan Burgess]

I have moved the discussion of the "class action" to a separate thread

 

[SinKav1]

From today's Sunday Times:

Cash-strapped consumer watchdog puts HQ on sale

FIRST it ran out of money, then it was accused of inflating the number of complaints it receives from the public and now the Consumers’ Association of Ireland (CAI) is selling its headquarters to raise cash.

The two Victorian houses it operates from in Ranelagh, in Dublin 6, are on the market for €695,000. The headquarters is beside Ranelagh village, which became one of the priciest suburbs during the property boom. In 2007 a neighbouring house sold for €1.35m.

Michael Kilcoyne, the CAI’s chairman, said it decided to sell the building a number of months ago and that leasing it back from new owners was one option under consideration.

“It’s for sale because we see it as an asset that we can convert into cash,” said Kilcoyne.

This is the latest move by the CAI, a registered charity, to survive. It has already laid off most of its staff. Last week The Sunday Times reported how sources at the CAI claimed Dermott Jewell, the chief executive, had exaggerated the number of complaints his organisation received about the Ulster Bank systems failure.

Jewell claimed on RTE Radio on July 3 that the CAI had received more than 3,000 online complaints from Ulster Bank customers. Bill Prasifka, the financial ombudsman, told RTE on Friday his office received 150.

In 2008, three directors of the CAI resigned in protest at what they said was a lack of internal transparency about the charity’s finances.

Enid O’Dowd, a chartered accountant and one of those who resigned, said even though she sat on its finance committee she had found it difficult to obtain information about expenses.

 

[Brendan Burgess]

They are on the market at €695k.

Thre are bank loans secured on these premises of €478k, as of May 2011. The loans may have been reduced since.

If they get their asking price, they will get cash of around €200k.

The premises are in the accounts at €820k, so if they are sold for €695k, they will have to reduce their reserves by around €100k.

The reserves as of May 2011 were €150k, and these have presumably reduced since then.

So they must be close to insolvency which must be a worry for the directors.