Fas, 70 days off, pre retirement

Status
Not open for further replies.
Not sure if this is already clarified, but in the public sector what's typically the case for people retiring with holidays built up - do they get paid for the holidays or do they have to use the days up?

Are the FAS retirees genuinely looking for extra holidays or rather a bigger lump sum payoff (on top of the 150% tax free of final salary). Save them up over the two years and you might retire with a payoff equal to 4 months salary - say 20k or so - which would help explain why embarassment isn't stopping them running to the LRC. (And why the 3 day buyout offer was given short shrift.)

It might be interesting to know how many FAS retirees have used the extra 88 days holidays as holidays. Also might be interesting to know how they account for a retiree who only announced this year they'd retire next Feb - what happens to the 44 days holiday they were "entitled" to for last year.

Incidentally the LRC is a long way from the honest broker its apologists often portray it as, any organisation with ex-ICTU and ex-BATU leadership should, at least, raise the eyebrows of sensible observers.
 
The Labour Court consists of a Chairman & 2 Deputy Chairmen nominated by the Minister, 3 Employer reps nominated by IBEC & 3 Worker reps nominated by ICTU.

Seems like a representative structure to me.
 
ashambles said:
Not sure if this is already clarified, but in the public sector what's typically the case for people retiring with holidays built up - do they get paid for the holidays or do they have to use the days up?
Click to expand...

they take the a/l before they retire (in the run-up to it,,,can be a serious amount of days) or if they;re going on VS at short notice, they get paid
 
Delboy do you mean the actually have the option to take the pay instead of the leave ..the same leave that is given for an ease into their retirement?

That cant be right.. I must have read that wrong..
 
Deiseblue said:
The Labour Court consists of a Chairman & 2 Deputy Chairmen nominated by the Minister, 3 Employer reps nominated by IBEC & 3 Worker reps nominated by ICTU.

Seems like a representative structure to me.
Click to expand...

IBEC represents the protected sector. Foreign Multinationals have to join when they move here but the people that run it are cut from the same cloth as the people who run FAS.
Speaking as a shareholder in a business I’d pay not to be in it.
 
Purple said:
IBEC represents the protected sector. Foreign Multinationals have to join when they move here but the people that run it are cut from the same cloth as the people who run FAS.
Speaking as a shareholder in a business I’d pay not to be in it.
Click to expand...

I agree with you.

Unfortunately , however , it appears that IBEC are accepted as the organisation most representative of employers in this country & I do believe that small & medium businesses should be represented at the table.
 
thedaras said:
Delboy do you mean the actually have the option to take the pay instead of the leave ..the same leave that is given for an ease into their retirement?

That cant be right.. I must have read that wrong..
Click to expand...

The 105 ex-ANCO employees do not have the option of taking the pay in lieu of leave - their retirement date is set in stone & they have to avail of the pre-retirement leave in each of the 2 years prior to retirement.

If any of the employees opt for voluntary early retirement then obviously the question of pre retirement leave for the 2 years prior to redundancy no longer applies although a pro rata period of pre retirement leave may be allowed for the year during which they avail of voluntary early retirement - the Labour Court hearing should clarify matters.

I would also point out that Delboy's statement as to how annual leave is dealt with on retirement applies across all sectors - whether such retirement occurs on reaching retirement age or by earlier voluntary retirement.
 
their retirement date is set in stone & they have to avail of the pre-retirement leave in each of the 2 years prior to retirement.
Click to expand...
You sure about that? What about the early retirement schemes in place? How come there's so many going for Feb '12 indicating they are taking some sort of accelerated scheme.

Didn't some state body (HSE?) recently have to send out a notice trying to persuade workers to give them some reasonable period of notice of a retirement - maybe 3 months or something. It doesn't seem there's any onus on workers to indicate they're retiring at all, let alone two years notice.

The independent article talks about people applying for the leave in May and allowing them to apply now, post an "LRC" meeting, and all this naturally for the coveted non salary adjusted Feb '12 retirements.

Can't see how these people can have been in a position "to avail of the pre-retirement leave in each of the 2 years prior to retirement".

By this stage unless they're doing nothing at the workplace (being FAS - that's sadly possible) effectively there's no way they could take that many days holidays over the next 6 months, certainly not if they can claim last years allowance as well.
 
Absolutely certain - the retirement age is set out in your contract of employment ( for some state employees such as Teachers & Guards your contract specifies that you can retire after a set number of year's service , the contract will also specify a date on which you must retire )

In my previous post when I referred to employees availing of voluntary redundancy I should have referred to employees availing of voluntary early retirement -I have duly amended that post.

All Public Sector workers wishing to do so have to apply for the early retirement schemes & if successful a date is then set for their departure - there is certainly no question of not giving ample notice.

If you can post a link to the HSE's difficulties with the massively undersubscribed early retirements/voluntary redundancies packages that would certainly be interesting - I vaguely remember the article myself but from that vague memory I felt that the short notice period applied to those taking voluntary redundancy as opposed to those availing of early retirement.
 
Where are the IMF in all this?

Surely they should have a big say in nonsense like this?
 
RMCF said:
Where are the IMF in all this?

Surely they should have a big say in nonsense like this?
Click to expand...

Why?

This is a small, isolated problem. The Indo, as usual has made a meal out of what really is the dressing on a side order salad. A pay and conditions agreement that relates to 105 staff, half due to retire in the next 12 months or so and you want the IMF to stick their nose in? They will be well aware of what is happening and it is up to our Government to deal with it.

Has anyone even bothered calculating how much this retirement scheme is costing? No.

End of.
 

A memo was issued to all HSE staff advising us to give 3 months notice of our intention to retire as it is expected that a lot will go in Feb 2011, as lumpsum will be based on 2008 pay rates. This could be a couple of thousand for a consultant with 30 years plus service. I heard our superann section has received over 100 requests for pension estimates in the last few weeks.

I'm assuming this 3 month requirement is so the HSE will have an indication by November of how many are leaving. I have heard a lot of consultants in their late 50's intend to go by February so I assume anyone in their late 50's will seriourlsy think about it.

Prior to that employer via the superann section use to write to the employee as provided under The Minimum Notice and Terms of Employment Acts 1973 to 2001.
 

I asked because this is just one example of countless 'little' issues that all add up to make one big, usually costly, mess.

Not a week passes that I don't hear of something that makes me say "jez, I wish the IMF could hear this nonsense and come in and tell folk "this is how its happening"".

For me, 'little' things like this are symptomatic of why Ireland is in a total mess in the 1st place.
 

Has it been clarified that it's only 105 staff in total, ever, or us it just that there's 105 at the moment?
 
Purple said:
Has it been clarified that it's only 105 staff in total, ever, or us it just that there's 105 at the moment?
Click to expand...

There hasnt been any clarification either way on this, that is an issue. I'd imagine it was much higher than 105 over the years.
 
Is there another discussion forum phrase that screams arrogance more than "end of"?
 
Deiseblue said:
All Public Sector workers wishing to do so have to apply for the early retirement schemes & if successful a date is then set for their departure - there is certainly no question of not giving ample notice.
Click to expand...

This is what should happen but isn't what's happening from what I've heard personally and I think Becky backs this up with her insight into the HSE.

Becky said:
A memo was issued to all HSE staff advising us to give 3 months notice of our intention to retire as it is expected that a lot will go in Feb 2011, as lumpsum will be based on 2008 pay rates.
Click to expand...

There will be areas like the civil service where there's tighter management of the retirements, but in other areas it can be a different story. Wouldn't surprise me if despite the HSE requests for three months notice that admin staff are left with prima donnas demanding next January that they want to leave within a few weeks.
 
DB74 said:
Is there another discussion forum phrase that screams arrogance more than "end of"?
Click to expand...

Couldn't agree with you more.. this type of attitude is often heard around the negotiation tables,from the left side..

Its a bit like a covering your eyes ,so you can claim you saw nothing..
 
The "End of" at the end of my post was an error, It was meant to be in reply to the IMF coming in to look at this issue. There is no need for them to come in and get involved in this. We should be sorting this out ourselves. I added more about the calculations and should have removed the end of bit, and it wasn't meant to be any form of arrogance on my part .... but sure lets nit pick over what some people say.

thedaras, no idea what your comment is about. The Indo printed a story, did they give the full story? No, they simply printed a story and gave as much information that fits their own agenda. Stiring the Public Service bashing pot.
 
Trying to be sympathetic to these FAS employees - but I'm struggling with it. Especially when I think of many people in long term employment who lost their jobs and had no time to get used to it.
Different times folks - just remember that WE THE TAX PAYERs are supposed to pay for this privilege! Well sorry but I don't want to. I'd rather that my tax money goes to other critical services like teachers and nurses.
So FAS employees - give it up and do what is honorable. Your don't have a god given right to this.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Menu
Log in
Register