Timmy Dooley (Clare, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

On Second Stage, I outlined my concerns about a particular group of employees of Shannon and Cork airports. They are people who from 1969 onwards transferred from the Civil Service to Aer Rianta on the urging of the Department and with the expectation that it would not involve any worsening of conditions of employment. This was circulated by way of office notice 4/68. That assertion was confirmed on a number of occasions in the Dáil by various Ministers based on questions that had arisen. Anybody taking a look at this would believe that there was a legitimate expectation that their situation would not be any worse than if they had remained within the Civil Service. In fact, they would argue, and I would find it very hard to disagree with them, that Aer Rianta was not a legal entity in company terms until 1998, that before then it had acted as an agent of the Minister, that all the legal documents from Aer Rianta had to be sent to the Department for signing, and that when the 1998 legislation was enacted, it made no reference to the company's staffing or any current superannuation conditions.

This raised a legal point that was moot but serious. How could an established civil servant prior to 1998 be transferred to a trading or non-registered company back in 1969? While they had transferred in terms of employment, one would need to look at what their legal standing was during that period. It would be their view that the conditions could not have changed since they transferred to an entity that only became a legal entity in 1998.

Successive Ministers, including those from my party, have failed to address this issue. It was easy to let it go. Unfortunately, because of the way in which the pension issue has transformed over the years, there is little doubt that those concerned are at a very significant financial disadvantage in pension terms. An officer in a particular grade who moved to Aer Rianta and who has a salary in 2014 of about €52,000 has a pension entitlement of €16,000. However, a similar person who remained in the Civil Service would now have a pension entitlement of about €24,000. That is very significant issue and I do not think the Government can continually turn its back on it.

I accept that my amendment has been ruled out of order on the basis that it might put some financial burden on the State. As members of the Opposition, we do not have the capacity to do that. However, it would be helpful if the Minister could have a look at it again possibly with a view to bringing forward his own amendments that might address this issue.