Seanad debates

Tuesday, 26 November 2013

Social Welfare and Pensions (No. 2) Bill 2013: Second Stage

 

5:25 pm

Photo of Terry BrennanTerry Brennan (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I have received many letters from former colleagues of mine who are still working in the ESB. These are very disappointed and dedicated workers who are deeply concerned about how they are being treated, not alone by the Government but also the previous one. All of my former colleagues are compulsory members of a contributory defined benefit pension scheme. It was obligatory for them on joining the ESB to sign up to the scheme. They are very fearful of what the position will be when they reach retirement age. For many of these men and women, it was their first job. Some came out of college or university and went straight into the ESB which always was a great employer. Many of them will not be entitled to the State contributory pension and they believe they carry all of the risks in the new pension scheme. Is this the case?

Since 2011, the Government has been accepting accounts from the ESB, wrongly, in my view. These accounts describe the scheme as a defined contribution pension scheme which was never known as a defined contribution scheme. There is no basis whatsoever for the change in its description since 2011 other than for accountancy reasons. Because of a deficit in the ESB accounts, the company will not provide funds to address whatever deficits occur. The company has categorically stated it will not meet the deficit under any circumstances. I also understand the Government plans to take in the region of €600 million from the company, but the ESB pension scheme badly needs that money. Under the new rules, many ESB employees will only have 3% pension coverage and will receive no State pension. The ESB is not prepared to accept any of the risk owing to its new accountancy system. I do not think it is fair that an ever diminishing number of dedicated staff in the ESB should carry all of the risk for a scheme to which they contributed 7% of their gross wages for all their years of employment to obtain their rightful entitlements. The mismanagement of the scheme was and continues to be the responsibility of the ESB and its owners.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.