Gerard Craughwell (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I will raise a number of issues about pensions in An Post. It appears the company is not complying with legislation. The Minister for the Environment, Climate and Communications must investigate to ensure good corporate governance.

More than 3,000 of the current pensioners are ex-civil servants who were transferred to An Post on its vesting day, 1 January 1984. They were given a firm guarantee that the conditions of their pension entitlements would not be less favourable in section 46(4) of the Postal and Telecommunications Services Act, 1983. The rules of the company pension scheme approved by the Minister specifically state that the terms and conditions will not be less favourable than those to which they were entitled by reference to the Civil Service regulation in force on 31 December 1983. Those Civil Service rules were section 29(2) of the Pensions (Increase) Act 1964 and regulations made under the Act, namely SI 381 of 2002. These confirmed that from 1 September 1983, pensions would be increased under the principle of pay and pension parity, i.e. wage and pension increases would be similar. An Post complied with the principle for many years.

After the financial crash the company's pension scheme suffered a funding issue. The company and its unions entered into collective agreement in 2013 to amend the scheme and include a cap of 2% or the consumer price index on pensionable pay. Collective agreements apply only to current staff, not to pensioners. When seeking ministerial approval for these changes, An Post informed the then Department of Communications that the proposed changes would not have any impact on current pensioners or preserved pensions in any way. However, the agreement made with the union in December 2013 states the cap also applies to increases to pensions in payment and to deferred pensions. It appears the Minister was misled by the company. An Post is now re-interpreting the legislative guarantee and capping the pension increase entitlements of these pensioners.

It has no authority to repudiate the legislative guarantee. In January 2004, the Attorney General advised the Department of Finance that nothing can take away from the pension rights enshrined in the 1983 Act. An Post also has statutory obligations derived from EU directives to re-value preserved pensions in line with changes in the consumer price index, subject to a cap of 4%. Since 2008, the Minister for Social Protection has issued regulations under section 3(4) of the Pensions Act 1990 prescribing cumulative increases of 17.8% whereas An Post pensions have increased by only 6.7% in the same period.The State pension increased by 18.8%. Postal unions do not represent pensioners and the CEO and chairperson of the company refuse to answer pensioners' correspondence. The trampling on the legitimate entitlements of these ex-civil servants is deplorable by a State company choosing what laws it complies with. These pensioners devoted their lives to the service of the State. I ask that the House brings the Minister in as soon as possible to discuss governance and oversight of An Post and the responsibility under section 46(4) of the 1983 Act to ensure it is implemented as intended by the Oireachtas and not as decided on by An Post. That is the situation in An Post. The Minister of State will be aware that pensions are property rights and to interfere with a property right is repugnant to our Constitution.