Michael McGrath (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

123. To ask the Minister for Finance if contractual restrictions on former National Asset Management Agency staff working on property related matters with which they had previously had exposure during their tenure of employment are being revised for both new and existing staff; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [5367/15]

Michael Noonan (Limerick City, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

In light of changes made in the NTMA policy in 2013 in respect of notice periods and post-termination restrictions on employment, which relate to all NTMA employees including those assigned to NAMA under Section 42 of the NAMA Act, I consider that the existing contractual provisions relating to NAMA staff are appropriate. 

As previously advised to the House, in early 2013 the NTMA Chief Executive committed to a review of NTMA policy in respect of notice periods and post-termination restrictions on employment. Accordingly, the law firm Matheson was engaged by the NTMA to:

(i) advise on market norms in the private sector in terms of notice periods and post-termination restrictions;

(ii) assess the adequacy of the protections in the current NTMA employment contracts/codes of conduct where employees leave the NTMA to join a commercial entity in the private sector that might gain an unfair advantage by employing them; and

(iii) recommend changes that could be made in this area by the NTMA.

This review applied across all the NTMA's business areas, including NAMA. All NAMA staff are employees of the NTMA and under Section 42 of the National Asset Management Agency Act, 2009 the NTMA assigns staff to NAMA. Other than a small number of staff reassigned from other functions within the NTMA, NAMA staff are employed on the basis of specified purpose contracts their employment lasts for as long as NAMA requires their particular function - or fixed term contracts.

Matheson's principal recommendations were as follows:

- longer notice periods (3 to 6 months) to be introduced for middle and senior NTMA management employees.

- garden leave provisions to be included in all NTMA employment contracts.

- post-termination of employment restrictions (including cooling-off periods and non-solicitation of employees) to be considered on a case-by-case basis in respect of senior NTMA management employees in particular.

However, Matheson stressed that the imposition of such restrictions would need to be balanced against the NTMA's need to recruit good candidates for whom such restrictions may act as a significant disincentive to taking up employment with the NTMA. Furthermore, to maximise the prospects of enforceability, Matheson advised that any such restrictions would need to be drafted as narrowly as possible.

It was proposed by Matheson that any required changes resulting from these recommendations would be introduced for new NTMA employees and for existing NTMA employees on promotion. The NTMA accepted the Matheson proposals and is implementing them on this basis.

With regard to staff assigned to NAMA, it should be noted that the 3 month notice period and garden leave provision were already in operation since the first employees were assigned to NAMA at the start of 2010. A provision prohibiting certain activities in an employee's subsequent employment for a defined period of time has also been introduced on a case by case basis for new employees, in cases where employees have moved from fixed to specified purpose contracts, and on promotion.

The Deputy will also be aware of S202 provisions in the NAMA Act which are lifelong provisions with respect to confidentiality for all current and former staff assigned to NAMA and to members of the NAMA Board.