Union Leaders Salaries Revealed

Sizzler

Er, well some of them!

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/frontpage/2009/1023/1224257294760.html

wrote:

THE LEADERS of the Irish National Teachers’ Organisation (INTO) and of the public sector workers’ union, Impact, had the highest salaries of trade unions surveyed by The Irish Times .

Seven out of the 16 trade unions contacted refused to disclose the pay levels of their general secretaries.

John Carr of the INTO has a salary of €172,000 while Peter McLoone of Impact has a salary of €171,313. Impact salaries are linked to public sector grades and Mr McLoone’s salary is the equivalent of that of the Cork County Manager.

The INTO has 35,000 members. Impact has 65,000 members, about half of whom are in the health sector, and a third in local government.

The general secretary of the Irish Congress of Trade Unions, David Begg, has a salary of €137,400. He earns an additional €27,700 from his work as a director of the Central Bank and as a Governor of the Irish Times trust. This work is done in his personal capacity, a spokesman said.

The general secretary of the Association of Secondary Teachers in Ireland, John White, has a salary of €144,000 while the general secretary of the Teachers’ Union of Ireland, Peter MacMenamin, is paid according to a grade system linked to Civil Service grades that sets his salary at between €131,748 and €150,712. The unions have 18,400 and 15,000 members respectively.

The three national executive officers of the State’s largest union, Siptu, each earned €124,895 in 2008. They are general president Jack O’Connor, vice-president Brendan Hayes, and general secretary Joe O’Flynn. The union has about 215,000 members.

The general secretary of the Civil and Public Services Union, Blair Horan, said he had a salary of “about €120,000”. The union has 14,000 members.

Seven trade unions did not disclose the salary levels of their general secretaries. These were: the Communications Workers’ Union (Steve Fitzpatrick); Mandate (John Douglas); the Irish Bank Officials’ Association (Larry Broderick); the TEEU (Owen Wills); the Irish Nurses’ Organisation (Liam Doran); the Public Service Executive Union (Tom Geraghty); and the Association of Higher Civil and Public Servants (Dave Thomas).

The website of the Certification Officer in the UK shows that the salary of the IBOA general secretary, Mr Broderick, was €133,518 last year.

The annual return for the union available on the website says he also benefited from pension contributions of €46,731, and car, bonus and VHI benefits that totalled a further €19,957. His total package was €200,206, according to the document. The IBOA has 21,776 members.

Ibec, the employers’ organisation, would not disclose the salary level of its director general Danny McCoy.

While I don't begrudge anybody their salary as invariably most people have to earn it, my observations on the above are that these guys are grossly overpaid for what they actually do.Couple that against the landscape of the people that they are representing and it makes it all the more gauling. You have Peter McLoone banging on about the hardship of his members on €30k a year while hes creaming in €170K+ a year :eek: What does he know about hardship If he is so concerned why doesnt he take a 50% pay cut and reduce his membership fees for the people who most need it, the people bankrolling his salary!

The most startling thing for me from the above is the 3 main people in SIPTU all earn identical salaries, just shy of €125k each ! Nice. How do they come up with such figures? Are SIPTU members entitled to vote on this
I wonder how there members would vote on it if it was put to them...

Rujib1

The local area reps of SIPTU are not exactly on the bread line either :cool: It's a cushy number, oh ...... and the expenses ........ and the milage ....... :P:P:P

mikemac

If they're losing tens of thousands of members to unemployment then eventually they'll have to take a cut as union subs decrease.

Though I think I read somewhere unemployed members can pay a reduced subscription if they wish. I probably read that here, not sure

Rujib1

Sizzler wrote: »

Er, well some of them!

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/frontpage/2009/1023/1224257294760.html



While I don't begrudge anybody their salary as invariably most people have to earn it, my observations on the above are that these guys are grossly overpaid for what they actually do.Couple that against the landscape of the people that they are representing and it makes it all the more gauling. You have Peter McLoone banging on about the hardship of his members on €30k a year while hes creaming in €170K+ a year :eek: What does he know about hardship If he is so concerned why doesnt he take a 50% pay cut and reduce his membership fees for the people who most need it, the people bankrolling his salary!

The most startling thing for me from the above is the 3 main people in SIPTU all earn identical salaries, just shy of €125k each ! Nice. How do they come up with such figures? Are SIPTU members entitled to vote on this
I wonder how there members would vote on it if it was put to them...

Suppose the principle of bringing down pay for senior public servants, would automatically mean that the gaffers in the unions with their pay directly linked to the self same senior public servants would have to take a similar cut:):) Now, now that wouldn't do at all, would it.
Lets get the marching boots out and fight for the cushy lives of public servants, civil servants, union bosses, etc, etc. It's your civic duty you know.

BennyLava

It's also interesting how the head of Impact was on the board of FAS, a more reputable organization you'll never find :rolleyes:,

All pigs with their heads in the trough, if ordinary PS workers think benchmarking was negotiated for them, these figures might give them pause for thought, benchmarking benefits those at the top allot more than ordinary workers

JonathanAnon

This issue has always got to me. They should accept the average wage of the people they represent and no more.

And secondly, all the money they are paid and not one of them would get a shave.

Tipp Man

Why oh why is this not getting enough attention from the media, from people interviewing them AND from their own members. Its a disgrace to hear them talking about FATCAT salaries when then themselves are some of the highest paid people in the country, how can they honestly have the sheer brass neck to come on TV calling for tax increases, They are the biggest hipocrits in this country, worse than FF

These fu##ers make my blood boil

Sizzler

Have a look at their profiles on the SIPTU website and the stellar CV's they have in the world of commerce -

Joe O'Flynn

http://www.siptu.ie/PressRoom/Profiles/JoeOFlynn/

Been in SIPTU since he was 22. A mechanic before that.

Brendan Hayes

http://www.siptu.ie/PressRoom/Profiles/BrendanHayes/

Has been involved in unions all his life.

Jack O'Connor

http://www.siptu.ie/PressRoom/Profiles/JackOConnor/

Employed in agriculture, local council and construction before going full time into unions.

If SIPTU went belly up next week where else would these lads get a €125k salary

The glaring deficiency of any of these men working outside the cushy bosom of the unions is stark in the extreme. How they feel confident to speak on behalf of their members conditions is beyond me when not one of them appears to have actually drank from the same cup.

ejmaztec

They're all obviously so guilt-ridden at receiving such financial rewards, they must always feel the need to justify their existence, more often than not by going OTT, and being completely unrealistic, in representing their members' interests.

ParkRunner

In fairness you would be hard pushed to find an organisation in the private sector with responsibility for at least 14,000 members where their chief earns less than 150,000!

P. Breathnach

EF wrote: »

In fairness ...

Sorry, EF, you lost your audience by starting your post with those words.

BroomBurner

Thanks for posting those Sizzler, I will email my union rep on Monday and ask for the salaries of those at the top, as they were one of the groups not to disclose such information.

This will be before I make any decision on the ballots that are due out soon.

Top earners in the PS are earning way too much, and that includes these lads. I'm sorry, EF, I've no sympathy for them, they've been far too quiet for too long (i.e. not earning their wage).

irish_bob

the unions heads are worth every penny , despite all the facts to the contary , they have managed to ( albeit with bald faced lies , rank propoganda and sheer chutzpah ) potray the public sector as being victimized , underpaid and disproportionatley effected by the rescession

goebels didnt have **** on the likes of o,connor , begg , doran and mcloone

ParkRunner

BroomBurner wrote: »

Thanks for posting those Sizzler, I will email my union rep on Monday and ask for the salaries of those at the top, as they were one of the groups not to disclose such information.

This will be before I make any decision on the ballots that are due out soon.

Top earners in the PS are earning way too much, and that includes these lads. I'm sorry, EF, I've no sympathy for them, they've been far too quiet for too long (i.e. not earning their wage).

I agree with you to some extent. I dont think there is any chance of them giving an impassioned Jim Larkinesque rallying speech from a soapbox. At the rally back in February they were all dressed to the hilt and meticulously groomed for their big day out. It was more like a St. Patrick's day parade than a rally to defend workers rights and pay.

nesf

EF wrote: »

In fairness you would be hard pushed to find an organisation in the private sector with responsibility for at least 14,000 members where their chief earns less than 150,000!

Hmm, TDs represent about 3 times that or so. Should they be on better wages then?


Actually EF, on a serious note, I think it's a pointless comparison you're making. If you want to talk about size it'd be more accurate to talk about the size of the union staff and managing them. It doesn't bother me either way what these guys get paid, I ain't a member of their unions so I don't consider it my business. I do wonder though what their salaries would be if they were set by a ballot of the membership rather than by the union officials themselves.

The Volt

So when is the Irish times going to post the pay of the heads of Aer Lingus, Ryanair, IBEC etc etc etc etc etc etc? Once again it's singling the unions out as an easy target. Disappointed in the Times for publishing this.

BroomBurner

Voltwad wrote: »

So when is the Irish times going to post the pay of the heads of Aer Lingus, Ryanair, IBEC etc etc etc etc etc etc? Once again it's singling the unions out as an easy target. Disappointed in the Times for publishing this.

Private companies are not paid for by the State, so it's none of our business what their members are paid.

P. Breathnach

BroomBurner wrote: »

Private companies are not paid for by the State, so it's none of our business what their members are paid.

Neither are trade unions.

dvpower

P. Breathnach wrote: »

Neither are trade unions.

Some of the public sector trade unions have their leaders' pay linked to public sector pay (not to the pay of the members they represent but to the pay of senior public servants).

Its entirely up to the unions and their members to set their pay scales, but it does leave a bit of a credibility gap if they have lifestyles far out of line with those they represent; a bit like TDs really.

P. Breathnach

dvpower wrote: »

Some of the public sector trade unions have their leaders' pay linked to public sector pay (not to the pay of the members they represent but to the pay of senior public servants).

Its entirely up to the unions and their members to set their pay scales, but it does leave a bit of a credibility gap if they have lifestyles far out of line with those they represent; a bit like TDs really.

If, as BroomBurner says, it is none of our business how much the heads of major companies are paid because they are not paid by the government, the same argument should apply to the head honchos in trade unions.

In fact, the pay of trade union executives is not really a matter for public attention, because it is an arrangement between the members and themselves. It's internal business.

Bodies like Aer Lingus and Ryanair are more properly regarded as being in the public domain because they are public limited companies, with a effective standing invitation to members of the public to purchase shares.

FlutterinBantam

P. Breathnach wrote: »

If, as BroomBurner says, it is none of our business how much the heads of major companies are paid because they are not paid by the government, the same argument should apply to the head honchos in trade unions.

In fact, the pay of trade union executives is not really a matter for public attention, because it is an arrangement between the members and themselves. It's internal business.:eek:

Bodies like Aer Lingus and Ryanair are more properly regarded as being in the public domain because they are public limited companies, with a effective standing invitation to members of the public to purchase shares.

John Q Taxpayer is perfectly entitled to know how much the remuneration of those involved in the "Social parternership" are pulling in I would opine, as are the taxpayers who are members of the Unions involved.

yoshytoshy

I find it worrying that the media are trying to point the finger at anyone in their way.
It's good that people know what the union leaders are paid ,but we shouldn't make ourselves (the public) so easy to read.

We all know what the right thing to do is ,we don't need to be told what to do.

dresden8

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

John Q Taxpayer is perfectly entitled to know how much the remuneration of those involved in the "Social parternership" are pulling in I would opine, as are the taxpayers who are members of the Unions involved.

Agreed.

When are we going to find out how much the IBEC and ISME leadership are paid.

Does any of this money come from public sector organisations paid for from the public purse?

Why do IBEC and ISME not publish a list of their membership on their respective websites?

Why are these social partners shrouded in secrecy?

nesf

dresden8 wrote: »

Agreed.

When are we going to find out how much the IBEC and ISME leadership are paid.

Does any of this money come from public sector organisations paid for from the public purse?

Why do IBEC and ISME not publish a list of their membership on their respective websites?

Why are these social partners shrouded in secrecy?

Because professional bodies like IBEC and ISME have traditionally not been expected to release renumberation details? They're under no obligation to release said details. Are the unions required to do so for some reason?

nesf

yoshytoshy wrote: »

I find it worrying that the media are trying to point the finger at anyone in their way.
It's good that people know what the union leaders are paid ,but we shouldn't make ourselves (the public) so easy to read.

We all know what the right thing to do is ,we don't need to be told what to do.

What does this even mean?

yoshytoshy

nesf wrote: »

What does this even mean?

It was a post pointed at RTE and their own wage rates. I hope it's not just myself ,but RTE seem to be pointing at everyone in the public light except for themselves.

nesf

yoshytoshy wrote: »

It was a post pointed at RTE and their own wage rates. I hope it's not just myself ,but RTE seem to be pointing at everyone in the public light except for themselves.

But what has that got to do with anything? The union leaders are paid what they are paid. Throwing dirt around what other people are paid doesn't change it. I don't get this obsession with pointing out X or Y is paid more or less. It doesn't change anything.

P. Breathnach

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

John Q Taxpayer is perfectly entitled to know how much the remuneration of those involved in the "Social parternership" are pulling in I would opine, as are the taxpayers who are members of the Unions involved.

[Please, if you quote my words in an edited version, be so kind as to make that clear. You might say "emphasis and silly face added", or somesuch.]

I did say that that the members of a union have a legitimate interest in what their officials are paid. How they express that interest is their own business.

I don't think it is the business of any of the rest of us. The reactions of some people (including people posting here) suggests to me that the wish to know what they are paid is not driven by any noble motives.

Overheal

A Bank of America CEO makes whut?











In comparison, you're sweating balls over Pennies here.

dresden8

nesf wrote: »

Because professional bodies like IBEC and ISME have traditionally not been expected to release renumberation details? They're under no obligation to release said details. Are the unions required to do so for some reason?

Are they receiving fees from public sector bodies like the ESB, I don't know.

If they are, they are receiving fees from the public sector and we deserve to know.

They are a vested interest.

We deserve to know what their interests are.

dresden8

Oh look, they are.

The ESB, which is a member of IBEC, said it had complied with a national agreement which was in force.

http://www.rte.ie/business/2009/0130/pay.html

IBEC members are paying increases to their own members while calling for the public sector to be screwed.

Surprise that.