General secretary of the IFA on a possible €400,000 salary-Read mod note in post 2734

limo_100

rangler1 wrote: »

Rubbish answer, you tell me now, why does 100000 pay membership and then think for €80 that they can belittle neighbours. sad way of going on.
And doing it on here is sadder

lets see how many stop paying over the coarse of the next 12 months

rangler1

limo_100 wrote: »

lets see how many stop paying over the coarse of the next 12 months

Ideal time to close it down

Bass Reeves

rangler1 wrote: »

We were told con and smith didn't get on and we weren't allowed read his resignation, those that knew fielded it well and I was ready for out so I didn't give a ****e. Cons reluctance to out it has disappointed me about him. I thought he had more guts

If I remember rightly Con mentioned his disquiet about senior exec pay when he resigned. So the all powerful Executive Board were not ''allowed'' to read his resignation letter. Could this also be mean ''did not want to read''. The executive seemed to have accepted that Con and Pat Smith did not get on. We are also told that DD and Pat Smith did not get on. The general tone seemed that anyone that took an issue with his pay did not get on with him.

When Con Lucey resigned he had an issue with the independence of the audit Committee, it comprised of the present Treasurer, a former treasurer and Con. Con was no wild dog who when he barked you fired a gun at, rather he was a former highly respected staff member who highlighted his unease about certain issue's. However it seemed it was too easy for the ordinary members oversight committee (the Executive board of the IFA) to brush it under the carpet.

So Con is now to blame for the Executive's board failure to look for all the facts leading to his resignation. He send this letter to the the president, senior elected members and to Pat Smith. Question should be asked of those that received this letter.

It is very easy to be disappointed in Con and say he lacked guts. I think it is the executive board that has questions to be answered about ''guts''. They accepted the fielded answers very easy that took ''guts''. As I say it is easy to shoot the messenger.

Water John

Wasn't going to comment. But this rot has set in a long time ago. Milk quota moved around in the 80's to 'friendly farmers'. We then had it moving from Mayo to Cork, against the rules with IFA blessing. Payments biased to stock turnover, suiting specific types of farmer. No fair restructuring when there was an opportunity.
Poor representation on many coop boards. Most people don't have family members to look after the shop whilst himself/herself is away at meetings.
Dissillusionment has seen less and less attending IFA branch meetings and also coop agm's. A coop agm with one to two % of suppliers present is being called democracy.

feargale

I haven't read the thread and I'm sorry if I'm covering old ground. It's mind-boggling that the members of IFA's executive didn't know the amount involved. I would be very surprised if the salaries of lesser lights in the organisation were unavailable to them.

rangler1

Bass Reeves wrote: »

If I remember rightly Con mentioned his disquiet about senior exec pay when he resigned. So the all powerful Executive Board were not ''allowed'' to read his resignation letter. Could this also be mean ''did not want to read''. The executive seemed to have accepted that Con and Pat Smith did not get on. We are also told that DD and Pat Smith did not get on. The general tone seemed that anyone that took an issue with his pay did not get on with him.

When Con Lucey resigned he had an issue with the independence of the audit Committee, it comprised of the present Treasurer, a former treasurer and Con. Con was no wild dog who when he barked you fired a gun at, rather he was a former highly respected staff member who highlighted his unease about certain issue's. However it seemed it was too easy for the ordinary members oversight committee (the Executive board of the IFA) to brush it under the carpet.

So Con is now to blame for the Executive's board failure to look for all the facts leading to his resignation. He send this letter to the the president, senior elected members and to Pat Smith. Question should be asked of those that received this letter.

It is very easy to be disappointed in Con and say he lacked guts. I think it is the executive board that has questions to be answered about ''guts''. They accepted the fielded answers very easy that took ''guts''. As I say it is easy to shoot the messenger.

As I said I was well sick of farmers after the beef mess and I didn't give a ****e and in case you're wondering,i didn't claim expenses for any of those meetings so I was only there for my own entertainment.
I've said that some more should be f.....d out as well so you spinning my post will achieve nothing. of course con lacked guts as did all the people that knew why he resigned. HAPPY NOW
Point of interest for you, executive board is different from executive council which I was a member of. executive board was fielding the answers so they probably knew why con resigned

limo_100

rangler1 wrote: »

As I said I was well sick of farmers after the beef mess and I didn't give a ****e and in case you're wondering,i didn't claim expenses for any of those meetings so I was only there for my own entertainment.
I've said that some more should be f.....d out as well so you spinning my post will achieve nothing. of course con lacked guts as did all the people that knew why he resigned. HAPPY NOW

You are sick of beef farmers after the beef crisis how do you think the beef farmers feel about the crisis. The IFA jumped in guns blazing and came out like a scolded mouse afraid to squeak, they achieved noting all they did was strengthen the factorys because they now no that the IFA will huff and puff and then just go away when they milk as much pr out of it as they can.

Bass Reeves

rangler1 wrote: »

As I said I was well sick of farmers after the beef mess and I didn't give a ****e and in case you're wondering,i didn't claim expenses for any of those meetings so I was only there for my own entertainment.
I've said that some more should be f.....d out as well so you spinning my post will achieve nothing. of course con lacked guts as did all the people that knew why he resigned. HAPPY NOW

Ya I am happy now. Happy that those involved will start to accept responsibility for this mess. For too long there has been a shoot the messenger syndrome in a lot of organisations. Lots of good people have being sidelined over issue like this across many organisations by people who know how to run meetings.

Too often we fail to accept that our unwillingness to follow the hard path and ask the hard questions has conquences for those that do. It is too easy to blame key board warriors and too easy to cast aspersions on the whistleblowers.

rangler1

Bass Reeves wrote: »

Ya I am happy now. Happy that those involved will start to accept responsibility for this mess. For too long there has been a shoot the messenger syndrome in a lot of organisations. Lots of good people have being sidelined over issue like this across many organisations by people who know how to run meetings.

Too often we fail to accept that our unwillingness to follow the hard path and ask the hard questions has conquences for those that do. It is too easy to blame key board warriors and too easy to cast aspersions on the whistleblowers.

you're playing the anonymous card well yourself, too cowardly to say it face to face at a meeting.
I love your type, new account and all specially for this.
Is the SIU busy in your area

rangler1

limo_100 wrote: »

You are sick of beef farmers after the beef crisis how do you think the beef farmers feel about the crisis. The IFA jumped in guns blazing and came out like a scolded mouse afraid to squeak, they achieved noting all they did was strengthen the factorys because they now no that the IFA will huff and puff and then just go away when they milk as much pr out of it as they can.

I was at the meeting in Roscommon, IFA were pushed into protesting at factories, never should've started it, waste of our time, poor support from beef farmers

Farmer Ed

Water John wrote: »

Wasn't going to comment. But this rot has set in a long time ago. Milk quota moved around in the 80's to 'friendly farmers'. We then had it moving from Mayo to Cork, against the rules with IFA blessing. Payments biased to stock turnover, suiting specific types of farmer. No fair restructuring when there was an opportunity.
Poor representation on many coop boards. Most people don't have family members to look after the shop whilst himself/herself is away at meetings.
Dissillusionment has seen less and less attending IFA branch meetings and also coop agm's. A coop agm with one to two % of suppliers present is being called democracy.

That pretty much sums it up. Maybe at last farmers will finally wake up and stop paying them in the hope of getting cheap insurance and the like.

Panch18

Buford T. Justice V wrote: »

I doubt the ordinary farmer knew who Pat Smith was, not to mind the average Joe Soap.


The SFP was only instituted 15 years ago and was set up to take the emphasis away from a per animal payment to comply with WTO rules, iirc, and onto an area payment.

I don't remember any farmer complaining at the time as they were generally getting exactly what they had gotten the years before. As time moved on, though, I agree the system became more and more unfit for purpose and badly needed something similar, at least, to the current system and perhaps to the level of the original proposals.

I fail to see what the level of payment an heir to a foreign monarchy has to do with the IFA? Larry Goodman claimed for slaughter premium in the years of premium and was, under the rules, the exact same rules that farmers were applying under, entitled to the huge payments he was getting. The morality of that payment, though, I wouldn't even try to justify but those rules were available to every single person in the country. Unless you wish to enact a European law to cater for one individual, I fail to see how the IFA can be blamed for one individual benefiting more than others who had the same opportunity to benefit.

On your point about the loss of family farms, that has been going on since famine times, sometimes faster, sometimes slower but always inevitable as our economy developed from a largely subsistence farming model right up to a largely commercial one today.

There is always a push/pull factor at work in the agricultural labour force, with poor returns and prices pushing more from farming and a relatively higher income from off farm labour providing a pull. Again, that has been going on since agriculture began to dominate over hunter gatherer cultures and will continue tomorrow if the IFA was disbanded or even if it was never founded.

While we may all hanker over the supposed death of the family farm, the vast majority of Irish farms are still family farms. But commercial pressure will force more and more of them to convert to a more 'commercial' model, regardless of the IFA.

On your point about the IFA only campaigning on issues they have already found out they were getting, where did you think the campaigning was carried out? Every single day there are a multitude of campaigns going on, some with close deadlines, some with further away ones. The IFA has a limited amount of political capital to spend and have to spend it wisely, similar to a farmer putting up a slatted house. Throwing all the funds at one issue today would lead to a lack of capital available to throw a roof over the shed. It's very easy to be an internet campaigner but issues are sorted in discussions with the relevant parties, and not on a thread on an internet forum.

If you went to meetings, you would be aware of the 10-12 different headline issues that are discussed at a meeting as they are the most pertinent at that particular time and space is available for the discussion of other issues later. A standard, simple formula with space available for anyone to highlight an issue of concern to them or their area or their sector. Did you or anyone else raise any of those issues at meetings?

I really don't think I can explain how the whole process works any simpler than that. I don't always agree with the stance that the IFA take on issues but I go and make my voice heard. How anyone can sit at home and not take part in the discussion of an issue and then complain their voice isn't being heard is a concept that I struggle to understand?

Great post BTJ, very well put

The IFA do a lot of good for farmers which more often then not goes unrecognised and there are certainly elements of the last couple of budgets which have IFA written all over them

The simple fact is that this salary is way way too high, it's not just a little too high, it's about 5 times what it should be and is a real kick in the face for farmers. There is no getting away from that. So time to start again and remember where th funding is coming from

red bull

rangler1 wrote: »

Then why do they pay membership, do they orgasm when they abuse people who try to help, is that how they get their kicks in life. did they never hear of voting with their feet. It's a sad way of going on.tbh
At least if the membership nos reduced people could get back to farming when the money runs out

Rangler1 why do you keep digging holes for yourself ?
Wrong was done, greedy Smith looked for too much, some people agreed to give it,wrong call.
I hope the IFA can survive this and learn to be lean on salaries and represent all farmers. Tough call

Farmer Ed

rangler1 wrote: »

you're playing the anonymous card well yourself, too cowardly to say it face to face at a meeting.
I love your type, new account and all specially for this.
Is the SIU busy in your area

To be fair the reason most farmers have given up going to meetings is because they have become nothing more than stage managed spectacles. where people who have a different point of view are well kept under wraps and not allowed make any meaningful contribution. Hardly fair to knock people who are simply disillusioned and intelligent enough to know that trying to get a fair hearing at one of these stage managed events is like trying to put out a fire by trowing petrol on it. Its only out of pure frustration that people are on here and have given up on meetings. IFA have only themselves to blame for that.

boggerman1

cute geoge wrote: »

What does one have to do to cancel the levy been taken out of the cremary cheque every month

Ring ur co-op and tell them to stop taking it.

rangler1

Farmer Ed wrote: »

To be fair the reason most farmers have given up going to meetings is because they have become nothing more than stage managed spectacles. where people who have a different point of view are well kept under wraps and not allowed make any meaningful contribution. Hardly fair to knock people who are simply disillusioned and intelligent enough to know that trying to get a fair hearing at one of these stage managed events is like trying to put out a fire by trowing petrol on it. Its only out of pure frustration that people are on here and have given up on meetings. IFA have only themselves to blame for that.

Not in our county, I knew from here that doing county chair wasn't worth the bother and left it out there that I didn't want the job until the agm, so saying that we're not allowing anyone else in doesn't apply here, Then at the AGM I said if there wasn't an improvement in support that I'd be gone and I did go. A 30 yr old fancied the job and got it. Plenty of opportunity there for change. Who'd want anything to do with it...as I say cannon fodder

Bass Reeves

rangler1 wrote: »

you're playing the anonymous card well yourself, too cowardly to say it face to face at a meeting.
I love your type, new account and all specially for this.
Is the SIU busy in your area

Yes shoot the messenger again. I am not an IFA member left years ago as I saw the way it was going. Had seen similarities with a union I was involved with year before as the top of the organisation grew all powerful. As you say I know your type as well. The local enforcer for the top brass. Wondering why no one new was coming along when in reality any lad with a bit of cop on could see what was happening.

I always notice lads that lose the argument in this sort of situation attack the man not the ball. Yes shoot the messenger.

Farmer Ed wrote: »

To be fair the reason most farmers have given up going to meetings is because they have become nothing more than stage managed spectacles. where people who have a different point of view are well kept under wraps and not allowed make any meaningful contribution. Hardly fair to knock people who are simply disillusioned and intelligent enough to know that trying to get a fair hearing at one of these stage managed events is like trying to put out a fire by trowing petrol on it. Its only out of pure frustration that people are on here and have given up on meetings. IFA have only themselves to blame for that.

This is the reality most lads with any intelligence willing to try to change the organisation realize that you cannot change it from the bottom up. If you got a county to change we would see exactly what happened to the Co-op member who was not allowed on the board even thought he was elected on to it.

DD was lucky in that he knew where the body was buried. But in 6 months the wagons will be circled again at executive Council level. The rebels will be excluded if they were ever really rebels. It might only be as the expression goes ;;a falling out of thieves''

Water John

There are two or three issues here.
One, is the extraordinary pay and arrangement.
Two,The lack of transparency and openness.
Three, is the fact that this reaches right through to coop structures and others.

Tackling One; Reading the pay of CEO's of voluntary charities earlier in the year the one that stood out for me was Fergus Finlay, Barnardos. His salary was 88K, he could draw a second salary of 30K but instead gave it back. Oddly, this tunes into what Farmer Ed said about high pay getting less reward. I did not say Fergus Finlay was ENTITLED to a second salary. This word must outlawed, far too much feeling of entitlement still around.

rangler1

Bass Reeves wrote: »

Yes shoot the messenger again. I am not an IFA member left years ago as I saw the way it was going. Had seen similarities with a union I was involved with year before as the top of the organisation grew all powerful. As you say I know your type as well. The local enforcer for the top brass. Wondering why no one new was coming along when in reality any lad with a bit of cop on could see what was happening.

I always notice lads that lose the argument in this sort of situation attack the man not the ball. Yes shoot the messenger.




This is the reality most lads with any intelligence willing to try to change the organisation realize that you cannot change it from the bottom up. If you got a county to change we would see exactly what happened to the Co-op member who was not allowed on the board even thought he was elected on to it.

DD was lucky in that he knew where the body was buried. But in 6 months the wagons will be circled again at executive Council level. The rebels will be excluded if they were ever really rebels. It might only be as the expression goes ;;a falling out of thieves''

sad effort, keyboard coward again, we all know dd is coming again and you're one of pets. but dd installed smith, was deputy from 2005 and like he said about downey this morning,he knew berkerys deal after 24hrs in the job, which by all accounts was better than smiths.
At least the next fight has to be face to face, no cowards

angusangus

limo_100 wrote: »

Hes backed into a corner today and he's coming out swinging in fairness sure I suppose you quit rangler as you got sick of making pat smiths tea all day i hoped he tipped you at xmas

This is the guy that held an umbrella over pat smith two years ago at the ploughing championships on the Thurday as it pissed! Keeping pat dry as he got soaked himself

Water John

not have the support

rangler1

angusangus wrote: »

This is the guy that held an umbrella over pat smith two years ago at the ploughing championships on the Thurday as it pissed! Keeping pat dry as he got soaked himself
sad sad man

you got the wrong person. or are you talking about deane......such rubbish

angusangus

rangler1 wrote: »

you got the wrong person. or are you talking about deane......such rubbish

Its you alright! I'm not going to give personal details to expose you but it was you I was talking to pat about another matter and you were there standing like his puppy dog in the rain holding an umbrella over his head while it rained on you

rangler1

angusangus wrote: »

Its you alright! I'm not going to give personal details to expose you but it was you I was talking to pat about another matter and you were there standing like his puppy dog in the rain holding an umbrella over his head while it rained on you

pictures or gtfo,
Unlikely to be Thursday, would always be there late thurs to collect a stand, very seldom venture too far from sheep tent
I could say you were there licking up to him if you like

Water John

There has been too much politicing in the IFA. Its all about jockeying for position. Lets raise this issue it might get me prominence. The other side is, this issue everyone thought they could bury. The interview by Keelan Shanley on RTE1 10.00am yesterday with Pat O'Toole of IFJ revealed a lot. He talks about the Grass Ceiling in Ag journalism. This would not have come to a head, publicly, only for DD going outside ag journalists. I suppose he has broken that omerta and will pay in time for that.
It is worth going back and reading Pat O'Toole News Correspondent in last weeks IFJ. He outlines the issue but in the second half of his piece goes to bat for Downey. This is very poor journalism. Mixing up news reporting with opinion.
Even after yesterdays meeting we can see DD trying to put it back in the box. But its out now, its giving voice to a lot of frustrated and angry people. Fundamental review of IFA needed. Not fit for purpose, ad Kowtow detailed well earlier.

Buford T. Justice XIX

Panch18 wrote: »

Great post BTJ, very well put

The IFA do a lot of good for farmers which more often then not goes unrecognised and there are certainly elements of the last couple of budgets which have IFA written all over them

The simple fact is that this salary is way way too high, it's not just a little too high, it's about 5 times what it should be and is a real kick in the face for farmers. There is no getting away from that. So time to start again and remember where th funding is coming from

Thanks, Panch.

Look, I said from the start that the reported figure was an assumed figure and to wait till the figure came out before anyone is hung. Looking back over the thread before the figure came out is quite enlightening. People had their minds made up before Con Lucey even resigned, which displays a bias in their argument from the get-go.

The figure of 535,000 from last year is astounding, tbh, that's 21 times the average salary of a farmer. Even his pension contribution, 150k(:eek:), is six times the average farmers take home pay. How many of us here will come anywhere close to that figure for a pension in total, not to mind one single contribution to that individual from those same farmers?

There has to be some justification given for the final figures given to Pat Smith, it surely cannot have been plucked from someones a*se?

When you're explaining, you're losing and the IFA needs to come out and explain how this figure was arrived at.

And the people who arrived at that figure need to be center stage and right in front of the people they work for and are supposed to represent to do it.

And then they need to resign and the IFA need to have a long hard look at exactly how they are conducting their/our business.

The branch AGM is next week and the county chairman will be there and I imagine there will be some tough questions thrown at him. And I would hope not just by me! But probably most will be in the local giving their all to the barman instead of actually questioning someone who can carry their disgust back to Bluebell. Sometimes I really wonder about farmers:(

kowtow

Honestly listening to all this political cr**p is liking watching two dogs fight over a stolen hunk of meat.

It is surely clear now to even the blindest among us that such salaries were utterly unwarranted - a gross breach of trust perpetrated on the entire membership which the executive sought to keep secret for their own ends.

I don't give a fig who is bad and who is better, who employed who, and why anyone spoke out - I'm just grateful that the whole thing is out in the open so that the farming community can see these people for what they are. The fact that the IFA has done some good - which it has, and has lots of hardworking volunteers - which it does - only makes their actions worse.

Make no mistake, these people who would line their pockets at the expense of their own community and attempt to excuse it or cover it up do no good at all for farmers, recent events alone will have done a lot of harm to the image of farming in the public eye.

I don't care how good they are at politics, I want honest men speaking for me and these are not them. I am sure I am not alone in this.

farmertipp

Farmer Ed wrote: »

Ranger I was very much involved in putting forward a motion over two years ago to a CoOp SGM. If passed it would have forced the Co Op to implement something that has been a fictional IFA policy for decades, Namely independent milk testing. I personally had gone to a lot of trouble getting a quote from a lab and I was put forward a motion that would see independent milk testing introduced in the Co Op in a matter of weeks.Can you guess who were the first two you people to stand up to oppose the motion? You'll never guess. The then IFA national chairman of the liquid milk committee and was quickly followed by a county chairman. Now forgive me but how in that particular situation did IFA not cause farmers pain? The only thing I can think of is they were more concerned with the money the Co Op was collecting for them and their own political careers than representing farmers. But please don't accuse me of not trying to do anything to better farmers incomes. I have tried and found the IFA to be one of the main obstacles.

You also tried to stop that coop from espanding its processing capacity 2years ago.where would we be now if the likes of you got your way?

rangler1

farmertipp wrote: »

You also tried to stop that coop from espanding its processing capacity 2years ago.where would we be now if the likes of you got your way?

just shows you, you never get the true story on here, thanks for your input.
it galls me when I have to look for the true story when someone comes with a problem

Water John

Ah Farmer Tipp is back. We know who you represent and are, Dairygold etc. Another CEO on half to one million. Coop going down the swanee for the second time in ten years. Plant has to be be both justified and value for money. Mallow in neither.
Word coming from senior Glanbia sources are that they will take you over. You have over reached and the banks wont give you any more. Hence the price of milk to the farmer.
You are right again KowTow. It needs a real review. We can go to meetings and go blue in the face letting Bluebell know. That will carry zero again, sadly. Don't think they will ever get it with the present set up.

farmertipp

Water John wrote: »

Ah Farmer Tipp is back. We know who you represent and are, Dairygold etc. Another CEO on half to one million. Coop going down the swanee for the second time in ten years. Plant has to be be both justified and value for money. Mallow in neither.
Word coming from senior Glanbia sources are that they will take you over. You have over reached and the banks wont give you any more. Hence the price of milk to the farmer.
You are right again KowTow. It needs a real review. We can go to meetings and go blue in the face are letting Bluebell know. That will carry zero again, sadly. Don't think they will ever get it with the present set up.

Again more misinformation .. would you put a time line on the takeover? ?dg paying 25.5 cent per litre @3.6 fat and 3.3 pr . What are glanbia paying for October?

rangler1

Back is better now and I have to do some work
Pat was a great tactician and negotiator.
He got me a payment of ten grand on a problem of mine that I'd given up on solving.
Only condition was that I had to publish an apology.
and you know the job that was;)

kevthegaff

I wonder about all IFA committee members, why was there not curiosity over top level remunerations? Who was actually surprised on here that his pay packet was so high... I believe it doesn't stop and the chief executive

rangler1

kevthegaff wrote: »

I wonder about all IFA committee members, why was there not curiosity over top level remunerations? Who was actually surprised on here that his pay packet was so high... I believe it doesn't stop and the chief executive

Was amused at Derek Deane this morning saying that the president deserved every penny he got........probably ensuring the trough stayed full till he got there

Water John

DD is trying to put the genie back in the bottle

fastrac

Wait til Monday when the subscriptions will really start to be cancelled. Nothing else will work.The Agristocracy need the numbers to pay the bills.Thats why deals were done with journalists, insurance,accountants,service providers etc. Don' be fooled by next weeks PR spin either.

Water John

This isn't a milk price thread but we well know the Dairygold price Farmer Tipp. Its West Cork you should be looking to. Four good CEO's getting a bit north of 100K each, getting less in total than your poor one. Look at Drinagh accounts. The expenses of each Director are given clearly. Nobody bedrudges them what they get for the day away from the farm and the reponsibility of the position. Thats how it should be all round.
Rangler1 we know the difference between Executive and National Council. Downey, O'Leary and Bergin should go. also a radical overhaul is it is to survive in a meaningful way.

rangler1

Water John wrote: »

This isn't a milk price thread but we well know the Dairygold price Farmer Tipp. Its West Cork you should be looking to. Four good CEO's getting a bit north of 100K each, getting less in total than your poor one. Look at Drinagh accounts. The expenses of each Director are given clearly. Nobody bedrudges them what they get for the day away from the farm and the reponsibility of the position. Thats how it should be all round.
Rangler1 we know the difference between Executive and National Council. Downey, O'Leary and Bergin should go. also a radical overhaul is it is to survive in a meaningful way.

That's what I'm saying, they kept the information from us, no one'll trust anyone now, and how much were the regional chairmen involved.
Those that told us lies( or refused to tell the truth) are open season now.
Anyone going to branch agms from this week should demand their resignation.
obviously it didn't happen yesterday

farmertipp

Water John wrote: »

This isn't a milk price thread but we well know the Dairygold price Farmer Tipp. Its West Cork you should be looking to. Four good CEO's getting a bit north of 100K each, getting less in total than your poor one. Look at Drinagh accounts. The expenses of each Director are given clearly. Nobody bedrudges them what they get for the day away from the farm and the reponsibility of the position. Thats how it should be all round.
Rangler1 we know the difference between Executive and National Council. Downey, O'Leary and Bergin should go. also a radical overhaul is it is to survive in a meaningful way.

So we should not be looking at glanbia taking dg over so? Glanbia paying 24 cents for oct.a market problem at the moment. I don't know what the chief executive of dg earns but neither do you. Às for ps I think it's not his fault ifa in their wisdom paid him a kings ransom.

Water John

I would not dissuade anyone from acting on their anger and cancelling membership.
I think to achieve some result. The key people must resign. I would give IFA then four weeks to come up with a radical restructuring plan, not some ICOS rameis. If there is not result by 1st Jan all funding in every form is withdrawn

blue5000

The best way to get a message to blubell now is to stop the gravy train flowing, cancel sub, cancel eif levies, grassroots are fed up being p1ssed on.

rangler1

blue5000 wrote: »

The best way to get a message to blubell now is to stop the gravy train flowing, cancel sub, cancel eif levies, grassroots are fed up being p1ssed on.

just messing, organisation will probably survive two years on the emergency fund.......if they behave

Water John

This needs major change. Cutting a head off the Hydra will not change the culture of the organisaiton. Henchy's 'retirement from Dairygold did not change much.

farmertipp

Water John wrote: »

This needs major change. Cutting a head off the Hydra will not change the culture of the organisaiton. Henchy's 'retirement from Dairygold did not change much.

Paying a cent and a half more than glanbia all the Same

Water John

As I said West Cork is the benchmark, always was. Glanbia always went for lower milk and grain price. No boast there. The Henchy court case opened a door. A poor CEO is not worth any money. I don't care largely what the CEO of Dairygold is paid but it should be in the public domain.

That's the wider problem. Disclose CEO earnings also Directors renumeration and expenses. If someone is worth it I won't complain and most people wont, Forget the bar stool idiots they never count.

farmertipp

Water John wrote: »

As I said West Cork is the benchmark, always was. Glanbia always went for lower milk and grain price. No boast there. The Henchy court case opened a door. A poor CEO is not worth any money. I don't care largely what the CEO of Dairygold is paid but it should be in the public domain.

That's the wider problem. Disclose CEO earnings also Directors renumeration and expenses. If someone is worth it I won't complain and most people wont, Forget the bar stool idiots they never count.

And who are the idiots in your opinion? Dg has gone from strength to strength since 09.i think current dg management and board have demonstrated massive ability in how they have moved forward since.the only people with a problem are the bar stool idiots who called an expensive egm and were roundly defeated in the vote.. by not accepting democratic results and still bickering away about it even now

Greengrass1

rangler1 wrote: »

He won't starve, he wouldn't have left so easy if he had nothing, probably got a year in lieu of notice as well, he definitely heldall the cards when he was leaving

A yr my hole. I wouldn't be surprised in the slightest if he was given up wards of a million to walk

Water John

Dairygold is going from strength to strength you say. Not what I hear on the ground. Agri sales are massively down. Mallow plant costing twice the same size plant in Lecpatrick 83.5M versus 42M. That and not 'the market' s why poor price in Dairygold.
But this is the spin we will also expect next week from the IFA. Issue over, nothing to see here lads.

Milked out

Water John wrote: »

Dairygold is going from strength to strength you say. Not what I hear on the ground. Agri sales are massively down. Mallow plant costing twice the same size plant in Lecpatrick 83.5M versus 42M. That and not 'the market' s why poor price in Dairygold.
But this is the spin we will also expect next week from the IFA. Issue over, nothing to see here lads.

I assume you'll air your grievances at the dg area meetings in the next month. Explain how it's the building of the plant to process my milk and not the market that's causing the poor milk price?

farmertipp

Water John wrote: »

Dairygold is going from strength to strength you say. Not what I hear on the ground. Agri sales are massively down. Mallow plant costing twice the same size plant in Lecpatrick 83.5M versus 42M. That and not 'the market' s why poor price in Dairygold.
But this is the spin we will also expect next week from the IFA. Issue over, nothing to see here lads.

Says you??? Agri sales have held up well instead of that..agri sales heavily influenced by good weather and milk price. Same for every one else. Can you quantify ''massively down ''?