It seems it’s not just Jack O’Connor, Joan Burton, Manuel Barroso and Archbishop Diarmuid Martin that have had enough of austerity. We learn this week that three employees of the NTMA and NAMA who are earning more than €200,000 and who were asked to waive 15% of their salaries are not agreeing the waivers.
In the Dail, the Sinn Fein finance spokesperson Pearse Doherty asked Minister for Finance Michael Noonan if NAMA staff earning more than €200,000 were continuing to waive 15% of their salaries.
You’ll recall that, for example, the NAMA CEO Brendan McDonagh has a basic salary of €430,000 but that, in 2012, he waived 15% which meant he was paid €365,500. But these waivers are not permanent, so on 1st January 2013, Brendan’s salary would have reverted to €430,000. As it happens, Brendan has agreed to a continuing waiver in 2013 so again this year, his basic salary is €365,500.
Minister Noonan told Deputy Doherty that 13 staff in the NTMA/NAMA are paid more than €200,000 a year and all but three are continuing to waive 15% of their salaries or the portion over €200,000, whichever is less. But there are three refuseniks, and given we are nearly a third of the way through the year, we must assume that these refuseniks have said “no” and mean “no”.
We don’t know the names of the refuseniks, but we do know that they don’t include either the CEO of the NTMA, John Corrigan or NAMA’s CEO Brendan McDonagh. So, workers in the public sector are threatened with legislation which might cut 7% from their pay regardless of pay-level and yet in the state agency, the NTMA and NAMA, the Government can’t do anything about the three staff who are paid more than €200,000 a year and who refuse a 15% pay waiver in 2013. Austerity is not for everyone, it seems.
The parliamentary question and response are here.
Deputy Pearse Doherty: To ask the Minister for Finance if he will confirm the status of salary waivers in 2013 at the National Treasury Management Agency and National Asset Management Agency, and specifically if 15% waivers by staff earning more than €200,000 are continuing; and if he will confirm if the Croke Park 2 agreement will mean additional cuts to salaries on top of the waivers..
Minister for Finance, Michael Noonan: On 21 December 2011, I wrote to the Chief Executive of the National Treasury Management Agency (NTMA) requesting all NTMA employees whose salary exceeds €200,000 to consider waiving at least 15% of their salary or such lesser amount of salary as exceeds €200,000. NAMA staff are employees of the NTMA. Under section 42 of the National Asset Management Agency Act 2009, the NTMA assigns staff to NAMA. All relevant NTMA employees agreed to waive such amounts during 2012.
I am informed by the NTMA that thirteen of its 522 employees fall within this category. Ten of these – including the Chief Executives of the NTMA, NAMA and the NDFA and the other six members of the NTMA senior management team – are continuing to waive such amounts.
With regard to the Croke Park 2 proposals, following the rejection by the Public Services Committee of Congress of the LRC proposals on a successor agreement to Croke Park, the Government will reflect on the outcome of the ballot and the manner in which the required payroll savings can be achieved this year. In that context it would be premature to comment on the way in which any proposed measures may affect a particular group of employees.
They will all be included in the CP2 cuts though.
@Otto, thanks for that. Somehow the last bit of the Minister’s response was truncated from the above blogpost. Now rectified. And it says that because CP2 has been rejected, the issue doesn’t arise!
Thanks for that. I would say that, if CP2 or 2.1 does arise, or pay cuts as the alternative, NAMA and NTMA staff will certainly be included…
I’d like to see these three divas try to find work in a private sector boutique.
If they are half decent they will, and if they are not then Nama shouldn’t employ them in the first place
Let’s not talk about one side vs. another – what about top vs. bottom on both sides?
Why not link executive-level ‘compensation’ to entry-level ‘salary’?