AIB employee perks

oppenheimer1

talla10 wrote: »

According to Fine Gael which was later confirmed by AIB, AIB bank spends €2,500 annually on each employee for their social and gym memberships when last week they described as crucial the decision to raise interest rates by 0.5%. This is an absolute disgrace why are we bailing out banks when they cant't even cut back on these kinds of perks when the rest of us cant put food on the table or pay or bills because of cutbacks and job losses??:mad::mad:

All decent employers do have some sort of social scheme. They don't do it for fun, the mentality being that healthy and happy employees are far less likely to pull sickies than those who are unhealthy and unhappy. Looking at the bigger picture, which it seems a lot of posters on boards are incapable of, it actually saves them money.

Laminations

dvpower wrote: »

Why stop at basic pay?
Surely if the company is broke, you would expect it to look at the basic pay rates to make savings since this accounts for the major component of the renumeration package.

dvpower wrote: »

Em, reducing the wages of all staff in AIB to the minimum wage would mean that all but the most lowly paid Bank Assistants would leave. The bank would cease to operate.

So after spending billions on bailing it out, you want to see it implode. That's bizarre.

I love when people answer their own questions

Now justify the perks. Are you saying staff would leave for the dole if they were denied subsidised gym memberships and golf outings?? Its not the amount thats in question, its the appropriateness of paying for these perks while being funded by the tax payer

Liam Byrne

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

All decent employers do have some sort of social scheme.

Define "decent employer" ? One that runs itself into the ground and has to beg for billions doesn't seem to fit the tag.

dvpower

Laminations wrote: »

Now justify the perks.

The perks form part of the overall renumerations package and, I assume, are included in the contract of employment.

I keep asking why people are focussing on this particiular element of pay and conditions but not on (for example):
core pay
pension contributions
annual leave allowances
stock issues
stock purchace schemes
health insurance
shift allowances
overtime allowances
on target earnings
sales commissions

For the record I think that the banks ought to directly reduce their pay costs, but how they do this should be a matter for HR.

Laminations wrote: »

Its not the amount thats in question, its the appropriateness of paying for these perks while being funded by the tax payer

Maybe the sight of a bank employee enjoying a workout down at Jackie Skellys is too much to take.

mikemac

talla10 wrote: »

According to Fine Gael which was later confirmed by AIB, AIB bank spends €2,500 annually on each employee for their social and gym memberships when last week they described as crucial the decision to raise interest rates by 0.5%. This is an absolute disgrace why are we bailing out banks when they cant't even cut back on these kinds of perks when the rest of us cant put food on the table or pay or bills because of cutbacks and job losses??:mad::mad:

Fine Gael jumped on the bandwagon when they picked up on a story from Liveline.
Why didn't they raise this before if there was outrage? It's not a secret

AIB does not spend €2,500 annually on each employee.

It should be reviewed but this whole issue was badly reported with people jumping at headline figures. Like this post talla10.

oppenheimer1

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Define "decent employer" ? One that runs itself into the ground and has to beg for billions doesn't seem to fit the tag.

A decent employer is one that treats its employees well usually one that gives more than statutory.

Jaysoose

feelingstressed wrote: »

Fine Gael jumped on the bandwagon when they picked up on a story from Liveline.
Why didn't they raise this before if there was outrage? It's not a secret

AIB does not spend €2,500 annually on each employee.

It should be reviewed but this whole issue was badly reported with people jumping at headline figures. Like this post talla10.

It has been already pointed out that the story is based on mistruths and false calculations, apparently a long standing term of employment for bank workers has caused the economic crisis..."they are not in the real world" "my taxes pay for this" etc..waste of time trying to argue in this thread.

Also the scary thing is this story broke on Joe Duffy and the original accusation was made by somebody who overheard a conversation in the pub... we are scraping the barrell with this.

mikemac

It'll be forgotton next week when we hear on Liveline that civil servants get free tea & coffee for their canteens.
I even heard from someone in a pub they have cake on Fridays

You mean my taxes pay for this :eek:;)

Laminations

feelingstressed wrote: »

It'll be forgotton next week when we hear on Liveline that civil servants get free tea & coffee for their canteens.
I even heard from someone in a pub they have cake on Fridays

You mean my taxes pay for this :eek:;)

Funny that. Taxes going to pay for public servants, it'd be odd indeed if the banks were paying for someone in the HSE to go play golf, and if and when they would they'd call it a loan. My problem isn't with social clubs, I agree with employer part funded socials, my problem is with inappropriate use of borrowed resources.

Liam Byrne

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

A decent employer is one that treats its employees well usually one that gives more than statutory.

Even when it doesn't have the cash to do so ?

oppenheimer1

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Even when it doesn't have the cash to do so ?

They do have the cash but thats another argument.

I'm all for these schemes if it means that they will save money in the long term when you take sick days into account. A happy workforce is more productive.

Don't be so short termist.

dingbat

feelingstressed wrote: »

This story broke on a three minute segment on Liveline on Tuesday.
Maybe broke isn't the correct term, the details were not secret but it wasn't being discussed before.
Goes to show what kind of influence that show has.

If they can get a current topic people feel strongly about it can explode over the media. And then you have the opposition front bench making comments.

And all from a 3 minute segment.
Just an observation, that's all

Tuesday morning's Examiner...

http://www.irishexaminer.com/home/stricken-aib-pays-staff-gym-and-golf-club-fees-127444.html

mikemac

My mistake, podcast was from Liveline, Monday August 8th.

Liveline had it Monday, Examiner on Tuesday so

Liam Byrne

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

They do have the cash but thats another argument.

It's not another argument. If they had the cash - and therefore we weren't forced by government to pay for this while trying to survive ourselves then I wouldn't have a problem with it.

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

I'm all for these schemes if it means that they will save money in the long term when you take sick days into account. A happy workforce is more productive.

Don't be so short termist.

It has nothing whatsoever to do with being "short termist". If they have the money, then fine......if they don't (and I'll await your explanation of why we have to give them billions if they do) then it's not acceptable.

Laminations

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

I'm all for these schemes if it means that they will save money in the long term when you take sick days into account. A happy workforce is more productive.

Don't be so short termist.

So the government should fund social clubs for all private sector businesses because if they don't staff will be less productive and we'd get more sick days? The government doesn't fund private sector staff morale schemes not because it's short termist but because that's not it's role, it's above and beyond the responsibility of the state and an inappropriate use of tax payees money

bondjames

Sure this is going on right across the private sector
A lot are getting there health insurance paid also
And that is before you even get to cash under the table for wages and backhands such as trips to man u for favors

SC024

The Taxpayer does not own AIB... Our public service is hardly capable of running or accounting for itself and your talking about doing that with AIB?? Come off it...

hinault wrote: »

Sorry pal - I thought we were discussing in AIB?
No/Yes?

AIB made commerically incorrect mistakes.
AIB employees and AIB managers made mistakes to the tune of billions.
If the taxpayer had not transferred billions in to AIB, AIB would have been put in to receivership/liquidation.
They are the facts.

The taxpayer has saved AIB.
It behoves AIB to account for every Euro of expenditure under such circumstances.

Incidentally, I also hold the view that the PS should also be accountable for every Euro it receives.

But in this instance we're discussing AIB.


As I said earlier two wrongs do not make a right.

Idbatterim

does anyone have any idea how much this scheme is costing AIB in total? When i first read this I immediately thought, yeah it is a piss take, but then again so is the PS. The difference is though, that with a private company they should be cutting absolute all waste expenditure out. As has been mentioned hundreds of jobs will be cut soon, how many could be saved if this nonsense was stopped?!

Liam Byrne

bondjames wrote: »

Sure this is going on right across the private sector
A lot are getting there health insurance paid also
And that is before you even get to cash under the table for wages and backhands such as trips to man u for favors

Which is irrelevant, because we're not bailing out "right across the private sector".

I actually agree with oppenheimer1 in general - these schemes do provide benefits....IF a company has money to pay for them and isn't running to the taxpayer to bail them out.

Tea drinker

bondjames wrote: »

Sure this is going on right across the private sector
A lot are getting there health insurance paid also
And that is before you even get to cash under the table for wages and backhands such as trips to man u for favors

No, I work for a yankee company and there is
No Paid Gym Membership
No Free health insurance (that would be BIK so an offence to not declare it)
No trips anywhere.

Basic holidays and wage packet only, no gold pension. Maybe in wealthy Irish companies it's different.

sure I'm sad if the bank employees would their perks removed in order for the company to survive IRL but that will never happen.

Arantza

I have worked as hotel receptionist,travel agent and finaly as Bank official in AIB and to be honest to work for AIB is the hardest job.There are targets,you have to be accurate and you have a supervisor on charge.Do not forget that we have to study for Institute of Banking exams+CPD hours+Desktop courses something that people from another EU countries as France,Spain...are exempted.My salary is close to the jobs that I had done before.It should be a program on TV where people works as a banker for one week and that way sees how is like ...

amen

Are you working in a branch(or HQ or a regional office) and if so are you front office or back office within the branch ?

coffee_cake

very old thread