Government vs DAA, government wins

zootroid

The Chief Executive of the Dublin Airport Authority has said he will forego a performance-related bonus of €106,000 for 2010, in 'light of prevailing national economic circumstances'.

In a statement issued this evening, the Board of the DAA said it had approved the bonus to Declan Collier based on the achievement of performance related targets.

The decision has been welcomed by Minister for Transport Leo Varadkar.

He said the semi-State sector, like all sections of society and the economy, will have to undergo a significant transformation in order to survive and prosper, requiring leadership and personal sacrifice from the top.

Earlier, the Minister for Finance has said the Board should consider why they should remain in their positions, when they disagree on the issue of pay with the wishes of the owner of the Authority - the taxpayers.

His comments come two days after it was revealed that the DAA has decided to delay, but not cancel, a performance-related payment of €106,000 to Mr Collier, for 2010.

Mr Varadkar indicated that unless the decision is reversed, he would not reappoint seven of the Authority's directors when their terms expire at the end of the year.

He said it is not in his power to sack any board members of the DAA, but wants to make sure all boards respect State policy.

Mr Noonan said it was a pity that Mr Collier and the Board broke from the consensus that all senior people in the public service have to give moral leadership and be subject to pay caps.

According to the DAA's annual report for last year, Mr Collier took a 12% cut in his basic salary, but his total package was up on 2009.

The DAA said only €21,900 in performance-related bonuses were actually paid to Mr Collier last year, in respect of 2009.

The bonus payment for 2010 was deferred to reflect current Government policy.

But Minister Varadkar said it was the Government's clear policy that no bonuses should be made for 2010.

The Irish Mail on Sunday reported that Mr Varadkar said he will not reappoint seven of the directors on the DAA board, who are due to have their terms renewed at the end of the year, unless the full bonus payment to Mr Collier is returned.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/0626/daa.html

Fair play to Varadkar and Noonan. Bonuses of 100k are obscene, especially in a public sector monopoly. Perhaps if wages and bonuses of this size didn't exist, landing charges might be lower and we'd have more visitors coming to the country.

Einhard

zootroid wrote: »

http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/0626/daa.html

Fair play to Varadkar and Noonan. Bonuses of 100k are obscene, especially in a public sector monopoly. Perhaps if wages and bonuses of this size didn't exist, landing charges might be lower and we'd have more visitors coming to the country.

Thing is, the man achieved the targets that were set out for him. AFAIK, it wasn't one of these "turn up for work" bonuses. I don't know whether the targets were particularly stringent, but I don't have a problem with large bonuses as long as fairly exacting standards and targets are met. I'd rather relatively low ages and high bonus than vice versa.

Head The Wall

The DAA's parent company i.e. the govt is broke so all bonus payments are off, it's as simple as that. Yes he met his targets but unless it helped Head Office balance the books then they can't afford it.

PhatPiggins

Einhard wrote: »

Thing is, the man achieved the targets that were set out for him. AFAIK, it wasn't one of these "turn up for work" bonuses. I don't know whether the targets were particularly stringent, but I don't have a problem with large bonuses as long as fairly exacting standards and targets are met. I'd rather relatively low ages and high bonus than vice versa.

Yeah fair play to him he put up the price of everything from airport charges to a cup of coffee. Must have spent months working out that strategy.

Passanger numbers are down year on year on year and the solution is to make it more expensive to travel to Ireland :rolleyes:

ninty9er

Head The Wall wrote: »

The DAA's parent company i.e. the govt is broke so all bonus payments are off, it's as simple as that. Yes he met his targets but unless it helped Head Office balance the books then they can't afford it.

Ha! Try that in any multinational subsidiary and you'd have a war on your hands. Doesn't matter as long as your division makes its money.

Einhard

Head The Wall wrote: »

The DAA's parent company i.e. the govt is broke so all bonus payments are off, it's as simple as that. Yes he met his targets but unless it helped Head Office balance the books then they can't afford it.

Well far enough, up to a point. The man met his targets in his company, and according to the news the other night, DAA made a profit. It's arguable that, without him meeting his targets, the profit wouldn't have been as large.

PhatPiggins wrote: »

Yeah fair play to him he put up the price of everything from airport charges to a cup of coffee. Must have spent months working out that strategy.

Passanger numbers are down year on year on year and the solution is to make it more expensive to travel to Ireland :rolleyes:

I don't really think the success of DAA can be measured by the price of your pot of tea...

As I said, the company made a sizable profit in a rough trading environment, and saw the opening of T II. I'm not saying he should definitely have received a bonus, but I don't like this blanket hysteria and outrage that accompanies these things. Sometimes, bonuses can be good things.

Dannyboy83

Einhard wrote: »

Well far enough, up to a point. The man met his targets in his company, and according to the news the other night, DAA made a profit. It's arguable that, without him meeting his targets, the profit wouldn't have been as large.

I'm not saying he should definitely have received a bonus, but I don't like this blanket hysteria and outrage that accompanies these things. Sometimes, bonuses can be good things.

I think you have a fair point.

For me the bottom line is that the government are broke, so it cannot be justified from increased expenditure. I am fully behind Varadkar in this regard.

But he should still get the bonus promised by the DAA.
It's up to the DAA to do it through cost savings in the DAA itself.
So regardless of the pot of money, they need to reorganize the distribution of this money.

I would see not rewarding achievers, as being equally as complacent as continuing to carry under-achievers.
I think this is the minor issue tho.

The more major issue is the bonus culture itself.
Why are performance related bonuses still being offered (and on such a wide and large scale)?

Declan Collier probably won't go the extra mile to met his targets this year, since he knows there is no bonus in store. And who would blame him?
But there should have never been any bonus offered in the first place.
It should have been part of his normal job description.

later12

Declan Collier is still a member of the remuneration and auditing committees at AIB, which is not itself a teriffic piece of PR for the man.

Nevertheless, I think Collier was put in a difficult position by the board of the DAA. He was given a set of targets, and told that upon reaching them he would be awared a surplus payment. He would have been slightly mad to have rejected a EUR 100,000 payment, in my opinion. I am not sure I would want some sort of saint who is allergic to money at the top of an organisation like the DAA who are already operating in a very rough environment.

Head The Wall

DAA made 33 million profit but have 40 million to pay in interest. This shows what a joke the decision was.

Colliers statement also said he would forego his bonus for 2010 only

fred252

what's all this about a "rough trading environment"? this is a state monopoly. am i missing something?

fred252

ninty9er wrote: »

Ha! Try that in any multinational subsidiary and you'd have a war on your hands. Doesn't matter as long as your division makes its money.

have you ever worked in a multinational subsidiary? this is precisely what happens. employees are disgruntled but are met with the "you should be happy to still have a job" argument and then life goes on.

Nijmegen

There's two sides to this coin: On the one hand, the government is broke.

On the other hand, this guy is the CEO of a commercial company, was headhunted for his experience and talent, and has turned a profit.

I think that we need to strike a balance between paying 'show up for work' bonuses and paying serious money to attract serious talent.

What if we identify, say, the person who has reformed and run a health care service we really admire, and want to reform our own broken one? I'd pay good money for that person.

I'm not in favour of paying great money to people because they have 30 years service, regardless of quality. But there's a distinction there between government pay for all, and government pay for talent.

Of course, the government could just offload its commercial semi-states. What business does it have operating a TV station or a shopping centre that happens to be an airplane terminal?

Let it hang on to the rights for infrastructure, but let private businesses operate the services. Pay us a fee for the pleasure of owning a runway and let them make whatever profit or loss they like.

InigoMontoya

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

I think you have a fair point.

For me the bottom line is that the government are broke, so it cannot be justified from increased expenditure. I am fully behind Varadkar in this regard.

But he should still get the bonus promised by the DAA.
It's up to the DAA to do it through cost savings in the DAA itself.
So regardless of the pot of money, they need to reorganize the distribution of this money.

I would see not rewarding achievers, as being equally as complacent as continuing to carry under-achievers.
I think this is the minor issue tho.

The more major issue is the bonus culture itself.
Why are performance related bonuses still being offered (and on such a wide and large scale)?

Declan Collier probably won't go the extra mile to met his targets this year, since he knows there is no bonus in store. And who would blame him?
But there should have never been any bonus offered in the first place.
It should have been part of his normal job description.

I would blame him. His basic salary is €308,500*. I think that's enough for anyone to strive to meet their targets. I do so for roughly 13% of that much. :pac:

*And his total package last year was €612,500

oflahero

Einhard wrote: »

Thing is, the man achieved the targets that were set out for him.

Any goofball can meet his targets if he jacks up landing charges by 40% in a monopoly situation. How this Collier clown can justify drawing even his basic salary is beyond me.

Dannyboy83

InigoMontoya wrote: »

I would blame him. His basic salary is €308,500*. I think that's enough for anyone to strive to meet their targets. I do so for roughly 13% of that much. :pac:

*And his total package last year was €612,500

If those figures are accurate, it just shows how ridiculous the bonus culture actually is.

InigoMontoya

Should have posted the link:

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/collier-remains-mute-on-100k-bonus-158993.html

waster81

Head The Wall wrote: »

The DAA's parent company i.e. the govt is broke so all bonus payments are off, it's as simple as that. Yes he met his targets but unless it helped Head Office balance the books then they can't afford it.

The bankers still got their bonuses paid yet they were broke.

Nijmegen

InigoMontoya wrote: »

I would blame him. His basic salary is €308,500*. I think that's enough for anyone to strive to meet their targets. I do so for roughly 13% of that much. :pac:

*And his total package last year was €612,500

I would blame the person who offered the contract.

And before I do that, I'd look at what he was being paid elsewhere, what he was achieving, and what his influence achieved.

By some of the thinking around here nobody should be paid a salary above X. That doesn't work in a free and competitive market.

Sleepy

Would this be the same DAA that are running two terminals with passenger numbers that could be adequately met by a single terminal?

thebman

The point of bonuses is to motivate people to succeed surely?

I recommend people shouting pay the man watch the below TED talk.
http://www.ted.com/talks/dan_pink_on_motivation.html

syklops

ninty9er wrote: »

Ha! Try that in any multinational subsidiary and you'd have a war on your hands. Doesn't matter as long as your division makes its money.

It happens in Multi-nationals all the time. The last place I worked in called it the "work together plan". Upto a 13% bonus if both the company and the individual met their targets. In 2008, I ticked all my boxes, but things elsewhere went pear shaped for the company so no bonus. Did I get out on the streets? No. I think I went for a few pints and moaned about it for an hour or too and left it at that.

Atilathehun

Title of this thread
"Government vs DAA, government wins"

When will we see a thread with title
"Government vs Sarkozy, government wins"

It would mean a lot more!

mathie

"Government wins"?

Yeah that's how it's spun.
I'm sure that some other form of bonus will be offered to him next year on the quiet.

This country and it's scapegoats.
Who will we be after next?

dilallio

Sleepy wrote: »

Would this be the same DAA that are running two terminals with passenger numbers that could be adequately met by a single terminal?

Yes.
The same DAA who makes us check in and go through security at Terminal 2, walk all the way to the gate in Terminal 1 for a flight, and on the way back forces us to land at Terminal 1, walk to Terminal 2, and then when we're outside, we have to walk to Terminal 1 to get a bus.
That's my experience the last 4 times I've flown from Dublin.

thebman

mathie wrote: »

"Government wins"?

Yeah that's how it's spun.
I'm sure that some other form of bonus will be offered to him next year on the quiet.

This country and it's scapegoats.
Who will we be after next?

I wouldn't be so sure on that one though.

He has no friends in FG by the looks of things and his contract is up this year so we could see a changing of the guards...

oflahero

dilallio wrote: »

Yes.
The same DAA who makes us check in and go through security at Terminal 2, walk all the way to the gate in Terminal 1 for a flight, and on the way back forces us to land at Terminal 1, walk to Terminal 2, and then when we're outside, we have to walk to Terminal 1 to get a bus.
That's my experience the last 4 times I've flown from Dublin.

Seriously? There's an airline even lower on the DAA pecking order of preference than Ryanair?

later12

I would be reasonably confident that poster is talking about an Aer Lingus flight.

Tora Bora

thebman wrote: »

I wouldn't be so sure on that one though.

He has no friends in FG by the looks of things and his contract is up this year so we could see a changing of the guards...

If I were him, and contract up at year end, and no hope of being reappointed because FG want to appoint their own mate, I would have given the government the two fingers and taken every last penney of the bonus.
Didn't see Mary Harney turning down her lump sum, or a whole lot more of them either.
Collier is a mouse. He should have take the loot.

dilallio

later10 wrote: »

I would be reasonably confident that poster is talking about an Aer Lingus flight.

Yes. All Aer Lingus flights

later12

The worst thing seems to be that this is part of the plan. That a number of flights would be checking in at T2 and boarding down at T1 is actually a part of the design. Bewilderingly enough.

InigoMontoya

dilallio wrote: »

Yes. All Aer Lingus flights

Don't think that's correct.

later12

InigoMontoya wrote: »

Don't think that's correct.

I think the poster is saying that all of his or her flights that checked in at T2 and boarded at T1 were Aer Lingus flights. It is not the same for all Aer Lingus flights, of course, but I have had the same experience twice.

I think it happens routinely on some services.

oflahero

InigoMontoya wrote: »

Don't think that's correct.

I'm guessing he meant 'all the Aer Lingus flights I was on', not 'all Aer Lingus flights in general'!

InigoMontoya

Nijmegen wrote: »

I would blame the person who offered the contract.

This is what I was responding to:

Declan Collier probably won't go the extra mile to met his targets this year, since he knows there is no bonus in store. And who would blame him?

Hypothetically speaking, if someone is paid €300,000+, and can't be arsed doing his best without the extra motivation of a bonus, I would very definitely blame him.

fred252

slightly off topic;

has anyone used the hand dryers in T2? they're a national embarrassment. first of all they're concealed with no signage and secondly when you do find them they don't so much dry your hands as spray water all over your trousers.

InigoMontoya

fred252 wrote: »

slightly off topic;

has anyone used the hand dryers in T2? they're a national embarrassment. first of all they're concealed with no signage and secondly when you do find them they don't so much dry your hands as spray water all over your trousers.

They're a bit inconspicuous alright, a bit of signage wouldn't go astray. They worked ok for me though, and "national embarrassment" is definitely a bit strong!

fred252

InigoMontoya wrote: »

They're a bit inconspicuous alright, a bit of signage wouldn't go astray. They worked ok for me though, and "national embarrassment" is definitely a bit strong!

i guess you didn't stand directly in front of it as people normally do when drying their hands then.

InigoMontoya

fred252 wrote: »

i guess you didn't stand directly in front of it as people normally do when drying their hands then.

No, I hung from the ceiling on a wire, like Tom Cruise in Mission Impossible. I always do that cause sometimes the floors in jacks are icky.