Councillors get pay-offs of up to €64,000

Idbatterim

It just never ends, what is left to say at this stage!

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/councillors-get-payoffs-of-up-to-64000-30319673.html

JIM CUSACK – PUBLISHED 01 JUNE 2014 02:30 AM

LOCAL authority councillors who lost their seats or retired after last week's elections weekend are receiving severance payments almost as high as those for former government ministers, the Sunday Independent can reveal.

An internal circular to members of the Local Authority Members Association (LAMA) shows that payments of up to €64,000 are being made to long-serving former councillors.

A councillor who has served just one term of five years and who lost their seat or otherwise decided to quit will get a lump sum of €16,724. If they have served two terms over 10 years they will get €33,448. The payments rise on up in five-year hitches to €63,968 for those who have served 40 years on councils.

The payments are based on the number of years served, by one fifth of the councillors' basic annual "representational payment" of €16,724.

Some of the payments at the top of the scale are in line with the sums senior government ministers are still entitled to until new legislation ending the payments comes into effect. Yet none of the councillors are coming under the type of pressure recently experienced by Justice Minister Alan Shatter over his entitlement to a €70,000 severance sum before he controversially donated the sum to a children's charity.

The councillors' pay-offs are also in line with the payments that were paid to outgoing Fianna Fail ministers, which were revealed in the Dail by Taoiseach Enda Kenny a fortnight ago.

Mr Kenny "noted" that John McGuinness, the chairman of the Public Accounts Committee, received €61,318. The Taoiseach also told the Dail: "Dara Calleary received €53,708, Micheal Kitt received €37,474, Billy Kelleher received €20,172, Willie O'Dea received €8,064."

The pre-election LAMA circular to councillors gives the examples of the "approximate payments to county and city councillors retiring in 2014" and offers advice on what tax may be due or be exempted for the lump-sum payments.

Up to Friday's elections, there were 1,627 town and county councillors in 114 councils. But under the forthcoming changes the numbers have been reduced to 91 councils and 949 councillors. However, the four Dublin councils have had their numbers increased.

LAMA made a submission last year to the Oireachtas Joint Committee for the Environment outlining concerns that while councillors pay PRSI on their basic salary they are not entitled to welfare benefits if they lose their jobs or are not re-elected. They also argued for a change in the current arrangement where lump sums on retirement or non-election are not paid until the ex-councillor reaches the age of 50.

Although the basic councillor salary is €16,724, they are paid roughly the same in allowances, expenses and fees.

The average payment is nearly €30,000. An investigation by the Irish Independent earlier this month revealed that 11 councillors earned more than €100k. City and county councillors received more than €52m in payments in the past two years.

Most councillors received these payments on top of their day-time jobs. However, the increases in payments in recent years has meant that an increasing number have made council work a full-time job.

Information obtained under the Freedom of Information Act revealed the average annual salary of a councillor is €29,469. This average is likely to remain despite cuts to council services and with 20 of 34 councils technically insolvent at the end of last year.

Guy:Incognito

64k for 40 years served is less than statutory redundancy from a job paying the same wage is it not..........

Reformed Character

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

64k for 40 years served is less than statutory redundancy from a job paying the same wage is it not..........

Serving on the council was never meant to be a job, it was meant to be a part-time act of public service.

Annasopra

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

64k for 40 years served is less than statutory redundancy from a job paying the same wage is it not..........

Exactly I don't see the issue here at all.

No Pants

At the lower end of the scale, €16k isn't that much either. Possibly when compared with their actual yearly wage, but I'd expect at least €15k from my job if made redundant. I'm not highly paid and I've been there three years.

Reformed Character

No Pants wrote: »

At the lower end of the scale, €16k isn't that much either. Possibly when compared with their actual yearly wage, but I'd expect at least €15k from my job if made redundant. I'm not highly paid and I've been there three years.

How much would you expect if you were sacked for incompetence and negligence?

No Pants

Reformed Character wrote: »

How much would you expect if you were sacked for incompetence and negligence?

Considerably less. I'm trying to avoid that.

Guy:Incognito

Reformed Character wrote: »

How much would you expect if you were sacked for incompetence and negligence?

How much would you expect if a load of members of the public falsely had you sacked as a reaction to the work done by another branch of your company a few counties away? :-)

Kermit.de.frog

I thought this was going to be a serious story but then I realised it's from the Sunday Independent. OP is disappoint.

dxhound2005

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

I thought this was going to be a serious story but then I realised it's from the Sunday Independent. OP is disappoint.

As they say they "can reveal" all of this to us. Having "revealed" the same stuff years ago. The state of journalism in this country appals me.


This from 2012.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/payoff-packages-for-councillors-will-soften-blow-of-losing-seats-28820005.html

tritium

Reformed Character wrote: »

How much would you expect if you were sacked for incompetence and negligence?

Which ones were sacked for incompetence and negligence as opposed to being voted out in the popularity contest we hold every few years?

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

More power to them. Many of them deserve it.

I find it laughable how AH rises up every time somebody gets a lump of money - as if nobody is entitled to any recognition or reward for anything in this country anymore without begrudery.

Cookie_Monster

what exactly do councillors need a severance payment for?

Annasopra

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

what exactly do councillors need a severance payment for?

What does any worker need a redundancy payment for?

Teyla Emmagan

One of my local councillors lost his seat. He worked full time at it. He is in his early 30s with a small child and a progressive neurological condition. I don't imagine he will find it easy to find work. He worked hard on behalf of his community for the last 5 years and I do not begrudge him a poxy 16k settlement.

Annasopra

Teyla Emmagan wrote: »

One of my local councillors lost his seat. He worked full time at it. He is in his early 30s with a small child and a progressive neurological condition. I don't imagine he will find it easy to find work. He worked hard on behalf of his community for the last 5 years and I do not begrudge him a poxy 16k settlement.

+1 and the cost of his campaign was probably about 3-4k so he has those bills to pay now as well.

kneemos

Reformed Character wrote: »

Serving on the council was never meant to be a job, it was meant to be a part-time act of public service.

Council meetings and such might be part time but no doubt they're constantly being spoken to,called and written to by the public,for this alone I'd give them their redundancy payment.

Teyla Emmagan

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

+1 and the cost of his campaign was probably about 3-4k so he has those bills to pay now as well.

This is it. You do not get good people to run for local office (decent, honest, committed people) if it's financially prohibative. Being a councillor is a really tough job and we need to encourage the right sort of people to do it. Not just candidates being bank rolled by a big political machine, or part timers who are at it for an ego boost. If the entry/exit costs are not picked up by the state the only people who will run are those who can afford to. And that eventually leads to the wrong candidates and a lot of people left with no voice at all to represent them at council level.

michael999999

Samuel Prickly Flesh wrote: »

More power to them. Many of them deserve it.

I find it laughable how AH rises up every time somebody gets a lump of money - as if nobody is entitled to any recognition or reward for anything in this country anymore without begrudery.

Ya I agree. Bertie bags of cash ahern and Mary four pensions hanafin totally deserve there pay offs and pensions for the outstanding service they provided the country!

My head hurts reading this!

michael999999

Teyla Emmagan wrote: »

One of my local councillors lost his seat. He worked full time at it. He is in his early 30s with a small child and a progressive neurological condition. I don't imagine he will find it easy to find work. He worked hard on behalf of his community for the last 5 years and I do not begrudge him a poxy 16k settlement.

If he was doing so much work for the community why wasn't he re elected?

Nib

Samuel Prickly Flesh wrote: »

More power to them. Many of them deserve it.

I find it laughable how AH rises up every time somebody gets a lump of money - as if nobody is entitled to any recognition or reward for anything in this country anymore without begrudery.

Jesus Christ!

No wonder this country's bolloxed.

Guy:Incognito

michael999999 wrote: »

If he was doing so much work for the community why wasn't he re elected?

He probably belonged to the wrong party as far as the electorate are concerned.

Do you believe everyone that got elected last week was because the voters educated themselves on the facts of each candidate then made the best decision on who should be elected and not "**** ff / fg / labour, I'm voting for someone else"

After hours posters losing the plot in people getting paid money they deserve shocker!!

Annasopra

Teyla Emmagan wrote: »

This is it. You do not get good people to run for local office (decent, honest, committed people) if it's financially prohibative. Being a councillor is a really tough job and we need to encourage the right sort of people to do it. Not just candidates being bank rolled by a big political machine, or part timers who are at it for an ego boost. If the entry/exit costs are not picked up by the state the only people who will run are those who can afford to. And that eventually leads to the wrong candidates and a lot of people left with no voice at all to represent them at council level.

Political parties very often do not fund candidates. This is a common misconception that they do. They will do some fundraising but nowadays the candidate has to pay most of the costs themselves.

Annasopra

michael999999 wrote: »

If he was doing so much work for the community why wasn't he re elected?

The hard work of some politicians can often go unrecognised.

michael999999

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

He probably belonged to the wrong party as far as the electorate are concerned.

Do you believe everyone that got elected last week was because the voters educated themselves on the facts of each candidate then made the best decision on who should be elected and not "**** ff / fg / labour, I'm voting for someone else"

Well if he runs under the FF/ FG name. Should he not be judged by what they stand for. Why not run as an Independent?

michael999999

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

The hard work of some politicians can often go unrecognised.

Most of the politicians around my way also go unrecognised.

You only ever see them a month before the election!

Shakespeare's Sister

Teyla Emmagan wrote: »

One of my local councillors lost his seat. He worked full time at it. He is in his early 30s with a small child and a progressive neurological condition. I don't imagine he will find it easy to find work. He worked hard on behalf of his community for the last 5 years and I do not begrudge him a poxy 16k settlement.

But the popular opinion would be to say that he's... "evil"... or something (see thread on evil people - all politicians are evil; it's like a get-together between a bunch of 13/14-year-olds).

Tail Docker

Magaggie wrote: »

But the popular opinion would be to say that he's... "evil"... or something (see thread on evil people - all politicians are evil; it's like a get-together between a bunch of 13/14-year-olds).

Yeah. Have a goo at the Russian connection to our great banking bailout for the craic, then get back to me about how wonderful they really are.

Shakespeare's Sister

Tail Docker wrote: »

Yeah. Have a goo at the Russian connection to our great banking bailout for the craic, then get back to me about how wonderful they really are.

Saying it's stupid to say all politicians are evil isn't automatically saying the above is ok.
There's a major "One or the other" tendency on this forum. I don't get it - it's not hard to see more than one angle.

Phoebas

michael999999 wrote: »

Most of the politicians around my way also go unrecognised.

You only ever see them a month before the election!

You do know that if you want to make a representation to your local councillor, you can easily contact them, right?

Some people want everything handed to them on a plate.

sock puppet

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

64k for 40 years served is less than statutory redundancy from a job paying the same wage is it not..........

Except redundancy is irrelvant because they weren't made redundant. In fact their replacements are sitting on the council right now.

Tail Docker

sock puppet wrote: »

Except redundancy is irrelvant because they weren't made redundant. In fact their replacements are sitting on the council right now.

Our outgoing local councillors are almost all wealthy local businesspeople - I doubt they would be on their uppers if they didn't get a silver-handshake.

Teyla Emmagan

michael999999 wrote: »

If he was doing so much work for the community why wasn't he re elected?

Because most people don't educate themselves as to who their local councillors are or what they have done for them when they go to vote. They just see the party name and don't look at the individual.

Foxhound38

Oh ffs OP - you'd be whinging right up to the point where the councillor starts paying you for the privilege of representing you, and then probably complain that it wasn't enough.

A good friend of mine was a councillor - it was his full time job, and he worked very hard at it. Unfortunately, he's also a member of the Labour Party, and narrowly lost his seat. He's now out of a job, and needs to find a way to pay the rent while he looks for a new one.

I don't begrundge him his payment.

Foxhound38

Tail Docker wrote: »

Our outgoing local councillors are almost all wealthy local businesspeople - I doubt they would be on their uppers if they didn't get a silver-handshake.

Many are not however. Most of ours for example are very ordinary people, quite a few of them are only in their mid-20's.

the culture of deference

Reformed Character wrote: »

How much would you expect if you were sacked for incompetence and negligence?

Lets see

Mr Cowen was paid a ministerial pension of €79,738.97 in 2011.


Dáil pension of €17,544 for 2011 rose to €20,806 for the first five months of 2012.

lump sum pension payment" of €159,873

termination lump sum" of €16,404

termination payment" of €36,909 from the Oireachtas.

sock puppet wrote: »

Except redundancy is irrelvant because they weren't made redundant. In fact their replacements are sitting on the council right now.

All council positions should be voluntary.

Capt'n Midnight

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

64k for 40 years served is less than statutory redundancy from a job paying the same wage is it not..........

Except they weren't permanent jobs.

And it's not even a fixed term contract because there could be early elections.


And every single one of them knew that before applying for the job.

Foxhound38

michael999999 wrote: »

Well if he runs under the FF/ FG name. Should he not be judged by what they stand for. Why not run as an Independent?

Because this is a democracy and people can run for whatever party they like, or none if they so wish.

michael999999

Foxhound38 wrote: »

Because this is a democracy and people can run for whatever party they like, or none if they so wish.

I didn't say they couldn't. But if you run under the fianna fail badge, expect to be judged by that!

Guy:Incognito

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Except they weren't permanent jobs.

And it's not even a fixed term contract because there could be early elections.


And every single one of them knew that before applying for the job.

I never said they were permanent jobs. I said if it was a 40 year job at the same pay. It was a comparison for the amounts paid.
The payments weren't just invented last week for the outgoing councillors.

They may have even known about them before applying for the job

Foxhound38

michael999999 wrote: »

I didn't say they couldn't. But if you run under the fianna fail badge, expect to be judged by that!

Indeed - and they were. What has that got to do with their redundancy entitlement?

Lone Stone

Many of them are hard workers so yeah it doesnt seem over the top in terms of payouts. I dont really see the problem. Then again i know feck all
about the positions or how its meant to be arranged financially, so it could be more cash for the lads.

Annasopra

the culture of deference wrote: »

All council positions should be voluntary.

why?

Sierra Oscar

the culture of deference wrote: »

All council positions should be voluntary.

So that only the rich can afford to take up office?

kneemos

Don't see why we need so many though.Even small towns have five or six councillors,surely one or two would do?

Foxhound38

kneemos wrote: »

Don't see why we need so many though.Even small towns have five or six councillors,surely one or two would do?

Could one or two people possibly represent the fullest possible range of opinion in the jurisdiction?

lightspeed

"An investigation by the Irish Independent earlier this month revealed that 11 councillors earned more than €100k. City and county councillors received more than €52m in payments in the past two years."

The above is the bit i found most troubling. Why are these super councillors on €100k and receiving large payments?

Payments from who and why? Is anyone else as confused as I am on that?

kneemos

Foxhound38 wrote: »

Could one or two people possibly represent the fullest possible range of opinion in the jurisdiction?

What opinions?most of it is purely of a practical nature,roads,housing,lighting etc.

Annasopra

lightspeed wrote: »

"An investigation by the Irish Independent earlier this month revealed that 11 councillors earned more than €100k. City and county councillors received more than €52m in payments in the past two years."

The above is the bit i found most troubling. Why are these super councillors on €100k and receiving large payments?

Payments from who and why? Is anyone else as confused as I am on that?

Payments from the Council they are elected to plus committees of that council plus outside bodies they are appointed to by the Council for example a vec(etb) or regional authority.

Annasopra

kneemos wrote: »

What opinions?most of it is purely of a practical nature,roads,housing,lighting etc.

Indeed but then you have deciding on overall plans which is far from practical in nature.