nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Court rules in favour of Waterford Crystal workers

deisemum

Court rules in favour of Waterford Crystal workers

Case over pension taken against State to European body in Luxembourg

The European Court of Justice has found in favour of Waterford Crystal workers in a case taken over their pensions.

The workers took the case against the State to the European Court of Justice in Luxembourg for its failure to establish a pension protection system and were seeking compensation.

Waterford Crystal was placed in receivership in January 2009 and the company’s pension schemes were wound up two months later with a deficit of more than €100 million.

Given the funding levels in the pension schemes, each plaintiff was offered payments representing between 18 per cent and 30 per cent of their entitlements but say, following a 2007 European court decision, they are entitled to at least 49 per cent.

In its judgement today the court said the measures taken by Ireland subsequent to its 2007 ruling “have not brought about the result that the plaintiffs would recveive in execess of 49 per cent of the value of their acfcrued old age pension” . This was a “serious breach” of Ireland’s obligations, the courts said.

It said the economics situation of Ireland “does not constitute and exceptional situation capable of justifying the lower level of porotection” of employees for pensions, the ruling said.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/court-rules-in-favour-of-waterford-crystal-workers-1.1372378

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Curly Judge

Dicky Pride wrote: »

Snobbery of the highest order. Impossible to talk to selfish people tbh.

I'd prefer snobbery to robbery!

Curly Judge

infosys wrote: »

I totally agree with you, I for one am fed up of paying for stuff I have no hand act or part in. Of let's start I'm fit and healthy, no need for my tax money to pay health services, I'm self employed and have no real rights to social welfare, I'll give up rights to Pension, so that PRSI and USC saved as I'm happy not to fund social welfare, I don't have kids and don't intend to have any, another saving in education. God this is great, I have not been involved in crime, god at this rate my tax bill will be zero. I love this idea, anything I'm not involved in I just don't want to pay.

As a society we have decided to follow certain rules, if that society makes a mess and does not protect certain people's rights then sorry we all need to chip in. I had no part in priory hall but I agree with compensation, I had no part in giving women hep C but I agree in compensation, I had no part in abusing children but I believe we as a state are liable, if we do not hold ourselves liable for injustices done in our name, who will be held accountable.

The problem is that the people who should be held accountable for this fiasco won't suffer one iota.
They will wander off into the sunset with their public sector pensions and lump sums unscathed, while the taxpayer picks up the tab for their incompetence.
I think I'm being very generous in offering the workers their money back even though there is no moral obligation on me to do so.
If the government cave in and grant the 89% they are looking for it'll mean some of them will be collecting 840 euro per week pension.... out of my pocket.
I'll never accept that as being morally right...never!

Dicky Pride

Snobbery of the highest order. Impossible to talk to selfish people tbh.

Pro Hoc Vice

Curly Judge wrote: »

Another mind reader whose laser like intellect can look into the soul of others?
It won't affect you, because they are unlikely to make an attachment order against your dole.

All I want is fair play and a level playing field for everyone.
If the ECJ had ruled that the dick heads, whose responsibility this was, had to come up with the money then I'd have no problem with it.
The ruling to compel me to pay for something I had no hand , act or part in is unjust, and should have been rejected by the present government.

I totally agree with you, I for one am fed up of paying for stuff I have no hand act or part in. Of let's start I'm fit and healthy, no need for my tax money to pay health services, I'm self employed and have no real rights to social welfare, I'll give up rights to Pension, so that PRSI and USC saved as I'm happy not to fund social welfare, I don't have kids and don't intend to have any, another saving in education. God this is great, I have not been involved in crime, god at this rate my tax bill will be zero. I love this idea, anything I'm not involved in I just don't want to pay.

As a society we have decided to follow certain rules, if that society makes a mess and does not protect certain people's rights then sorry we all need to chip in. I had no part in priory hall but I agree with compensation, I had no part in giving women hep C but I agree in compensation, I had no part in abusing children but I believe we as a state are liable, if we do not hold ourselves liable for injustices done in our name, who will be held accountable.

Curly Judge

Dicky Pride wrote: »

It's very simple. An inept government failed to protect their pensions. Irish workers got about 20% of what they were entitled to while their British counterparts in Waterford Wedgwood got 90%.

A European court found that the government was in the wrong. Why is that not enough for you? Because you have a grudge, simple as that.

Another mind reader whose laser like intellect can look into the soul of others?
It won't affect you, because they are unlikely to make an attachment order against your dole.

All I want is fair play and a level playing field for everyone.
If the ECJ had ruled that the dick heads, whose responsibility this was, had to come up with the money then I'd have no problem with it.
The ruling to compel me to pay for something I had no hand , act or part in is unjust, and should have been rejected by the present government.

Dicky Pride

It's very simple. An inept government failed to protect their pensions. Irish workers got about 20% of what they were entitled to while their British counterparts in Waterford Wedgwood got 90%.

A European court found that the government was in the wrong. Why is that not enough for you? Because you have a grudge, simple as that.

Curly Judge

Dicky Pride wrote: »

WTF are you talking about? You think it's right that workers can pay into a pension for 40 plus years and then get shafted once their jobs are lost? You sound like a right dickhead tbh.

By all means pay them back what they paid into it, plus a reasonable interest.
I fail to see why I should have to pay any more.
Perhaps you could enlighten me as to how the pensions of a private company become my responsibility?
Indeed why the pensions of any company, private or other wise are allowed to fall on my shoulders?
How much will the Waterford Crystal boyos pay towards my failed private pension?

Dicky Pride

Curly Judge wrote: »

http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/state-offers-to-fund-half-of-pension-pots-at-waterford-crystal-30115258.html
I hope they pay the bare minimum they can get away with under the law.
And even then it will be too much!

WTF are you talking about? You think it's right that workers can pay into a pension for 40 plus years and then get shafted once their jobs are lost? You sound like a right dickhead tbh.

Curly Judge

http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/state-offers-to-fund-half-of-pension-pots-at-waterford-crystal-30115258.html
I hope they pay the bare minimum they can get away with under the law.
And even then it will be too much!

Sully

Bards wrote: »

And remind me again why Anglo was bailed out? Was it a pillar bank, did it have thousands of ordinary depositors?

That's an exception, I agree. Im not sure what the argument for saving that bank was.

Cabaal

-MOD WARNING-
Ok, I'm not having this entire thread derailed so it'll end up locked.

If you want to talk about the Waterford Crystal pension issues and the ruling then go right ahead,

But this is not turning into yet another "the banks cost us a load of money and the big bad government" type of thread, in doing so it goes off-topic and is no longer anything to do with Waterford.

If you want to talk about the government and banking bailout then take it to another forum

Bards

Sully wrote: »

Banks are completely different and cannot be compared to the fall of private businesses. A collapse would have caused huge issues (with the exception of one or two I suspect) and serious concern for hundreds and thousands of people. Just look at the distress in Greece at the suggestion the banks could have fallen.

This is why Waterford Crystal wasn't saved when there were repeated calls at the time for the government to step in (not this administration, the last). There is also repeated arguments put forward by people in Waterford and outside that the factory got way too big for itself and squeezed the company for everything and this is partly the reason why the company isn't having a big factory in Waterford producing crystal - because its cheaper to go somewhere else. This is why some people are thick that the tax payers will be forced to bailout private pensions on top of bailing out the banks.

The issue with banks is mostly down to the fact that no government is willing to slap them on the wrist and refuse to accept salary increases and bonuses despite the fact the government are refusing such on the public sector and are hitting most people very hard year after year. Hence the "us vs them" approach to bankers. I'm just fed up hearing every single time an issue with the government comes up the line trotted out about banks being big evil ****ers laughing their way to the, well, bank. That's all. I'm not dismissing concerns or anger over the bailout, im just genuinely fed up of people using it in every bloody discussion.

And remind me again why Anglo was bailed out? Was it a pillar bank, did it have thousands of ordinary depositors?

7upfree

Sully wrote: »

Banks are completely different and cannot be compared to the fall of private businesses.

:D:D:D Of course they are...........

Seriously, Sully. Are you for real??!! They are a private, profit-driven business. Whatever about maybe offering support to possibly ONE of them, what went on is an absolute economic scandal. They have received (and still receive) preferential treatment. All of the rules of capitalism (as Bards says "survival of the fittest") were changed for them.

And these leeches now have the gall to lecture people about what they can and cannot spend? Christ, even 1984 couldn't have predicted this. And successive Governments have folded their arms and declared that "we can't do anything about it". My hole. It was an unmitigated mistake. Even some IMF members have declared this.

From that gentleman:

"In Ireland today he went on to say that the Irish bailout deal, in which bondholders sacrificed nothing and the Irish taxpayer took all liabilities, was wrong."

"Wrong" is putting it mildly. Again on Friday we saw €140m written off for INM by AIB. And people still query the Crystal verdict? What is going on in this country is truly, truly sickening.

* Politicians earning more than the President of the USA.

* Defunct bankrupt, business entities trading as if nothing happened.

* CEOs of those entities on grossly immoral salaries when compared to struggling young families.

* Disc Jockeys being paid three times the salary of Barack Obama.

* Newsreaders being paid €3k a WEEK.

* The talking shop that is the Seanad still operating.

* State assets being sold off to fund these banking clowns.

The list is truly endless. And people still complain about the Waterford Crystal workers?

fuzzy dunlop

Curly Judge wrote: »

You and the rest of the Deise Mafia throw out personal insults like snuff at a wake!
I'm neither begrudging or bitter. I have picked myself up and made alternative arrangements for my retirement which are working our quite well.
And let me also add: These arrangements won't cost you or any other taxpayer a penny.
What I will admit to is having a sense of justice and fair play and when I see workers, who were overpaid during their time of employment, being lauded for sandbagging the rest of us with demands for unrealistic "entitlements" I will shout stop.
Up until now the workers at WG held the high moral ground and had the lions share of the sympathy. Watch that change like an April day as details of the pensions awarded to individuals leaks out.

The Irish Government being incompetent or the ECJ handing down an unfair and counter productive judgement hardly bars me from expressing an opinion on the matter......now does it?

At least we know now you're not from Waterford. Theres a surprise.GOOD OLD FASHIONED BEGRUDGERY. What happened? Couldn't get a job there? We also know you haven't a clue what your talking about when your blaming wages for the reason of the factorys demise. So do you actually know anyone who was working there? The high wages myth is just that, a myth! There was people working years there on part time contracts in somes cases 10 YEARS! It was just a run of the mill factory as far as workers were concerned. The idea of WC being some cushy number compared to other factories was well and truly gone by the early 90's at the latest. The company almost had a cash flow of 1 Billion Euro in the year 2000. What killed the factory was the economic criisis in 2009 which killed a lot of other businesses. Your narrow minded foaming at the mouth just betrays your willful ignorance. Don't flatter yourelf with your self described sense of justice. If you had any you wouldn't be here moaning! You would be on some other forum trying to attack real injustice.

chainsawman

robtri wrote: »

No more offensive than to the rest of the taxpayers having to put there hands into therir pockets to use their hard earned money and pay for someone elses pension.

Are you a moderators or something ?

robtri

chainsawman wrote: »

Curly Judge,,, Why calling Waterford people a Deise Mafia, very very offensive to the workers of the Waterford glass factory. 18 former workers who lost out the pension died already without seeing a victory. I hope to god their familes wont be reading your comments here.

No more offensive than to the rest of the taxpayers having to put there hands into therir pockets to use their hard earned money and pay for someone elses pension.

chainsawman

Curly Judge,,, Why calling Waterford people a Deise Mafia, very very offensive to the workers of the Waterford glass factory. 18 former workers who lost out the pension died already without seeing a victory. I hope to god their familes wont be reading your comments here.

Sully

Bards wrote: »

But the banks were private before the state had to capitalise them and they became nationalised. They should never have been bailed out in the first place and should have allowed to fail just like waterford crystal was allowed to fail.

Banks are completely different and cannot be compared to the fall of private businesses. A collapse would have caused huge issues (with the exception of one or two I suspect) and serious concern for hundreds and thousands of people. Just look at the distress in Greece at the suggestion the banks could have fallen.

This is why Waterford Crystal wasn't saved when there were repeated calls at the time for the government to step in (not this administration, the last). There is also repeated arguments put forward by people in Waterford and outside that the factory got way too big for itself and squeezed the company for everything and this is partly the reason why the company isn't having a big factory in Waterford producing crystal - because its cheaper to go somewhere else. This is why some people are thick that the tax payers will be forced to bailout private pensions on top of bailing out the banks.

The issue with banks is mostly down to the fact that no government is willing to slap them on the wrist and refuse to accept salary increases and bonuses despite the fact the government are refusing such on the public sector and are hitting most people very hard year after year. Hence the "us vs them" approach to bankers. I'm just fed up hearing every single time an issue with the government comes up the line trotted out about banks being big evil ****ers laughing their way to the, well, bank. That's all. I'm not dismissing concerns or anger over the bailout, im just genuinely fed up of people using it in every bloody discussion.

Bards

7upfree wrote: »

Agreed Bards. There are two basic fundamentals to capitalism. You succeed or you fail. Unless, apparently, you're a bank. Then ALL the rules go out the window.

And our pillar banks weren't really that big in the first place. If they had failed there would be a few foreign banks that would have queued up to become our new "pillar" banks.

Isnt that what capitilism is all about, survival of the fitest.

7upfree

Bards wrote: »

But the banks were private before the state had to capitalise them and they became nationalised. They should never have been bailed out in the first place and should have allowed to fail just like waterford crystal was allowed to fail.

Agreed Bards. There are two basic fundamentals to capitalism. You succeed or you fail. Unless, apparently, you're a bank. Then ALL the rules go out the window.

Bards

Sully wrote: »

Can we stop comparing a private company to the banks? Its the most annoying line thrown into every single rant about the government. We get it, the banks cost us a bucket load and they get the red carpet rolled out while we don't etc..

But the banks were private before the state had to capitalise them and they became nationalised. They should never have been bailed out in the first place and should have allowed to fail just like waterford crystal was allowed to fail.

7upfree

Sully wrote: »

There is a battle to get qualified experienced individuals because they expect to be well paid, and the Irish don't want them to be well paid.

No - the Irish want them to be paid a fair rate for a fair job. The wages and expenses being paid to politicians is truly beyond belief. The self-perpetuating gravy train that is the Irish Golden Circle is both immoral and disgusting.

7upfree

Curly Judge wrote: »

The Irish Government being incompetent or the ECJ handing down an unfair and counter productive judgement hardly bars me from expressing an opinion on the matter......now does it?

Absolutely not. You are entitled to your opinion - much as I would disagree with it. Just as I am entitled to raise the inequity of bailing out failed, bankrupt business entities like banks and developers off the backs of Irish workers. And as for an "unfair and counter productive judgement" that is from your perspective.

7upfree

Sully wrote: »

Can we stop comparing a private company to the banks? Its the most annoying line thrown into every single rant about the government. We get it, the banks cost us a bucket load and they get the red carpet rolled out while we don't etc..

Well isn't that the case? After all, the banks are..............private companies:eek:

So let's roll anything to do with the banks under that red carpet? In a week where the government decided to abstain from a vote on the truly immoral wages being paid to a man who oversaw a loss of €2Bn in his business last year?

No thanks Sully. These are two issue which cannot be separated. If only in the interests of fairness.

Curly Judge

deise blue wrote: »

As for throwing out insults - I wasn't the one warned to be civil !

And thereby hangs another tale?

deise blue

The " Deise Mafia " has a lovely ring to it !

As for throwing out insults - I wasn't the one warned to be civil !

Of course you are entitled to your opinions but unfortunately such opinions have been rendered redundant by the ECJ ruling & the fact that this case will now revert to the High Court whose only role is now to adjudicate as to what amount over 50% should be allocated to the Glass workers.

I know you have strong views as to what exactly the Glass workers should receive but even you must concede that your views are not going to amount to a hill of beans when the High Court sits.

Rather than risk your ire by continuing to post the legal facts of the case I will now withdraw & review matters after the High Court adjudication.

Curly Judge

deise blue wrote: »

The waters are being muddied by Curly Judge whose sense of bitterness is palpable , we get it - your private pension has been decimated & you want the Glass workers to suffer accordingly.

You and the rest of the Deise Mafia throw out personal insults like snuff at a wake!
I'm neither begrudging or bitter. I have picked myself up and made alternative arrangements for my retirement which are working our quite well.
And let me also add: These arrangements won't cost you or any other taxpayer a penny.
What I will admit to is having a sense of justice and fair play and when I see workers, who were overpaid during their time of employment, being lauded for sandbagging the rest of us with demands for unrealistic "entitlements" I will shout stop.
Up until now the workers at WG held the high moral ground and had the lions share of the sympathy. Watch that change like an April day as details of the pensions awarded to individuals leaks out.

The Irish Government being incompetent or the ECJ handing down an unfair and counter productive judgement hardly bars me from expressing an opinion on the matter......now does it?

deise blue

The waters are being muddied by Curly Judge whose sense of bitterness is palpable , we get it - your private pension has been decimated & you want the Glass workers to suffer accordingly.

The blame for this debacle as roundly commentated on by our media & confirmed by the ECJ lies solely with the STATE as they failed to legislate for a pension protection fund as required by the 2008 insolvency directive - how often does this have to be repeated ?

The matter will now revert to the High Court who will adjudicate as to what percentage the Glass workers should receive , it will be at least 50% & at most
100% of what they anticipated getting from the DB scheme.

Now Curly Judge can continue to roll out proposals as to what the Glass workers should receive but he knows as well as I do that such proposals are pie in the sky.

Let's wait & see what the High Court says before becoming further entrenched in what is increasingly looking like a futile argument .

Sully

Can we stop comparing a private company to the banks? Its the most annoying line thrown into every single rant about the government. We get it, the banks cost us a bucket load and they get the red carpet rolled out while we don't etc..

Curly Judge

7upfree wrote: »

Your "point" has been begrudgery towards the Waterford crystal workers. Let me refresh your mind - yesterday Independent News & Media had €140m "written down" by their banks (AIB INCLUDED) so that they could "restructure their finances and pension fund".

As AIB is state owned this is another hit for taxpayers. And not a whimper about it. So far from "babysitting" anyone at least educate yourself with the facts as they stand.

Good luck to the crystal workers. AND FCUK THE BEGRUDGERS.

The crystal workers and their union sucked so hard at the tits of Waterford Glass, by demanding ridiculous wages and indulging in restrictive work practices, that at the end when the carcass was brought to the knackery all they could sell was the skin.
They had it good for a long time but now the party is over.
The company dipped into their pension fund, probably in an attempt to keep the ship afloat. This was illegal and they should not have done it but it has nothing to do with Irish taxpayers.
If the Waterford Crystal workers are not responsible for the demise of their pension scheme why should I be?
They are citizens of this state too.
I'm sure a lot of them voted FF over the 15 years this was going on.