General secretary of the IFA on a possible €400,000 salary-Read mod note in post 2734

whelan2 · 20-11-2015 10:33am

The ifa 60th do was on a week or 2 ago in Louth , Mr Downey got up and spoke and never mentioned milk price once in his speech. This is the main topic on every dairy farmers mind. To answer your last post , I am all too aware of the unpaid hours put in by ifa officers, what needs to change though to make the ifa work , as at the moment it is sinking fast

rangler1 · 20-11-2015 10:39am

whelan2 wrote: »

The ifa 60th do was on a week or 2 ago in Louth , Mr Downey got up and spoke and never mentioned milk price once in his speech. This is the main topic on every dairy farmers mind. To answer your last post , I am all too aware of the unpaid hours put in by ifa officers, what needs to change though to make the ifa work , as at the moment it is sinking fast

As is farming and farm incomes.
The people that are in positions seemingly aren't good enough for you and no one else will get off their backsides so it's catch 22.....let her sink

whelan2 · 20-11-2015 10:41am

rangler1 wrote: »

As is farming and farm incomes.
The people that are in positions seemingly aren't good enough for you and no one else will get off their backsides so it's catch 22.....let her sink

????????? I am asking you what you would do to improve things?

Farmer Ed · 20-11-2015 10:52am

Whats the difference between IFA and FIFA? One letter as far as I can see.
This year a farmer friend of mine ended up in hospital with what he described as a big muscle in his back that was pressing on a nerve. Now he said the ironic thing was that this big muscle was meant to be protecting him but was in fact causing him a lot of pain. He could not remember the latin name of the of this muscle but for ease of memory we gave it the new medical name. The IFA muscle.

rangler1 · 20-11-2015 10:55am

whelan2 wrote: »

????????? I am asking you what you would do to improve things?

Milk price, beef price, it's the market, don't waste peoples time chasing it.
If farmers want an organisation they have to get involved instead of hurling abuse. If you're in any voluntary organisation and start to criticise the committee, you don't be long being told to get the finger out and work on the committee,
When important issues come up, if you're not involved how do people expect to be represented, hence the hill committee....what possible interest would I have in it if the HC aren't prepared to drive on the issues, yet you see the way we're being blamed. I sat beside the chairman of the HC in meetings for a year and he never opened his mouth, yet you see the sh...that goes on here.
It's not going to be easy and I'm glad to be away from it

rangler1 · 20-11-2015 10:58am

Farmer Ed wrote: »

Whats the difference between IFA and FIFA? One letter as far as I can see.
This year a farmer friend of mine ended up in hospital with what he described as a big muscle in his back that was pressing on a nerve. Now he said the ironic thing was that this big muscle was meant to be protecting him but was in fact causing him a lot of pain. He could not remember the latin name of the of this muscle but for ease of memory we gave it the new medical name. The IFA muscle.

and you expect other farmers to work for you when you're spewing that rubbish for rubbish expenses.....get a life.
Sad little farmers needn't think they're going to get off on using other farmers as cannon fodder just cos those sad little farmers can't make it in the real world.
when I was breeding pedigree rams, if I kept too many and had to take bad prices to get rid.......wasn't I slow that I didn't blame IFA for my bad management like you're doing. Only difference was that I'd always be producing what the customer wanted

Nettleman · 20-11-2015 11:12am

Rangler, youve been on here last night and again this morning after having a full inspection this week. Take a break man, as IFA needs to defend itself today, one man cant do it by himself.
This organisation is in a bad way imo, & they lack the courage to do what needs to be done, maybe they will prove me wrong. Is there any chatter on who the successor will be. btw, CAN WE CHANGE THE THREAD TITLE TO €450,000+ ?

kowtow · 20-11-2015 11:27am

rangler1 wrote: »

Only difference was that I'd always be producing what the customer wanted

If we were producing what the customer wanted then we would hardly need the IFA.

So why pay them?

Farmer Ed · 20-11-2015 11:39am

rangler1 wrote: »

and you expect other farmers to work for you when you're spewing that rubbish for rubbish expenses.....get a life.
Sad little farmers needn't think they're going to get off on using other farmers as cannon fodder just cos those sad little farmers can't make it in the real world.
when I was breeding pedigree rams, if I kept too many and had to take bad prices to get rid.......wasn't I slow that I didn't blame IFA for my bad management like you're doing. Only difference was that I'd always be producing what the customer wanted

Ranger I was very much involved in putting forward a motion over two years ago to a CoOp SGM. If passed it would have forced the Co Op to implement something that has been a fictional IFA policy for decades, Namely independent milk testing. I personally had gone to a lot of trouble getting a quote from a lab and I was put forward a motion that would see independent milk testing introduced in the Co Op in a matter of weeks.Can you guess who were the first two people to stand up to oppose the motion? You'll never guess. The then IFA national chairman of the liquid milk committee and was quickly followed by a county chairman. Now forgive me but how in that particular situation did IFA not cause farmers pain? The only thing I can think of is they were more concerned with the money the Co Op was collecting for them and their own political careers than representing farmers. But please don't accuse me of not trying to do anything to better farmers incomes. I have tried and found the IFA to be one of the main obstacles.

Farmer Ed · 20-11-2015 11:53am

kowtow wrote: »

If we were producing what the customer wanted then we would hardly need the IFA.

So why pay them?

I thought I stopped paying them a good while back when the type of thing that has become public knowledge this week started to become clear to me.
However I was shocked to find out just a few weeks ago that the EIF levy that the marts collect goes to IFA ICMSA and Macra. Needless to say I'll be stopping that also.

Farmer Ed · 20-11-2015 12:11pm

http://www.forbes.com/sites/susanadams/2014/06/16/the-highest-paid-ceos-are-the-worst-performers-new-study-says/

Please open the above link

Across the board, the more CEOs get paid, the worse their companies do over the next three years, according to extensive new research. This is true whether they’re CEOs at the highest end of the pay spectrum or the lowest. “The more CEOs are paid, the worse the firm does over the next three years, as far as stock performance and even accounting performance,” says one of the authors of the study, Michael Cooper of the University of Utah’s David Eccles School of Business.

frazzledhome · 20-11-2015 12:15pm

whelan2 wrote: »

The ifa 60th do was on a week or 2 ago in Louth , Mr Downey got up and spoke and never mentioned milk price once in his speech. This is the main topic on every dairy farmers mind. To answer your last post , I am all too aware of the unpaid hours put in by ifa officers, what needs to change though to make the ifa work , as at the moment it is sinking fast

I take it you'll be in Portlaoise at 8,30 Monday night Killeshin hotel for the IFA liquid milk meeting. It's for all winter and liquid suppliers country wide. Nothing other than price will be discussed

frazzledhome · 20-11-2015 12:17pm

whelan2 wrote: »

The ifa 60th do was on a week or 2 ago in Louth , Mr Downey got up and spoke and never mentioned milk price once in his speech. This is the main topic on every dairy farmers mind. To answer your last post , I am all too aware of the unpaid hours put in by ifa officers, what needs to change though to make the ifa work , as at the moment it is sinking fast

I take it you'll be in Portlaoise at 8,30 Monday night Killeshin hotel for the IFA liquid milk meeting. It's for all winter and liquid suppliers country wide. Nothing other than price will be discussed

rangler1 · 20-11-2015 12:21pm

whelan2 wrote: »

The ifa 60th do was on a week or 2 ago in Louth , Mr Downey got up and spoke and never mentioned milk price once in his speech. This is the main topic on every dairy farmers mind. To answer your last post , I am all too aware of the unpaid hours put in by ifa officers, what needs to change though to make the ifa work , as at the moment it is sinking fast

I told pat smith not to talk about IFA policy at our 60th, it was for another night.
maybe eddie was told the same

whelan2 · 20-11-2015 12:30pm

frazzledhome wrote: »

I take it you'll be in Portlaoise at 8,30 Monday night Killeshin hotel for the IFA liquid milk meeting. It's for all winter and liquid suppliers country wide. Nothing other than price will be discussed

don't know yet. can't drop everything at the drop of a hat. if I can make it I will go

kowtow · 20-11-2015 12:31pm

whelan2 wrote: »

don't know yet. can't drop everything at the drop of a hat. if I can make it I will go

Might go myself.

Will there be popcorn?

whelan2 · 20-11-2015 12:34pm

am multi taking here phone in one hand and flutter valve in the other

serfboard · 20-11-2015 12:42pm

Michael Fitzmaurice TD said today:

it did not add up to have a salary of more than €400,000 in an organisation with a turnover of €12m.

At that rate, Pat Smith's remuneration package was 3% of turnover/revenue.

I thought this was an interesting perspective, so I went looking for comparisons.

The chief executive of Shell earned €24.2m/£17.2m/$25.7m last year.

Shell's revenue last year was $421 billion.

Remuneration as a percentage of revenue? 0.006%

On that basis, Pat was earning 500 times more than the CEO of Shell - who was the second-highest paid boss in the FTSE 100.

Or, to put it another way, Pat Smith was getting a staggering amount of money for being the head of a (globally) tiny organisation.

Nettleman · 20-11-2015 12:58pm

serfboard wrote: »

Michael Fitzmaurice TD said today:
At that rate, Pat Smith's remuneration package was 3% of turnover/revenue.

I thought this was an interesting perspective, so I went looking for comparisons.

The chief executive of Shell earned €24.2m/£17.2m/$25.7m last year.

Shell's revenue last year was $421 billion.

Remuneration as a percentage of revenue? 0.006%

On that basis, Pat was earning 500 times more than the CEO of Shell - who was the second-highest paid boss in the FTSE 100.

Or, to put it another way, Pat Smith was getting a staggering amount of money for being the head of a (globally) tiny organisation.

Yes, the salary is the headline catcher, but its only a sympton of the real disease which has been at work in this organisation for too long. I do agree that all farm organisations should disclose, but IFA in particular have a very vulnerable funding model which requires the confidence of their volunteers and financial supporters. Avoiding Transparency and best practice governance was the only way to look after people and keep the confidence needed to fund the organisation. Big problem now. what really annoys me is that the IFA man was in my yard three times in the spring looking to get me back as a member, now i know what they needed the money for

rangler1 · 20-11-2015 1:50pm

Farmer Ed wrote: »

Ranger I was very much involved in putting forward a motion over two years ago to a CoOp SGM. If passed it would have forced the Co Op to implement something that has been a fictional IFA policy for decades, Namely independent milk testing. I personally had gone to a lot of trouble getting a quote from a lab and I was put forward a motion that would see independent milk testing introduced in the Co Op in a matter of weeks.Can you guess who were the first two people to stand up to oppose the motion? You'll never guess. The then IFA national chairman of the liquid milk committee and was quickly followed by a county chairman. Now forgive me but how in that particular situation did IFA not cause farmers pain? The only thing I can think of is they were more concerned with the money the Co Op was collecting for them and their own political careers than representing farmers. But please don't accuse me of not trying to do anything to better farmers incomes. I have tried and found the IFA to be one of the main obstacles.

Surely there was a vote on the proposal at the SGM, and don't tell me farmers voted with IFA out of loyalty. If the national liquid milk committee was against it, there was a good reason for it.
Our lambs are graded by an in house grader.....never a problem

rangler1 · 20-11-2015 1:56pm

Nettleman wrote: »

Rangler, youve been on here last night and again this morning after having a full inspection this week. Take a break man, as IFA needs to defend itself today, one man cant do it by himself.
This organisation is in a bad way imo, & they lack the courage to do what needs to be done, maybe they will prove me wrong. Is there any chatter on who the successor will be. btw, CAN WE CHANGE THE THREAD TITLE TO €450,000+ ?

After praising my chiropractor last week, I now have a back problem that he seems unable to cure so just passing the time here till it does improve......don't think the twenty year old office chair is helping though

Nettleman · 20-11-2015 2:20pm

rangler1 wrote: »

After praising my chiropractor last week, I now have a back problem that he seems unable to cure so just passing the time here till it does improve......don't think the twenty year old office chair is helping though

I know there's a nice comfy chair vacant in farmcentre going!!!! Might be more than a few vacant by six o'clock news this evening!!

rangler1 · 20-11-2015 2:28pm

Nettleman wrote: »

I know there's a nice comfy chair vacant in farmcentre going!!!! Might be more than a few vacant by six o'clock news this evening!!

Eddie had an input into the salary, as well as the treasurer and probably the deputy, so you wouldn't know where it'd stop.......if it starts.
If it's even half true the top guys are in for a hammering today.
Wonder why the media aren't after the treasurer, he's really avoiding the cross fire.
Padraig walshe and Derek deane hired smith ffs

ABlur · 20-11-2015 2:44pm

Derek Deane just on News at 1 he's not giving much away! Suggesting the IFA enter a 'period of reflection' whatever that means!

whelan2 · 20-11-2015 2:50pm

Why dont they want the salaries made public? Surely it will alienate people more by not making it public

Buford T. Justice XIX · 20-11-2015 3:08pm

limo_100 wrote: »

I would assume that the the IFA never paid out any bonuses in fairness as they never achieved anything

See the reply to kowtows below for a start. Yours is a common refrain to anything concerning the IFA. I go to every Co. Exec. meeting that I can, even those 40 miles away in spring when I could be wrapped up near the fire with a steaming cup of tea or catching up on sleep, but I was voted into a position with the local branch and I feel obliged to attend as that is a duty I accepted in agreeing to be an officer in the branch.

When I read replies like yours, I only wish that the negotiations that the IFA succeed in could only be confined to members, but, unfortunately, they are for ALL farmers, even those ungrateful and whining about those who spend their personal time and money(yeah, no expenses here:rolleyes:) in campaigning for those to blinded by prejudice to recognise the work carried out that doesn't make the headlines like campaigning on Mercosur, TTIP, TAMS, TAMS II, obtaining the PAYE allowance, young farmers allowances in stock relief and farm transfers etc etc etc etc etc.

Or do you think all those relatively farmer friendly schemes were conjured out of thin air by the Dept of Ag with their low shoes and soft hands?

Get a grip.

limo_100 wrote: »

I worked hard to get it to were it is we started out wit 0acres in 1990 little by little with hard graft and time and off farm enterprises yes we have a fairly big place now, Yes I got entitlements but no thanks to the IFA they lobbied for the big man to keep his entitlements as he was the best and more efficient farmer they didn't care about me or any of the young farmers, I also depend on beef as a beef farmer do you no that?? last year the €350 price gap with the UK has scandalous they were gona do this and do that and the gap would never happen again and low and behold its at €340 now but I dont here them saying to much about that now there too busy trying to safe there own jobs,

Were you out protesting at the rallies organised to highlight the price gap.

Iirc, there was much ridicule about having a protest at all and at the section I was at, it was predominately Dairy farmers with beef enterprises that were there.

Where did the beef farmers go?

kowtow wrote: »

If we were producing what the customer wanted then we would hardly need the IFA.

So why pay them?

A quock history lesson, kowtow.

50years ago, farmers weren't allowed to collectively bargain to get better returns for themselves. It was, iirc, outlawed. This position was sustained many, many decades after the right to collective bargaining was allowed in labour negotiations.

The IFA, then only 10 years after formed as the NFA, decided that this was an unfair practice and resolved to fight it, up to and including going to jail. There were a series of marches organised in 1966 from a number of areas to meet up in Dublin and march on the Dail to highlight the prejudicial practice of outlawing one organisation from collective bargaining while positively encouraging another in the practice.

After much negotiation, the rights of farmers to collectively bargain was obtained and retained since despite many attempts to ignore/reduce it.

This will be much in the news next year as the 50th anniversary of the march is marked by a similar march to collect for charities will be organised.

MF290 · 20-11-2015 3:15pm

had a good chuckle at this one...http://waterfordwhispersnews.com/2015/11/20/splinter-farmer-group-declares-itself-the-real-ifa/

Farmer Ed · 20-11-2015 3:37pm

Buford T. Justice V wrote: »

See the reply to kowtows below for a start. Yours is a common refrain to anything concerning the IFA. I go to every Co. Exec. meeting that I can, even those 40 miles away in spring when I could be wrapped up near the fire with a steaming cup of tea or catching up on sleep, but I was voted into a position with the local branch and I feel obliged to attend as that is a duty I accepted in agreeing to be an officer in the branch.

When I read replies like yours, I only wish that the negotiations that the IFA succeed in could only be confined to members, but, unfortunately, they are for ALL farmers, even those ungrateful and whining about those who spend their personal time and money(yeah, no expenses here:rolleyes:) in campaigning for those to blinded by prejudice to recognise the work carried out that doesn't make the headlines like campaigning on Mercosur, TTIP, TAMS, TAMS II, obtaining the PAYE allowance, young farmers allowances in stock relief and farm transfers etc etc etc etc etc.

Or do you think all those relatively farmer friendly schemes were conjured out of thin air by the Dept of Ag with their low shoes and soft hands?

Get a grip.

Were you out protesting at the rallies organised to highlight the price gap.

Iirc, there was much ridicule about having a protest at all and at the section I was at, it was predominately Dairy farmers with beef enterprises that were there.

Where did the beef farmers go?

A quock history lesson, kowtow.

50years ago, farmers weren't allowed to collectively bargain to get better returns for themselves. It was, iirc, outlawed. This position was sustained many, many decades after the right to collective bargaining was allowed in labour negotiations.

The IFA, then only 10 years after formed as the NFA, decided that this was an unfair practice and resolved to fight it, up to and including going to jail. There were a series of marches organised in 1966 from a number of areas to meet up in Dublin and march on the Dail to highlight the prejudicial practice of outlawing one organisation from collective bargaining while positively encouraging another in the practice.

After much negotiation, the rights of farmers to collectively bargain was obtained and retained since despite many attempts to ignore/reduce it.

This will be much in the news next year as the 50th anniversary of the march is marked by a similar march to collect for charities will be organised.

Re history lesson. We have lost the vast majority of our full time family farms over the past 30 years while the IFA support a system that sees the highest rate of farm supports being paid to the likes of Prince Charles and Larry Goodman. I've been that innocent fool that traveled to IFA meetings in the past, only to learn that IFA only campaign for something they only know will happen anyway. It's nearly gone to a stage where if the IFA could be sure they would get fine weather they would put out a press release saying they were lobbing God, and then try a get the credit for the fine weather when it arrived.

kowtow · 20-11-2015 3:41pm

Buford T. Justice V wrote: »

A quock history lesson, kowtow.

50years ago, farmers weren't allowed to collectively bargain to get better returns for themselves. It was, iirc, outlawed. This position was sustained many, many decades after the right to collective bargaining was allowed in labour negotiations.

The IFA, then only 10 years after formed as the NFA, decided that this was an unfair practice and resolved to fight it, up to and including going to jail. There were a series of marches organised in 1966 from a number of areas to meet up in Dublin and march on the Dail to highlight the prejudicial practice of outlawing one organisation from collective bargaining while positively encouraging another in the practice.

After much negotiation, the rights of farmers to collectively bargain was obtained and retained since despite many attempts to ignore/reduce it.

This will be much in the news next year as the 50th anniversary of the march is marked by a similar march to collect for charities will be organised.

I take your point in it's entirety - you are perfectly right that the IFA is constituted in effect as a union. At some moments in the past collective representation of that sort might have proved useful to individual farmers.

The problem is that the market(s) we operate in have changed and the IFA has not. Collective bargaining is appropriate for employees in a factory, with a single employer and terms - perhaps (although many would say industry has also evolved past this) - but it just doesn't work where the risks of production have been effectively transferred to individual farm businesses.

Farmers act in their own perceived interest first and foremost, quite rightly because it is their financial assets which are at risk. The IFA will always fail if it's goal is to rely upon farmers to act collectively.

The first error made in this approach is to treat the processors & creameries as if they were the farmers employer - they are not, they are (or should be) actively owned and controlled by farmers themselves. Colouring them as employers colours the farmers as factory employees on a production line without any power over the supply chain - ironically precisely the setup which allows the processing chain to extract value at the expense of the farmers who are supposed to control it.

The second is that - in the face of farmers who cannot be herded effectively - the IFA is left to concentrate on the one area all farmers can (more or less) agree on, which is lobbying Brussels for more money. Again, this suits the processing chain perfectly because when Europe pays they don't have to.

And it makes for expensive politics, as we are finding out.

Dawggone · 20-11-2015 3:44pm

kowtow wrote: »

I take your point in it's entirety - you are perfectly right that the IFA is constituted in effect as a union. At some moments in the past collective representation of that sort might have proved useful to individual farmers.

The problem is that the market(s) we operate in have changed and the IFA has not. Collective bargaining is appropriate for employees in a factory, with a single employer and terms - perhaps (although many would say industry has also evolved past this) - but it just doesn't work where the risks of production have been effectively transferred to individual farm businesses.

Farmers act in their own perceived interest first and foremost, quite rightly because it is their financial assets which are at risk. The IFA will always fail if it's goal is to rely upon farmers to act collectively.

The first error made in this approach is to treat the processors & creameries as if they were the farmers employer - they are not, they are (or should be) actively owned and controlled by farmers themselves. Colouring them as employers colours the farmers as factory employees on a production line without any power over the supply chain - ironically precisely the setup which allows the processing chain to extract value at the expense of the farmers who are supposed to control it.

Interesting perspective. I would like to hear some debate on this.

Farmer Ed · 20-11-2015 3:51pm

rangler1 wrote: »

Surely there was a vote on the proposal at the SGM, and don't tell me farmers voted with IFA out of loyalty. If the national liquid milk committee was against it, there was a good reason for it.
Our lambs are graded by an in house grader.....never a problem

They had the placed packed wit dry shareholders many of whom were infact also Co Op employees they stood by while the Co Op management used a very expensive PR company and videos to tell blatant lies to farmers and refused to allow the proposers of the motion to use powerpoint or properly address the meeting.

And yes there was a very good reason for IFA to oppose something that had been IFA policy for decades. The individuals involved have all done pretty well in their respective agri political careers since that time. Now that brings us back to the case in point. How much do these agri politicians get paid for sitting on the boards of all these quangos"

rangler1 · 20-11-2015 5:24pm

Farmer Ed wrote: »

They had the placed packed wit dry shareholders many of whom were infact also Co Op employees they stood by while the Co Op management used a very expensive PR company and videos to tell blatant lies to farmers and refused to allow the proposers of the motion to use powerpoint or properly address the meeting.

And yes there was a very good reason for IFA to oppose something that had been IFA policy for decades. The individuals involved have all done pretty well in their respective agri political careers since that time. Now that brings us back to the case in point. How much do these agri politicians get paid for sitting on the boards of all these quangos"

Just because you don't agree with it doesn't mean it was blatant lies.
Anyway that's democracy for you.
Keep thinking they're all mad except you and it'll take some of the pain away

blue5000 · 20-11-2015 5:58pm

Does anyone else think it's ironic that we have the launch of theft stop and news breaking of Pat Smith's salary almost simultaneously, or is it just me?

Greengrass1 · 20-11-2015 6:00pm

What wage would members be happy with?

alps · 20-11-2015 6:04pm

535k.....that has been such an insult to voluntary officials, and the ordinary members, of a magnitude that is difficult to comprehend.

It does prove a long held belief that I have thatordinary farmers are no match for these wolves wearing ties.....

My worry extends to all situations where management is being overseen by farmer board members and even where we have farmers on the renumeration committees.

While the snowball.is rolling it should roll through the coops and any such organisations where farmers effectively pay the cost of management..

tanko · 20-11-2015 6:08pm

blue5000 wrote: »

Does anyone else think it's ironic that we have the launch of theft stop and news breaking of Pat Smith's salary almost simultaneously, or is it just me?

Sure the IFA have been taking money from farmers cheques without their permission at meat factories for years. This is theft pure and simple.
I hope Pat Smith has a good time with the millions of euros of farmers money he's managed to get his hands on over the years.

darragh_haven · 20-11-2015 6:09pm

Greengrass1 wrote: »

What wage would members be happy with?

€135,000 to €150,000 is realistic for the job in the size and type of organisation that the IFA is. There would be good experienced candidates going for job at that pay level.
As an IFA member, would I be happy about it No!. But I also have to be realistic

Farmer Ed · 20-11-2015 6:12pm

rangler1 wrote: »

Just because you don't agree with it doesn't mean it was blatant lies.
Anyway that's democracy for you.
Keep thinking they're all mad except you and it'll take some of the pain away

Actually no that is not democracy.As ruled by the McKenna judgment, the two sides of a debate have to be equally represented. Otherwise it is simply undemocratic. But we are moving away from the point in hand and the value of IFA. The fact is, when faced with the prospect of upsetting Co Op management who collect it dues, IFA actively opposed a motion that would see the implementation of something that had been, and by the way still is, IFA policy, Namely,Independent milk testing. Now that it is becoming public as to the type of money some of these people are on, it is all becoming a bit clearer.

Farmer Ed · 20-11-2015 6:17pm

tanko wrote: »

Sure the IFA have been taking money from farmers cheques without their permission at meat factories for years. This is theft pure and simple.
I hope Pat Smith has a good time with the millions of euros of farmers money he's managed to get his hands on over the years.

Dont forget the EIF levy that they take from the mart cheques. I would say most of us had no idea where it was going or that we would be within our rights to contact the mart and have it stopped.

Farmer Ed · 20-11-2015 6:18pm

alps wrote: »

535k.....that has been such an insult to voluntary officials, and the ordinary members, of a magnitude that is difficult to comprehend.

It does prove a long held belief that I have thatordinary farmers are no match for these wolves wearing ties.....

My worry extends to all situations where management is being overseen by farmer board members and even where we have farmers on the renumeration committees.

While the snowball.is rolling it should roll through the coops and any such organisations where farmers effectively pay the cost of management..

Well said!

rangler1 · 20-11-2015 6:20pm

Greengrass1 wrote: »

What wage would members be happy with?

They want everyone in the financial ****e as well as themselves.
Probably department agriculture senior rates, not forgetting 6 wks holidays 16 sick days, sundays bank holidays etc etc and replacement pay for those holidays,
which comes to 185000 for half a years work........now what's the civil service pension contribution worth....probably need a fund of €5m+ to generate the cs pension of 120000, so there's another 100000, then there's car and expenses.

Right after all that we'll offer him €10/hr and 12 on a sunday
Ok a joke but then that's what all this is....so petty

Panch18 · 20-11-2015 6:21pm

darragh_haven wrote: »

€135,000 to €150,000 is realistic for the job in the size and type of organisation that the IFA is. There would be good experienced candidates going for job at that pay level.
As an IFA member, would I be happy about it No!. But I also have to be realistic

100k would be a very good salary but all those union heads seem to be up to 150k so he should compete with them. I think the highest paid Union guy was paid 150k about 3 years ago

There is absolutely no justification whatsoever for that level of salary for any role in this organisation. The IFA isn't a large corporation with large profits, this salary is totally out of context with the organisation

kowtow · 20-11-2015 6:29pm

Panch18 wrote: »

100k would be a very good salary but all those union heads seem to be up to 150k so he should compete with them. I think the highest paid Union guy was paid 150k about 3 years ago

There is absolutely no justification whatsoever for that level of salary for any role in this organisation. The IFA isn't a large corporation with large profits, this salary is totally out of context with the organisation

+1000

Precisely.

And what is more worrying is the fact that the board of the IFA are not as shocked as their own membership, but rather seek to defend their behaviour, or claim that the revelation is "political" - they are like toddlers blaming each other for the broken vase. They need their heads knocked together.

Organisations which act that way are, without exception, dysfunctional and self-serving.

The contempt of these people for the farmers they are supposed to represent is breathtaking. Time to start afresh.

Farmer Ed · 20-11-2015 6:37pm

rangler1 wrote: »

They want everyone in the financial ****e as well as themselves.
Probably department agriculture senior rates, not forgetting 6 wks holidays 16 sick days, sundays bank holidays etc etc and replacement pay for those holidays,
which comes to 185000 for half a years work........now what's the civil service pension contribution worth....probably need a fund of €5m+ to generate the cs pension of 120000, so there's another 100000, then there's car and expenses.

Right after all that we'll offer him €10/hr and 12 on a sunday
Ok a joke but then that's what all this is....so petty

As a matter of fact the most up to date research would suggest that above a certain point the more you pay someone the worse they get. Please open this link to just some of the findings http://www.forbes.com/sites/susanadams/2014/06/16/the-highest-paid-ceos-are-the-worst-performers-new-study-says/
But now that this can of worms has been opened,surely we have a right to know how much all farmer representatives,CoOp CEOs and so on are being paid. If we know how much the president of the United States is being paid, then surely we have a right to know if wages of multiple times his salary are being paid to people in the agri sector here. Its farmers money they should have a right to know.

Panch18 · 20-11-2015 6:40pm

kowtow wrote: »

+1000

Precisely.

And what is more worrying is the fact that the board of the IFA are not as shocked as their own membership, but rather seek to defend their behaviour, or claim that the revelation is "political" - they are like toddlers blaming each other for the broken vase. They need their heads knocked together.

Organisations which act that way are, without exception, dysfunctional and self-serving.

The contempt of these people for the farmers they are supposed to represent is breathtaking. Time to start afresh.

I am amazed, flabbergasted and a bit disgusted that farmer leaders allowed this to develop in the organisation. Totally out of proportion with the organisation
Just to clarify I'm not anti IFA or anti high salary like some on here, not at all, but this is just wrong

WheatenBriar · 20-11-2015 7:02pm

Looks like the IFA have made a millionaire out of him
He got €535,000 in 2013 :eek:

What the fcuk

http://www.farmersjournal.ie/breaking-former-ifa-general-secretary-salary-revealed-194506/

boggerman1 · 20-11-2015 7:07pm

rangler1 wrote: »

They want everyone in the financial ****e as well as themselves.
Probably department agriculture senior rates, not forgetting 6 wks holidays 16 sick days, sundays bank holidays etc etc and replacement pay for those holidays,
which comes to 185000 for half a years work........now what's the civil service pension contribution worth....probably need a fund of €5m+ to generate the cs pension of 120000, so there's another 100000, then there's car and expenses.

Right after all that we'll offer him €10/hr and 12 on a sunday
Ok a joke but then that's what all this is....so petty

rangler stop defending the indefensible.its a bit like the catholic church blaming everyone else for their covering up of abuse for years.smith should have been paid but no ****ing way north of half a million.so basically for every animal slaughtered in this county if all guys were still allowing the factories to take the ifa levy its amounts to at least 15 weeks of cattle killed at an average kill of 30000 a week.unbelievable

Willfarman · 20-11-2015 7:20pm

4 memberships stopped here. And levies will be stopped forthwith.

rangler1 · 20-11-2015 7:23pm

boggerman1 wrote: »

rangler stop defending the indefensible.its a bit like the catholic church blaming everyone else for their covering up of abuse for years.smith should have been paid but no ****ing way north of half a million.so basically for every animal slaughtered in this county if all guys were still allowing the factories to take the ifa levy its amounts to at least 15 weeks of cattle killed at an average kill of 30000 a week.unbelievable

I didn't think farmers could carry on like that, stupid bollicks didn't think they could keep it under wraps forever did they. as for deane he could have stopped it in 2009 when he was involved in hiring smith, smith only took what was offered, fair dues to him, wouldn't expected anymore from deane anyway.
Such a f..... cover up

Base price · 20-11-2015 7:24pm

http://www.agriland.ie/farming-news/official-ifa-statement-as-extraordinary-portlaoise-meeting-ends/
Going forward they are going to state the remuneration package of the General Secretary but no mention of anyone else :mad:

General secretary of the IFA on a possible €400,000 salary-Read mod note in post 2734

Comments