Why aren't the trustees in jail?

Just looking at Prime Time right now.

Some guy who worked 42 years in Waterford Glass since he was like 16 is now facing his pension going nuclear.

Surely the trustees have to report regularly on the status of the retirement money they manage?


High court and shackles.

Ive said it before on here and got tackled for doing so, but the pensions timebomb which we are facing is just that, a timebomb.

Many Trustees are also the Company Directors or owners. Schemes are supposed to be audited once a year but its not uncommon for some schemes to go a number of years without scheme years being closed off, balanced and members provided with their personalised year end statements etc. There are also almost certainly going to be funding issues with regard to DB schemes very soon - I didnt see the programme this evening so Im not sure which category the Waterford Glass one falls into.

Given the unregulated nature of much of the Irish financial world during the boom years, as well as the transitory nature of the employment scene at many of the pensions providers/adminstrators, IMO its safe to say that the guy in Waterford Glass wont be the only poor sod to be facing into such circumstances. God only knows whats coming down the line.

I guess it’s the same reason the bank executives aren’t in jail -

The pensions board are attempting to fiddle and “kick into touch” by relaxing rules and extending deadlines left right and centre.


They’re even worse than the pensions companies and should be summarily executed.

The point that was made on primetime was that all these schemes are “voluntary”. The pensions board are afraid that if they start enforcing the letter of the law (well actually code of the regulation), the employers will simply say “stuff that, I’m not offering a company pension scheme any more”

Brendan Burges was on prime time and made the good point that if a company goes under, and there are funds in the pension scheme, by law, the first people who are taken care of are those who are already retired. Only after that, if there’s funds remaining, will people who are still below the retirement age get any money. In the case of Waterford, the bulk of people in the scheme are already retired, so those who haven’t retired yet, could get wiped out.

Mark Little was saying that it now appears that there is “risk” after all in company pension schemes. The “promise” of a pension is just that, and not a guarantee, and the government was telling everyone to contribute to them, without highlighting this.

Scary stuff.

My employer provides a mandatory scheme, so I’ve no choice but to see 5% of my gross disappear every month. Do employers do that because of a legal requirement or simply a government guideline?

Half the time the money goes into a company-owned (or part-owned) fund.

The other half of the time, the financial director and managing director get a tidy back-hander.

If anything is to emerge out of this crisis, pension funds would love nothing more than mandatory pension schemes being introduced.

Are the IALPA trustees acting recklessly by not accepting Ryanair’s offer? Did they act recklessly by putting politics before dividends when they soaked up Aer Lingus shares not so long ago? Will this gamble pay off or will they be left not being able to meet their statutory requirements?

independent.ie/national-news … 59930.html

Hundreds of airline pilots could wind up holding worthless pensions that can’t pay for their weekly shop, let alone their medical bills.