Should the taxpayer fund Waterford Glass Pension Deficit?

C

Carramore

Registered User
Messages
80
I don't think the taxpayer should fund the deficit on the Waterford Glass Pension Scheme. The fact that there was a massive deficit was clear for years from the pension fund's accounts, yet workers were prepared to ignore it, preferring to keep their jobs intact. Those of us whose DC pension funds were ravaged by the stock market collapse don't have the option of coming begging to the government (i.e. other taxppayers). I don't know why we should be asked to provide money to others who made a conscious choice of jobs over pension security.
 
Carramore said:
I don't think the taxpayer should fund the deficit on the Waterford Glass Pension Scheme. The fact that there was a massive deficit was clear for years from the pension fund's accounts, yet workers were prepared to ignore it, preferring to keep their jobs intact. Those of us whose DC pension funds were ravaged by the stock market collapse don't have the option of coming begging to the government (i.e. other taxppayers). I don't know why we should be asked to provide money to others who made a conscious choice of jobs over pension security.
Click to expand...
Can explain or expand on that part of our comment (( i dont know why etc over pension securit.Forgive me if I dont get the connection between the ( jobs over pension security) part of your comment
 
For years, employees and management in WG knew that there was a substantial deficit in the pension fund. That was apparent from the Trustees' reports on the fund. Yet they conspired together to look after the immediate concern for pay and jobs rather than fix the deficit.
 
Are all the pension funds in a similar deficit or is it the case that the directors and senior executives enjoy superior funding arrangements? This should be in the public domain.
 
Carramore said:
For years, employees and management in WG knew that there was a substantial deficit in the pension fund. That was apparent from the Trustees' reports on the fund. Yet they conspired together to look after the immediate concern for pay and jobs rather than fix the deficit.
Click to expand...

I can assure you that the Employees in WG never conspired with management on any issues there let alone Pensions.Employees paid the contributions to Pension fund maybe some others did not as you suggest.
 
All I'm saying is that this wasn't done behind employees' backs. Everyone knew that the contributions to the pension fund weren't nearly sufficient to meet the liabilities being accrued. Therefore, either directly or indirectly, employees and their trade union representatives were complicit in what happened.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top