Conor D McGuinness Demands Justice for Waterford Crystal Workers

Áraibh, diolch maith agaibh beann, sá nacht connaí seoflaí. My colleague, Deputy Cullinan, said it out there, and he and I met with this group of former Water for Crystal workers just last week. And to be honest, Minister, they're worn out by this. They've been at it for years, years of being fobbed off. These are decent, hard-working men. They worked hard, and honestly, for Water for Crystal. They were made redundant. They were kept in the dark at that time about their options. They were never told about their options, in fact. And that failure to inform them has cost them real money, and it's money that would have made a real difference in their lives up until now, and that could, if this is resolved, make a very real difference to their lives. And it's what it comes down to. Time isn't on the side of these individuals either, Minister. And whatever way we cut it, and whatever happened in the early 90s, the state had and has a duty to protect its citizens, to underwrite fairness and guarantee justice, to ensure that rights are upheld, that when workers are put into a situation through no fault of their own that they're made redundant, that their ability to make decisions happens with information, that informed consent is at the core of everything. And these workers didn't get that. And instead of fixing it, the government is washing its hands. The government is ignoring them. And it's not good enough. It needs to be resolved, Minister. And critically, these men, they want to meet with you. They want to sit down with you, Minister. They want for you to hear their story, to hear how this has impacted their lives, to hear the injustice that was done to them. And they want you, crucially then, to resolve it. And that's where you can make the difference. But instead, what we've had is decades of these men being ignored, of the injustice that was done to them being explained away, of goalposts shifting, where previous Ministers have said one thing, Ministers of State are on local media saying another thing, and then we have responses to BQ saying another thing entirely. And that's not good enough. So I'd implore you, Minister, to meet with these men, to hear them out, and to do everything you can with your officials to work on a solution that will give these men some comfort and some justice as they finish their retirement. Good morning to you all, and welcome to the first meeting of this important meeting on Saturday night. As Deputy Col. McGuinness has set out, the issue relates to a group of former workers who left the service of Waterford Crystal between 1990 and 1992 under a redundancy arrangement. At the time of the redundancy, the workers received a refund of their pension contributions relating to their service in the relevant company pension schemes up to that time. Consequently, they then ceased to be members of the pension scheme, no longer had any rights or entitlements under those schemes. This was a private arrangement, agreement entered into by the workers themselves with their former employers. Separately, in 2010, a legal action was taken by a group of former Waterford Crystal workers against the state following the insolvency of the Waterford Crystal factory and staff pension schemes. The case, which is known as the Hogan case, related to the failure of the state to adequately transpose into Irish law the relevant provisions of the EU Insolvency Directive. The Directive requires Member States to ensure that necessary measures are taken to protect employees' occupational pension scheme benefits where an employer becomes insolvent. In 2015, a mediated settlement was reached between the parties to that legal action. The mediated settlement applied to all persons who were members of the Waterford Crystal staff and factory pension scheme on the date of the wind-up of the schemes, 31 March 2009. In total, 1,774 scheme members were covered by the agreement. Total costs to the exchequer arising from the mediated agreement were estimated at €253 million. No member of the scheme with a pension entitlement at the date of wind-up was excluded from the mediated settlement in respect of their benefits. The former employees of Waterford Crystal who previously took redundancy and received refunds of pension contributions were not eligible to be included in the mediated settlement as they had no benefits retained in the scheme. Those who took partial refunds maintained an entitlement consummate with their level of benefit that remained in the scheme. This group of workers, the Waterford Crystal Pension Action Group, WCPHE, dispute the receipt of pension option forms at the time they were made redundant. The question regarding the provision of leaving service options is one for the employer and the trustees rather than the state. I understand that some members of WCPHE took a legal action against these parties, which was ultimately settled. My department was not a party to these proceedings, but the outcome did not reinstate the members' pension rights in the pension schemes. Following a meeting with some of those affected in September 2024, Ben Taoiseach, the Simon Harris, requested the Attorney General to review the claims being made, including the allegations around the failure to provide leaving service options. The Attorney General advised that there is no basis on which the state could be obliged to compensate the members concerned or otherwise intervene. I very much appreciate that the members of WCPHE feel an injustice has been done to them. Unfortunately, it is not something that the state was party to or can now resolve. As I have already communicated to the group, to Deputy Cullen-Ann, nothing has changed from my department's perspective and there is no basis for me to intervene, considering that the Attorney General has reviewed this issue comprehensively. In those circumstances, I do not feel a meeting is warranted. I hope this clarifies matters for both deputies. Minister, you say in your response that the question regarding the provision of leaving service options is one for the employer and the trustees rather than the state. Well, the first part of that sentence is true. At that time when these workers were being redundant, it was incumbent on the employer and the trustees to provide full information. But the state has a role. The state has a role in vindicating rights, in ensuring compliance with not just the letter but the spirit of the law and ensuring that where there are differences in power, when there is a large multinational company making workers in Waterford redundant, that the state is on the side of the workers ensuring that they have fair play. Fairness wasn't done here and justice wasn't done here and that happened on the state's watch. It happened on the watch of Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael, I might add, as well. Minister, you and government have legal advice that says you can just sit on your hands and let this injustice go on. But this comes down to a political decision. It comes down to a choice of values and a matter of justice and you have a political decision now. Is it to sit on your hands or is it to meet these workers halfway and make a reasonable attempt to resolve this issue for them? As I said, birthdays come around every single year and time is not on the side of these former Waterford crystal workers. And just to say, Minister, the last line of your response here, and I have it in front of me as well. I do not believe a meeting is warranted. I trust this clarifies matters for the Deputy. It is crystal clear, that last line, a meeting is not warranted. You're refusing now to meet with this group of workers who have suffered an injustice. And at the very least, sit down with them, hear their stories, hear the impact and let's work to get a resolution for these men. I thank both deputies and I want to again clarify the position. The former employees took refunds of the contributions. They have no pension entitlements and therefore they had no entitlement under what was the mediated settlement. The Pensions Authority have also advised that there is no breach of the Pensions Act in this case. Some of those in relation have taken illegal action against the parties. That action was settled. It did not involve the state in any way. The Attorney General has comprehensively reviewed all of the information that was provided to him in September 2024. And on his advice is that there is nothing further that could be done in this case. I think you'll have found in other cases where I feel there can be a solution, but I genuinely feel on this occasion a meeting would be unfair because it may create an expectation that I cannot meet. And I think that would be unfair. So I think the Attorney General's advice is very clear. There is nothing further that can be done as of now in this case.