Mr David Franks
Chief Executive Officer
Iarnród Éireann
Connolly Station
Dublin 1

16th February 2015

Re: Payment of Trade Union Accountants to Examine Company Books

Dear Sir,

I refer to the above and wish to highlight an anomaly which was contained in an article from Eolas Magazine dated Friday the 19th September 2014.

This particular magazine, according to its website, reaches Ireland’s key decision-makers and influencers within Government and business.

The article in question which was tagged as “Rail: growing into the future”, carried a comprehensive interview with you conducted by Mr Owen McQuade, covered a range of topics to do with the Iarnród Éireann and was indexed as the Top Story in that particular edition.

My concern relates to the section which refers to the company having an “open-book approach on the (then) proposed pay cuts, paying for the trade union’s accountants to go through the books”. This particular section conveys the clear and I would suggest unambiguous impression that Iarnród Eireann paid for the NBRU’s accountants to examine the company’s books.

Having been made aware of the article, I believe that the record requires to corrected on this issue: whilst the company may have paid for some accountants or financial assessors to conduct an analysis of the books, they did not pay for the NBRU’s accountants, nor were they requested to do so.

It is important in the context of this Trade Union’s independence to draw a clear distinction between areas which may necessitate the undertaking of pre-agreed joint reviews or the provision of adjudicators for various internal fora, as opposed to the scenario which pertained at the time that the financial assessment was commissioned by this Trade Union.

You will for example be only too aware that the position adopted by the NBRU was diametrically opposed to that of the Company with regard to the causes of the financial situation, the reduction in Government subvention and the expectation that staff would prop up the running of a modern railway being one case in point.

We also had issues with the non-payroll cost base; issues which were identified and ventilated by the financial assessor appointed and financed by the NBRU.

The concerns raised in his report still permeate to this day. They include, but are not exclusive to, the use of contractors and consultants, an area which we have consistently raised through correspondence, through the terms of reference as a component of the original Cost Management Committee and within the brief opportunity we have had under the LRC-proposed review process.

Our commitment to our members is to continue to ask the questions, to continue to seek the answers we feel they are entitled to around the non-payroll cost base, and all the obstructionist interventions, all the attempts to stymie the debate around this vital and fundamental pillar of the LRC proposals of the 3rd September 2014 will not thwart our resolve to fully represent our members’ concerns.

Notwithstanding this, I am now to request that you will by return correct the record with regard to the erroneous assertion contained in the Eolas Magazine article that the NBRU’s accountants were paid for by the Company.

Yours Sincerely

______________
DERMOT O’LEARY
General Secretary