55% discount for ESB staff



Goodbody

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 21, 2010
Messages
1,481
It doesnt matter who the private owners are. As long as the company is not 100% in public ownership, it has private shareholders who get private profits.
You can't at the same time call employees of ESB both exploited cattle AND capricious shareholders.
 

taxman58

Active member
Joined
Jul 6, 2009
Messages
102
There appears to be a real issue over the BIK tax on this perk.
Dont think so as ESB will rely on Revenue Rules as follows:


Staff Discounts
Price above cost to the employer
A discount, given by an employer (e.g. an employer in the retail sector) on the purchase of goods by an employee, is not regarded as a taxable benefit if the sum paid by the employee is equal to or greater than the cost to the employer of acquiring or manufacturing the goods and
The goods cannot reasonably be converted into money or money's worth.
Price below cost to the employer
Where goods are sold below the employer's cost and the goods cannot reasonably be converted into money or money's worth, the difference between that cost and the price paid is a taxable benefit and PAYE and PRSI must be operated on this amount.



Not sure if still applies but when the old College Fees existed, children of University Employees were exempt from fees and there was no BIK as not convertible and at no cost to employer. Similar re discounted/free travel perks on Airlines.
 

Cael

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 19, 2006
Messages
13,304
Don't you think that this trashes the right/left divide a bit? People will always help out those they personally know over the faceless masses. That is nothing to do with left or right, it's just the nature of living beings, buiilt in for survival. We cannot trust people we do not know to do the right thing by us irrespective of what title our system has, socialist or capitalist. What we need is transparency, the ability to examine and effect every decision made.

I think direct democracy is what will address these issues, not socialism or communism or whatever. Do you think that calling the bigshots by a different name will change their nature? I'm assuming you have read Animal Farm.
Of course Im in favour of direct democracy. But, we need to end this commodification of labour. We also need large scale state industry to provide the people with their material needs - particularly in areas such as energy and other areas of advanced technology. Irish private capital is too weak to carry our this task.
 

Cael

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 19, 2006
Messages
13,304
You can't at the same time call employees of ESB both exploited cattle AND capricious shareholders.
I didnt mention anything about exploitation. I said they are capitalists selling a commodity. That is the attitude and view of self that the capitalist educational system has drummed into them, and thats the attitude the capitalist media bombards them with every minute of the day and night.
 

KingKane

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 19, 2003
Messages
2,323
Website
www.danielsullivan.ie
Twitter
kingkane
It doesnt matter who the private owners are. As long as the company is not 100% in public ownership, it has private shareholders who get private profits.
but who are these private owners? You do realise that the term semi-state doesn't mean the company is only partially owned by the state?
 

Raketemensch

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 11, 2009
Messages
3,075
but who are these private owners? You do realise that the term semi-state doesn't mean the company is only partially owned by the state?
FFS, we have already been discussing for ages how it's part owned by the employees, do keep up.
 

Goodbody

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 21, 2010
Messages
1,481
I didnt mention anything about exploitation. I said they are capitalists selling a commodity. That is the attitude and view of self that the capitalist educational system has drummed into them, and thats the attitude the capitalist media bombards them with every minute of the day and night.
Cael, they're not Capitalists. Capitalists supply the Capital ($Cash). In the case of ESB, the Capital is supplied by the State (on behalf of the Taxpayer). So the employees of ESB are enjoying Double Compensation, in that they are being paid for their Labor (via Wages) and are also receiving Capital remuneration (via ESOP Dividends), even though they supplied no Capital.

Actually, make that Triple Compensation as they are also receiving subsidized electricity themselves.
 

H

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 13, 2007
Messages
378
Apparently Joe Duffy is to discuss the very generous 55% discount on electricity which Leo Varadkar unearthed.
Nice to know that on top of the highest salaries in Europe, the recent 2.5% pay increase that the TEEU and other union darlings are doing quite nicely on this also.
BIK declared-I am sure it is.
Still it is good to know that our working class heoes are being looked after nicely while thousands have been cut off from the ESB.
What ever the merits or otherwise of existing job bonuses etc that these employees currently enjoy it pales into insignificance when you see what is ripped off via stealth taxes (PSO levy) supported by chief Sleaze merchant Greenwash Minister Eamon Ryan and given to profitable companies like the ESB for lousy inefficent "renewables"

Profits for the ESB are circa more than €500 million

The poor, the elderley are crucified by these scumbag stealth taxes.
 

Finbar10

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 3, 2008
Messages
2,629
I think ESB employees would own only about 5% of the company via their ESOT. I wouldn't begrudge ESB employees a good wage. But there's a balance to be struck also since it is being paid for by ESB customers. Average wages of €75k (plus another €25k pension contribution) seem excessive to me. Annual turnover in electricity sold is circa €3 billion. Wage costs are around €0.7 billion a year. The wage cost is certainly not insignificant to the price being charged for electricity.
 

Kevin Doyle

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 9, 2007
Messages
11,017
i heard a story that the head guys in ESB get free electiricity for life once they pack in the job and a new one takes over.

anyone know if this is true or just the rumour mill ?
Hey, d'ya think IF the ESB was privatised that the CEO of the new private company wouldnt enjoy a similar perk?
 

Kevin Doyle

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 9, 2007
Messages
11,017
I think ESB employees would own only about 5% of the company via their ESOT. I wouldn't begrudge ESB employees a good wage. But there's a balance to be struck also since it is being paid for by ESB customers. Average wages of €75k (plus another €25k pension contribution) seem excessive to me. Annual turnover in electricity sold is circa €3 billion. Wage costs are around €0.7 billion a year. The wage cost is certainly not insignificant to the price being charged for electricity.
Actually its completey irrlevant, the ESB handed back over 400 million in profits to the exhequer, the Goverment could have dismissed the regulator and ordered the ESB to charge at break even rates drastically lowering the price of electricity for everyone and there wouldnt be a pay cut in sight in the process.

Of course the goverment wont do this, they view profits from the ESB as another form of stealth tax.
 

Newffowner

Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2010
Messages
94
The point is that it's not a lot of E3. The numbers who are not given meter readings for a year due to non-employment of a meter reader are very very small. Most people who don't get a meter reading don't get one because only two thirds of meter readings are read, not 100%, hence two of your six readings will be estimated for everyone. This is part of the service ESB has agreed because a two month gap in a reading rarely seriously impacts on anyone's bill. Alternatively, a lot of people have indoor meters or meters in sheds or behind gates, or a lot of people have dogs on their property. The vast majority of estimations are due to inaccessibility of the meter or a scheduled estimation. So it's not a 'lot of E3' building up.



That's fine but stating that that's self-evidently a good thing is wrong. There are arguments in favour and arguments against, but thats a matter of national legislation. Personally I'd be against as it would be carte blanche for anyone who didnt want to pay a bill.

Especially considering how difficult it is to get cut off (it takes total non-cooperation and months of lack of contact), I don't think that, or widespread token meter use is necessary here. If all we had was airtricity, fair enough - they're very quick to disconnect customers, but with ESB CS, they are exceptionally fair and flexible to anyone in difficulty who makes contact.

The fact is that if I can't afford food and rock up at Tesco and demand to get my trolley of food for free, Tesco will tell me to bugger off. That doesn't mean my plight isn't genuine, but that the responsibility does not lie with the provider, but with myself or with society.

Likewise, if people can't afford electricity (and I mean genuinely can't afford it, as opposed to simply don't want to cut back on non-essentials like clothes driers and u/g heating) then it is unfair to expect ESB or any other electricity company to pick up the tab - whether we, as a society want to be cold-hearted and do nothing, or whether we want to provide extra support to people in difficulties is ultimately a social and political decision. I'd much rather the decision about whether I pay more in taxes to support people in difficulty be made in Dail Eireann, than a decision about whether I pay more in electricity costs to cover the bills of people who can't pay be made in ESB HQ.
Looking at the CER Customer Care Team report for 2008, we see that the CER is aware for one customer that no meter reader was employed for a year, assuming a reader reads more than one meter a year, that’s a lot of meters not being read and if it happens once, it’s likely happening more than once. The CER or Ryan won’t clarify the extent, so we can differ on our opinions based on experiences, neither of use has the facts to support our version, but if the regulator was doing their job the facts should be available but they’re not. How can a regulator be regulating when it doesn’t know what’s going on.

You seem to use the argument that prepaid meters are a method of avoiding payment for bills, this is not the case, in the North, energy companies cannot cut you off without first offering you a prepaid meter(H&S), part of the prepayment then goes to pay off old debts, it’s not debt forgiveness at all, it assists those in genuine need, and the company gets paid it’s outstanding debts. Win win situation.



On the issue of national legislation, all these decisions have been transferred to the Commission of Energy Regulation, the most incompetent shower of clowns you will ever have the misfortune to deal with if you have a ding dong with an energy company. As Consumers we have little or no input into the decision making policies of this shower. For example, if you look at the 2008 report, the consumer based objects, for 2009, have not been achieved and it’s now nearly 2011, the roadmap for electricity deregulation was to have a public consultation in Sept Oct of this year still to happen, and the consumer proposals on deregulation of the gas industry are to de dealt with at some unspecified time in the future.

We as consumers don’t have a watchdog we have a lapping pup, that can’t do anything without it’s masters consent, and that spanner Ryan won’t do anything about it because the Energy companies are keeping him happy with windmills.

With regard to the perk, it’s not an issue for me, the issue is in if the regulator allowed it as an acceptable cost in calculating the tariff, this tariff is the bench mark for all suppliers so it affects everybodies bill. The tariff is meant to be based on cost of production not cost incurred, and all these little amounts the CER lets the energy companies get away with just increases the costs of the consumer and industry, making us uncompetitive in the global market
 


New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top