FÁS Executive Expenses & Payoffs

Irish Independent

Quote:

---

FAS spent almost €643,000 on travel to the US for Rody Molloy his wife, key executives and FAS guests in just four years.

The vast majority of the cost was for business class flights for the top brass. Club Travel was paid a total of $229,957 for flights to the US between 2003 to 2007. Donnybrook Travel was paid €176,318 over the same period, with Regency Travel billing for €236,138.

Greg Craig had a visa card, paid by FAS, with a credit limit of a staggering €76,000.

---

The last expense needed.

http://yellowj.files.wordpress.com/2.../kick-butt.gif

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pete

Irish Independent

---

http://foot.ie/showpost.php?p=1064614&postcount=171

Quote:

---

Greg Craig had a visa card, paid by FAS, with a credit limit of a staggering €76,000.

---

Went to school with Greg and knocked around with him for a few years after leaving.

He got involved in politics and was IIRC seconded to Dublin Corporation, as it was then in 1982/83, as a FF Councillor

Can't beat a good Ballyfermot education all the same:D

RTE News

Quote:

---

Mr Molloy said FÁS does have a very serious checking process for expenses and that people only get what they are entitled to.

---

I presume this means lavish entertainment is standard practice. :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

He also defended taking his wife on some trips, saying she accompanied him when it was appropriate.

He said he was entitled to travel first class but traded down to business class when his wife travelled with him.

---

No accountable company would send wives on business class seats.

Quote:

---

Fianna Fáil Senator Labhrás O'Murchú said that while the expenses at FÁS should be dealt with in a professional manner, any investigation should not be allowed to distract from the 'wonderful' work the agency was doing.

---

Classic muddy the waters tactic. As if the top management ripping off the state on expenses has anything to do with the rest of the organisation.

Interestingly there are 4 Trade union & 4 IBEC reps on the board. No wonder they have been so quiet. In any accountable organisation anyone approving such expenses would be kick out the door.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pete

I presume this means lavish entertainment is standard practice.

---

Yeah, that's right the whole way down :rolleyes: Sure the normal public servant has strict expenses - our place cuts me for a mile each trip as they won't count the mile I live outside the village. Ministers and TD's have the best Travel & Subsistence out of anyone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pete

Classic muddy the waters tactic. As if the top management ripping off the state on expenses has anything to do with the rest of the organisation.

---

But it is being used to add in to the general bashing of the whole Public Service. As I'm sitting here typing I'm listening to them making out that the NASA trips and the procurement issues around advertising show this type of stuff is widespread in FAS - they both relate to the same section within the same division!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pete

Interestingly there are 4 Trade union & 4 IBEC reps on the board. No wonder they have been so quiet. In any accountable organisation anyone approving such expenses would be kick out the door.

---

Sure why would they in the type of climate that the leader of the country nominates people to state boards because they're his friends (not because they gave him money, honest), and the type of climate that allows one of those said friends stay as chairman of a state company when liquidators are applying that he be barred from holding directorships.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pete

Interestingly there are 4 Trade union & 4 IBEC reps on the board. No wonder they have been so quiet. In any accountable organisation anyone approving such expenses would be kick out the door.

---

David Begg was on Q&A on Monday night and Jack O'Connor was on Vincent Brown last night - I was appalled by the performance of both - they fudged and refused to condemn anything that went on there. Probably because the 3rd of the trinity, Peter McLoone, was on one of the trips.
It made me realise that the unions' membership is probably* predominantly from the public sector now, so they were only standing up for their constituency (albeit in a very misguided way, imo).
It made me wonder how they now link with Labour Party after years of cosying up to Bertie. (Macy, interested in your views here as you would appear to know more about the public sector, unions and the Labour Party than me.)

I've worked in some companies that were very extravagent when it came to expenses and only the very, very top brass flew first class; none of these "expenses" would have been allowable.

Finally, this will be a good test of the Keenan and Buckley reports - the ones that gave massive pay hikes to top public servants because that's what they could get in the private sector; will Rody get a 250k pa job in the private sector?

* I wonder what the stats are, public vs private union membership

I used to work in the civil service, and one of the sections I worked in specifically dealt with expense accounts for overseas visits etc. There's absolutely no way the FAS guy would've got away with anything in the civil service. Breakfast isn't allowed in hotel stays, never mind PPV films. And that goes right to ministerial level.

Scandalous abuse of money. And as usual, its front line public servants who will feel the brunt of any media driven "backlash" despite the overwhelming majority of them not receiving expenses of any kind

As far as I understand it it depends on where you have to travel to with the Civil Service, you get x amount depending on what city/country and if you go over that its at your own expense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by monutdfc

David Begg was on Q&A on Monday night and Jack O'Connor was on Vincent Brown last night - I was appalled by the performance of both - they fudged and refused to condemn anything that went on there. Probably because the 3rd of the trinity, Peter McLoone, was on one of the trips.

---

I don't watch Q&A as Bowman can't be arsed to chair it properly anymore, but saw O'Connor on Brawn last night. My read was that he wouldn't say much until he saw all the evidence, which is fair enough imo. The DG of FAS resigning probably took the sting out of it. He was right to argue that it shouldn't be taken as the general carry on throughout the public service - it might be at the top, but it certainly doesn't filter down.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by monutdfc

It made me realise that the unions' membership is probably* predominantly from the public sector now, so they were only standing up for their constituency (albeit in a very misguided way, imo).

* I wonder what the stats are, public vs private union membership

---

Density is certainly higher in the public sector, but afaik there's still more members in the Private sector than Public. In my own union, SIPTU, that is certainly the case (and they've certainly done their public service members no favours with the recent wage agreements - concessions have been by the Public Sector members for the Private Sector members working rights).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by monutdfc

It made me wonder how they now link with Labour Party after years of cosying up to Bertie. (Macy, interested in your views here as you would appear to know more about the public sector, unions and the Labour Party than me.)

---

I think I've said it here before many times, the link between Labour and the Trade Unions is over played (unfortunately). Both sides are guilty. The Unions have cosied up to FF through the national wage agreements which have propped up those Governments. Labour have moved more towards the centre away from their roots. IMO both the Unions and Labour need to get back to their roots politically.

The financial connection is over played by the right too - it's around €60k a year out of €2million the Labour Party raises, and the political fund contribution in SIPTU is 63 cent per annum per member (and is very easy to opt out of).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by monutdfc

I've worked in some companies that were very extravagent when it came to expenses and only the very, very top brass flew first class; none of these "expenses" would have been allowable.

---

I don't know about that - I know people in the Private Sector who are (or were) regularly taken on jollies on the company.

Quote:

---

I don't know about that - I know people in the Private Sector who are (or were) regularly taken on jollies on the company.

---

So do I. Indeed I have been that camper. But companies have very strict rules about what is allowed and what is not allowed. PPV movies (except if someone is on a long-term secondment), nailbars, hairdos would never be allowed (indeed revenue will audit expenses with a toothcomb if they think BIK fraud is going on). Fewer and fewer companies allow First Class for even their top execs anymore (I've never been in First Class but there's a world of difference between First and Business, and Business is already very luxurious and ridiculously priced),

Quote:

---

As far as I understand it it depends on where you have to travel to with the Civil Service, you get x amount depending on what city/country and if you go over that its at your own expense.

---

Basically, but flights and hotels would be separate, and absolutely no hotel extras would be covered. As I said, even breakfast isn't covered. If breakfast is included in the room rate, 10% of rate is paid for by staff. There are strict ceilings on the maximum amount allowed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by monutdfc

Fewer and fewer companies allow First Class for even their top execs anymore (I've never been in First Class but there's a world of difference between First and Business, and Business is already very luxurious and ridiculously priced),

---

I would suspect it isn't common in FAS either. It appears to me to be the one basket case section. The issues over procurement of advertising and advertising agencies, and the NASA project all appear to be the same section when you actually look at the details.

My wife who is a public servant drove (for personal reasons) to Galway for a meeting , did her mileage calculation but it was such a large amount (can't remember offhand, but around €350 I think) she decided it wasnt right and just submitted for the price of a return train ticket. Also, the higher cc her car the higher mileage rate she gets.

But for foreign travel what Dodge and Centre-mid say is afaik correct for her - the rates and rules are very clear.

Civil service mileage rates

I'd presume public servants the same (or very similar)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dodge

I'd presume public servants the same (or very similar)

---

Public Servants Travel & Subsistence rates and regulations are the same, as per Department of Finance circulars.

As for the mileage (or should that be kilometerage?) it's supposed to include wear and tear as well as fuel. If there is a public transport option you're supposed to use it anyway.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pete

I presume this means lavish entertainment is standard practice.

---

I was talking about FAS Executives. Not meant as spur on FAS or the public/civil service. The guy in question felt yesterday he had not done anything wrong (i.e. charging lavish entertainment was ok) so by that logic he has been charging & approving those expenses for years.

IMO the flights & accommodation is a different issue if someone traveling on legitimate business. Business class fares might be justifiable depending on options & flexable fares. The charging of first class flights was completely unjustifiable as is charging business class fare for wife. Then again he was a politician so I am sure he saw this as standard practice.

As they say business class is for people someone else is paying for & first class is for people who pay for themselves. I believe first class is almost unheard of business travel unless upgraded.

Seems to me looking from the outside that big different between civil service regulation & other state bodies. Seems some state bodies given a budget & no accountability of the top management. Controller & Auditor General report on Bord na Gon found fraud in maintenance contracts from years ago.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pete

Seems to me looking from the outside that big different between civil service regulation & other state bodies. Seems some state bodies given a budget & no accountability of the top management. Controller & Auditor General report on Bord na Gon found fraud in maintenance contracts from years ago.

---

The Regulations are generally the same. Only probably difference is the Minister would sign directly a Sec Generals expenses I assume, whereas in a semi-state it would be the Minister appointed chairman/ board. The board of these organisations are tired directly to the Minister - the last chairman of FAS was married to the Minister responsible Enterprise, Trade & Employment who are the FAS parent department (incidentally the company in which he is now involved represents both HIQA & various private health companies, whilst she's over the Department of Health).

Molloys P Flynn moment in the Pat Kenny Interview

Quote:

---

When the issue of spouses' flights being paid for by Fás was raised with Molloy by Kenny on Tuesday, the public service executive responded: "It wasn't first-class travel, it was business-class travel. Yes, it is hellishly expensive, but any time that a spouse travelled it was because there was reason for a spouse to travel to do with the activities that were involved. One that comes to my mind . . . an [event] that involved President McAleese and her husband . . . I mean listen, all I can say to you on that is that when a spouse travels in Fás they do so at no additional expense to the organisation unless there is a very specific reason for it. There are occasions when it is appropriate. In my own case when my spouse would be with me . . . any time she has been with me there was no additional expense to Fás because I traded down my travel entitlement to allow her to travel . . . so it comes in at less expense to the organisation."

"I'm entitled to travel first class," Molloy said. Asked to confirm that he had traded down his first-class ticket for two business-class tickets, he responded: "In one instance that's what happened, yeah."

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pete

"I'm entitled to travel first class," Molloy said. Asked to confirm that he had traded down his first-class ticket for two business-class tickets, he responded: "In one instance that's what happened, yeah."

---

I've done that too.

Back in the days when I was a public servant I was being sent to Paris on work related business. It was over a weekend which also included St Patrick's Day.

I was booked business class on Aer Lingus and when the tickets arrived I trotted the short distance up O'Connell St to the AL offices and changed them for two "normal seats".

The company also received a small rebate as the cost of the two standard tickets was less than one business class.

AFAIK, it's a regular practice both in public and private industry.

Whatever about downgrading to bring a partner and still saving money (against the rules of most private companies now for insurance reasons) travelling First Class is ridiculous.

Business Class is comfortable enough to arrive at your destination well rested.