More than 150 staff at airport operator Daa earned over €150,000 last year
Daa
earned above €150,000 each last year, figures show.
Official figures also reveal the chief executive at the group, which runs Dublin and Cork airports and other subsidiaries, is not the organisation's highest-paid staff member in 2024.
Last year one unnamed person had total remuneration of between €475,000 and €500,000. The company's chief executive Kenny Jacobs received a total package of €374,830.
In a statement, Daa said it was a commercial business that received no public funding. It said it had to compete internationally for key personnel.
READ MORE
Eamon Ryan
, then minister for transport, set out remuneration levels for the top earners at Daa in an appendix to a submission sent last summer to a government-appointed pay review for chief executives of commercial state companies.
Mr Ryan's submission, which has been released by the
Department of Transport
, were based on figures for 2023.
Those figures showed three staff were paid more than the chief executive, who that year received total remuneration of €347,457. The three were paid between €350,000 and €375,000.
The document showed 137 personnel received total remuneration of more than €150,000 each in 2023.
Mr Ryan's submission to the senior posts remuneration committee said that 3,864 personnel at Daa group earned less than €50,000, although this included part-time staff.
He said remuneration for CEOs varied across international competitors in the aviation sector.
Mr Ryan noted the head of Fraport, which runs Frankfurt Airport and has contracts at 30 others worldwide, had a total package of €1.65 million while the head of Aena, the state company that manages 46 airports in Spain, was paid €186,575 in 2023.
Daa's annual report for 2024 showed 152 people received €150,000 or more last year.
In addition, 88 employees were paid between €125,000 and €150,000, while 187 earned between €100,000 and €125,000.
The company said: 'The State does not fund the remuneration of Daa staff, as Daa operates as a commercial business and receives no public funding.
'Aviation is a global industry and Daa competes for talent against other international airports and aviation businesses, as well as international retailers.
'Daa is a multinational commercial enterprise with operations in 14 countries across four continents, with several CEOs and management teams.'
The annual report said Mr Jacobs received total remuneration of €374,830 last year – up from €347,457 the previous year. It said this figure included basic salary of €284,235 and pension contributions and other taxable benefits of €90,595 . It said Mr Jacobs did not receive a director's fee.
Last month the Cabinet accepted many of the recommendations of the senior post remuneration committee.
Minister for Public Expenditure Jack Chambers said the upper limit on any proposed package would be the market rate .
However, there would be no backdating of any increases to May 1st of last year, another committee recommendation, and no reintroduction of performance-related bonuses worth up to 25 per cent of salaries, which was also proposed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Irish Times
2 hours ago
- Irish Times
‘The stress is inhumane': Second Dublin council pauses scheme to buy homes of tenants at risk of homelessness
The number of families at risk of homelessness due to the lack of funding for the tenant-in-situ scheme has risen to more than 160, after a second local authority in Dublin paused applications. The scheme allows local authorities to buy properties that host tenants facing eviction because the landlord is selling. It applies to tenants who have received a notice of termination, are deemed at risk of homelessness and who qualify for social housing support such as the Housing Assistance Payment (HAP) or the Rental Accommodation Scheme (RAS). New restrictions were applied to the scheme this year, including a stipulation that the home must be in the HAP or RAS system for at least two years. READ MORE There have also been lengthy delays in the issuing of Government funding to the scheme, as Minister for Housing James Browne conducted a review of its terms. In June, Dublin City Council confirmed it had paused all new applications to the scheme as its 2025 budget had already been allocated. The council had 104 applications to the scheme by March. Fingal County Council has now confirmed it is in the same position and will not be proceeding with any more purchases under the scheme. In a letter sent to Sinn Féin TD for Fingal West Louise O'Reilly, the local authority said its budget for 2025 'has been exhausted' after it made 32 acquisitions under tenant in situ, with one remaining sale going through the conveyancing process. This compares to 121 tenant-in-situ acquisitions made in 2024. 'There were 60 tenant-in-situ applications that were paused at the beginning of the year and did not proceed due to limited funding,' the council said. [ More than 100 families in Dublin at risk of homelessness as tenant-in-situ applications paused Opens in new window ] One of those applications was by a woman and her young child who are living in rental accommodation in Balbriggan. Ms O'Reilly said the woman's child was due to start school in the area in September but now they are at risk of homelessness. The woman received a notice to quit in August 2024 and applied for the tenant-in-situ scheme in March. Ms O'Reilly said the woman understood she was accepted for the scheme until she learned last month about the council pausing applications. 'The stress she is under is inhumane. She has also lost valuable time that she could have been searching for somewhere to live while believing that the tenant-in-situ purchase was ongoing,' Ms O'Reilly said of her constituent. 'The Government has now literally removed the only homeless prevention measure that my constituents had. It is beyond heartbreaking to see the human impact of this decision on families and especially on children,' she said.
Irish Times
4 hours ago
- Irish Times
Does it make sense to hold onto my husband's bank shares and his stockbroker account?
I know that you have done your best to try to explain the misery that befell many of us when the banks were taken over by the Government. But some of us are remedial and still don't quite understand where we now stand. My late husband worked in AIB and had his life's savings in AIB shares. (For safety he diversified into equally 'safe' BOI shares!). I recall that, before the crash, his AIB shares were worth about €450,000. They were held with Goodbody's . I don't know why. My December 2024 statement states that, as of now, I have close to €25,000 invested roughly evenly across the two big banks. READ MORE Last month, I paid an annual charge of €701,61 to Goodbody's (Cumulative Effect of Costs and Charges on Returns), of which €501,61 was in non-Goodbody charges My questions are as follows: Should I close this account with Goodbodys since I have never done – and don't plan to do – any trading. Is there any point in hanging on to these shares in the hope that, when the banks are making millions again, they might feel sorry for those of us who lost everything and offer some kind of compensation? In fairness, AIB continues to pay my widow's pension. Ms J.R. The first rule in making sense of investments is understanding what you are paying for the opportunity of gain. Charges can fundamentally affect your return so it is important to get a proper fix on them. I get the sense you're not too sure why you are paying the amount you are paying Goodbody's to manage this portfolio of shares and cash. I've spoken to Goodbodys who, no more than their rivals, can be difficult o tie down on the question of fees. To their credit, they have suggested you contact them directly so that they can walk you through exactly what the charges are and for what service. As usual, I have not given any of your identifying details to them as I did not have your explicit permission to do so but they tell me they have offered an experienced person on standby to deal with you directly on this matter. I'll pass those details on to you. Charges aside, there are a couple of big issues here. First, should you hold on to the shares and second, should you continue to hold an account with Goodbody's or any other broker? Let's take those in reverse order. You have kind of answered the second question with your assertion that since your husband died and you inherited these shares, you have never done – and do not plan to do – any trading. There is no obligation to hold your shares through a broker although you will need to engage a broker should you ever decide to sell them. These days, shares are 'dematerialised'. This means that any paper share certificates you hold – which used to be the legal proof of ownership – are now worthless. Instead, details of your shareholdings are held in electronic form by the 'registrar', the company that manages the list of shareholders for each of these banks. In this case, a company called Computershare is share registrar for both banks. You can keep track of your shares and any dealings in them by registering with Computershare here for access to their online investor centre. You'll need very basic details – your unique shareholder reference number for each shareholding – which you should be able to find on communications from the companies, or from Goodbody. The key thing here is that you do not need to hold your shares through a stockbroker and, if you are not trading in shares, it makes little sense to be paying annual charges for the privilege – never mind over €700. Based on the current value of your account, as outlined in your query, the Goodbody's annual charge amounts to over 2.75 per cent, which certainly strikes me as very high, especially for an account with no activity. I cannot think of an explanation Goodbody's could provide that would make this a sensible proposition for you. Unless you plan to sell the shares now given you already appear to be paying Goodbody for the service, I would pull the plug on the Goodbody account and keep track of the shares through the Computershare Investor Centre. If you do want to sell later, you can always 'shop the market' to see who will sell them for you at the lowest charge. That brings us to the other issue – should you hold on to these shares at all? As an AIB lifer, it is not entirely surprising – if not exactly sensible – that he invested heavily n the bank's shares. Back then, he may have been able to do so at preferential rates or through some employee share programme. He was correct that it made sense to diversify given the concentration of his investment. I have no idea if he took advice at that time but the notion of diversifying from having all your investments in one bank stock by investing in the State other large listed back was mad even back then. All his eggs were still in the banking basket and we all know what happened there. People like your husband saw their savings effectively go up in smoke. In AIB's case, quite apart from the bank bailout that saw the value of his shareholding crash, he also went through the one for 250 share consolidation in 2015 that knocked a further 75 per cent of the value of his savings. In the case of Bank of Ireland, in 2017, it gave shareholder one new share for every 30 previously held but, of course, it too saw the value of existing investors' shareholdings decimated by the post-crash bailout. Given the number of shares your husband, and now you, hold in both banks, it is clear his investment in both was significant. You do not say when you inherited these shares which is a key point. Any investment gains (or in his case losses) die with a shareholder. So when you inherited the shares, their base value will be whatever they were worth at that time. The losses your husband suffered are, unfortunately, irrelevant. Assuming you inherited some time since late 2010, you are actually in profit on both those shares right now – albeit a long way of recovering the sort of level they traded at when your husband had them before the crash. So if you do sell, and assuming your gain is more than €1,270, as I assume it will be, you will be paying capital gains tax at 33 per cent on those 'profits'. I'm not a share analyst, nor a qualified financial adviser, so I cannot say what you might expect these shares to do in the future, though it is fair to say that most analysts see some upside for both as the State has now exited their bailout investment despite cuts in European Central Bank interest rates that have padded their profits in recent years. The bigger question is whether you are comfortable with stock market investments in individual shares. Even if you are, it would be advisable to consider proper diversification – something you might discuss with Goodbody when you meet them and before you make any decision to close that account. Whatever you do, I would certainly not bank of either lender offering any compensation to the shareholders it gutted during the crash, now that they are back to earning millions of euro. They may say how sorry they are for what happened – and have done – but they're not that sorry. And, to be fair to them, that is the nature of stock market investment. It carries risk – hence the good sense in diversification – and when things go wrong, shareholders will find themselves at the bottom of the pecking order when it comes to people being taken care of. That is the reality of shareholder investment. Investing in Ireland's banks used to be considered almost as good as investing in government bonds, with dividend income as icing on the cake. The crash reminded us not to take such things for granted. And much and all as investors must take responsibility for their own risk, I would not be giving AIB any credit for paying your widow's pension. That is part of the Ts & Cs of your husband's occupational pension scheme - not some munificence on the part of the bank. Please send your queries to Dominic Coyle, Q&A, The Irish Times, 24-28 Tara Street, Dublin 2, or by email to , with a contact phone number. This column is a reader service and is not intended to replace professional advice
Irish Examiner
5 hours ago
- Irish Examiner
Cork-Limerick motorway will have 'devastating consequences' for farmland, claims group
A group representing 1,500 people says the Cork-Limerick motorway will have devastating consequences for some of the finest farmland in the country, result in the demolition of 20 homes, and prove extremely costly for the taxpayer. The Cork-Limerick Alliance Group, which represents farmers, teachers, businessmen, and householders, believes 'there are many shortcomings in the current M20 planning that will ultimately result in more negatives than positives for the majority of people who use the road". That's according to the group's chairman Brian Hyde, who said while they support road safety improvements on the route they have a number of concerns about the overall project. 'The Government recently announced its intention to toll the road, which will make travelling on the M20 cost prohibitive for many. This will result in commuters using back roads and the current N20, which will become the 'old road'," Mr Hyde said. He said short and intra urban journeys account for the vast majority of journeys taken on the existing N20. 'We have been informed there is no plan in place to improve these existing roads when the M20 is built, which means the current issues we have now around safety will remain unresolved, and in our opinion, will just get worse. That is unacceptable,' Mr Hyde said. Cost to taxpayer a 'big negative' He added the enormous cost to the taxpayer 'is another big negative". 'The current M20 planning is going to hit people's pockets in three big ways: The exorbitant cost to build the new road, which is estimated at between €1bn and €3bn; the direct carbon pollution and resulting carbon tax it will inevitably cause given it's going through many greenfield sites and causing a lot of environmental issues; and lastly the tolls people will have to pay to use the road for every journey, every day,' Mr Hyde said. He said his group firmly believe there is a far most cost-efficient and less environmentally impactful way to achieve the M20 aims. 'This would be to stay online with the current N20 and upgrade the existing road, to work with what we have, rather than going offline to take hundreds of acres of prime agricultural land in the Golden Vale and devastate family farms in the process. "It will also take up to 20 homes in the midst of a raging housing crisis, as well as pollute and very negatively impact the Blackwater River,' he said. The river is designated an SAC (Special Area of Conservation) and the group say building a new bridge across if will cost millions and is not needed. 'What makes far more sense instead is to bypass Charleville and Buttevant, which are the major traffic bottlenecks on the current N20 and to build an overpass between the two roundabouts at Mallow, as the town is already bypassed. Taking that approach would deliver a safer, faster, less impactful and far less costly road connection between Cork and Limerick with no tolls. "It would also be delivered in roughly half the time it will take to build the M20. It just makes far more sense on multiple levels,' Mr Hyde said. It's unlikely work will start on the project until at least 2028 and the motorway is expected to be open no sooner than 2035.
