Presidents unaware of how allowance was calculated

The Irish Medical Organisation last night said presidents of the organisation were unaware of how their annual allowance was calculated.

It was reported that the allowance was equal to around 25% of the chief executive’s pay.

The matter arose in the light of the controversy surrounding the contract and pension package of former chief executive George McNeice.

Outgoing IMO president Paul McKeown insisted on Thursday that the pay arrangements for Mr McNeice were not widely known in the doctors’ union.

However, it was suggested yesterday that if the president’s allowance is a percentage of the chief executive’s pay, several past presidents must have known what Mr McNeice’s pay was.

The IMO refuted this last night, saying: “It has been suggested that it was known by past presidents that their stipend was fixed by reference to the CEO salary. This is not correct.”

Minister for Health James Reilly is a past IMO president and he also served on its remuneration committee.

The row arising from revelations of Mr McNeice’s pay package and €9.7m retirement settlement is overshadowing the conference, which is being held in Killarney

Ten years ago, Mr McNeice’s salary was €250,000 a year and, with bonuses, rose to just under €500,000 in December.

Dr McKeown has said the CEO’s full €25m retirement entitlement, which has been negotiated down to €9.7m, could have put the IMO into liquidation.

It has also emerged that the original CEO’s contract was drafted in 2003 on the advice of independent outside consultants, who were asked to benchmark it to comparable office holders in the public and private sectors.

The IMO is commissioning an outside retrospective review of the affair covering the last 20 years.

Incoming president Matt Sadlier has advised the organisation that, because the allowances issue is being reviewed by the governance review, he will not take any allowance until that review is complete and then only at the rate agreed by the members at that time.

The review is due to be completed in late summer/autumn.

Meanwhile, a motion from Clare branch voiced “profound dissatisfaction” with IMO governance and demanded transparent governance in the future.

Another motion, from Limerick, called for new legal opinion on the validity of Mr McNeice’s contract.

Other motions called for all IMO business to be transparent and for a “bottom-up” approach to running the organisation.