Tag: 浙江一品楼

Strong criticism of flood risk group

first_imgNewsLocal NewsStrong criticism of flood risk groupBy Alan Jacques – April 15, 2016 692 Limerick Ladies National Football League opener to be streamed live Advertisement Print Maurice Quinlivan TDSINN Féin TD for Limerick, Maurice Quinlivan, has strongly criticised the interdepartmental group set up to work with the OPW for the management of flood risk after it emerged that it didn’t meet for four years and the main group for almost six years.Deputy Quinlivan said that this was wholly irresponsible and unacceptable when so many families were driven from their homes by the floodwaters.“To the people of Corbally, King’s Island, Castleconnell, other flooded parts of Limerick, this is not good enough. Families were driven from their homes by rising flood waters, others only remained through the sterling work of the emergency services and the decency of neighbours”, he said. Sign up for the weekly Limerick Post newsletter Sign Up “I had dealings with the head of the interdepartmental group, Brian Hayes MEP, when he came to Limerick in 2014. He guaranteed me that we would have all the funding we needed to make sure that the flooding like we saw in King’s Island wouldn’t happen again.“Limerick never saw Brian Hayes or any funding after that”, Deputy Quinlivan declared.“There has to be a serious look at how we approach flooding and flood prevention in this country. Sinn Féin has already put forward the idea of a Shannon River Management body. Firstly though, the flood management group need to offer an explanation to the Irish people for the dereliction of their duty.”by Alan [email protected] WhatsApp WATCH: “Everyone is fighting so hard to get on” – Pat Ryan on competitive camogie squads Limerick’s National Camogie League double header to be streamed live Twitter TAGSfloodinglimerickMaurice Quinlivan TDOffice of Public Works (OPW)Sinn Fein center_img Previous article#nowbooking The Buzzcocks 40 years going steadyNext articleBallyneety man helps rebuild lives in the Philippines Alan Jacqueshttp://www.limerickpost.ie RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR Limerick Artist ‘Willzee’ releases new Music Video – “A Dream of Peace” Linkedin Predictions on the future of learning discussed at Limerick Lifelong Learning Festival Facebook Email Billy Lee names strong Limerick side to take on Wicklow in crucial Division 3 clashlast_img read more

Continue Reading

Low interest rates hit German workers with court verdict on pensions

first_imgA German company granting a ‘market average’ interest rate as guarantee for an employee’s pension payout can now use federal zero-coupon bonds as a basis for calculation, according to a recent court ruling.Germany’s federal labour court – the Bundesarbeitsgericht (BAG) – reached the verdict last week, overturning a previous decision by a regional court in the spring of 2015.A former employee sued the company, whose name has not been disclosed.When the employee retired in 2011, he said he expected the company to guarantee 3.55% of the capital remaining in his pension account. The company, however, had employed the yield curve for German and French government bonds as the basis for its calculations and instead offered a guarantee of 0.87%.The regional court in Nuremberg estimated that, based on the returns from some German bunds bought in February 2012, the guarantee should be 2.13%.The BAG, however, has now ruled that the company had the right to its own interpretation of the phrase ‘market-average interest’ set down in the contract.Sascha Grosjean, a partner at law firm Taylor Wessing, told IPE: “It is legally interesting to see the BAG says it is not for any court to decide how this provision of a ‘market-average interest’ set down in the contract is to be interpreted.”The German pension fund association (aba) agreed that it was “positive” the court had confirmed the employer’s right to interpretation.An aba spokesperson added that the term ‘market-average interest’ had not been “defined anywhere”.Mercer’s Thomas Bischopink and Stefan Oecking said German companies could breath a “sigh of relief” over the verdict.“It means that an employer can use low-risk investments to achieve a ‘market-average interest’,” they said. Grosjean said the BAG’s ruling was about the phrasing within a contract rather than the phrasing in law.He added that such contracts were the exception, not the rule, as, in most German pension plans, there is no additional interest guarantee on pension assets remaining with the employer before payout.Bischopink and Oecking said employees would also “thank the BAG” for its verdict.A different outcome, they said, might have deterred companies from offering instalments, and lump-sum payouts enjoy less of a tax advantage in Germany, they added. Grosjean pointed to the wider implications of the verdict, with “the low-interest-rate environment affecting workers directly for the first time”. Under German law, pension plans must come with a guarantee; if the Pensionskasse or insurer fails to fulfil this guarantee, the employer must top up the scheme.At present, there are no so-called ‘pay-and-forget’ models in Germany’s second pillar, but they being debated under proposals for industry-wide pension plans.“But we can already see some Pensionskassen and insurers struggling with the guarantees,” Grosjean said.From 2017, the legal minimum guarantee life insurers must meet will fall below 1% for the first time; it was set at 0.9%, down from the current 1.25%.In recent months, a number of court verdicts – including the BAG’s – have been reached allowing providers to cut guarantees if a company pays the difference.Grosjean said he was convinced the ‘pay-and-forget’ model would come to Germany eventually, in particular to make occupational pensions more attractive for small and medium-sized enterprises.“Just as in this court case,” he said, “it is a question of whether an employer has to increase the accrued assets or merely keep them safe.”Bischopink and Oecking took pains to emphasise that “vague phrasings” such as ‘market-average interest’ were “very often the reason for a dispute between employer and employee and should be avoided”.last_img read more

Continue Reading