Mr Con Scanlon, the deputy chairman of Eircom, has said he does not see any unmanageable conflict of interest between his position on the Eircom board and his role as general secretary of the Communications Workers' Union (CWU).
He has also suggested that the general secretary of the Civil Public & Services Union (CPSU), Mr Blair Horan, does not understand issues he addressed concerning the level of remuneration being paid to Eircom directors, in a recent circular to CPSU Eircom branch secretaries.
Documents released for the refloating of Eircom revealed that Mr Scanlon was given shares worth in excess of 580,000. He is paid director's fees of 106,000 for his role representing the Employee Share Ownership Trust (ESOT) on the board.
He draws a similar salary in his capacity as general secretary of the CWU.
He is also to receive pension payments from Eircom worth €1 million over the next 10 years and a lump-sum payment of €230,000.
The CPSU circular said it was seriously concerned about the level of remuneration being paid to Eircom directors and ESOT representatives on the board. It said the level of remuneration being paid to directors "simply cannot be justified".
It said media reports indicated ESOT directors were receiving "significant remuneration in excess of the norm for staff representatives on company boards. The CPSU was not aware of this and the matter was not brought to the attention of the union coalition."
Mr Scanlon told The Irish Times he had not seen the circular. He said he did not know what criteria Mr Horan was using when he said the remuneration levels could not be justified. "If you want the best people on a board, you have to pay them," he said.
He said there were no staff representatives on the board. He was there as a representative of a trust that was a 30 per cent shareholder. "I think he should check out the facts and then we can talk about it," he said, referring to Mr Horan.
On the issue of what the union coalition knew about the level of remuneration being paid, Mr Scanlon said disclosure was a matter for the company and not for the individual director.
He said that for decades trade unions had been trying to get this level of involvement in companies. "That's where workers want to be, where the decisions are being made."
Ask if there was not a conflict between being a director of a company seeking to maximise its profits, and being general secretary of a trade union seeking the best deal for its members, Mr Scanlon said "having a healthy company is in everyone's interest". He said there was no evidence that his union had not been able to represent staff successfully.
"There is no-one on the board that doesn't have some conflicts to manage. I don't see any difficulty in managing these things." He said union leaders should aspire towards being in a position of influence. "There's no point in running away from it." The whole point of the ESOT was to be in a position of influence.
"I haven't got any cheques back from any of Blair Horan's members," he said.
