SALESPEOPLE working for Irish Life are fearful about their job security, according to Mr John Tierney, union official with the Manufacturing Science and Finance trade union (MSF).
But he believes the company has "miscalculated" in suspending some 320 of its salesforce for refusing to implement new work practices.
He is confident that most Irish Life customers will not pay their premiums direct to the company as Irish Life has requested. "They will not abandon the salespeople who have built up a relationship with them that is where the relationship is after all," he says.
A seasoned negotiator with the Republic's largest union for financial services staff, Mr Tierney is scathing in his criticism of Irish Life management.
"Serious industrial relations problems have been building in Irish Life for a number of years. In 1994 I met David Kingston and members of his management team and puts our concerns to them. We brought along an expert from the Irish Productivity Centre. We suggested a more participatory, approach but they rejected our suggestions.
Most of the 320 union members who are on the "field force" - sales team - have now been suspended by Irish Life for their refusal to accept a Labour Court recommendation on changes in sales structures and practices.
"The difficulty is that my members sincerely believe that the changes proposed by the company are designed to drive them out of their jobs," he said. Accepting that the life assurance market is very competitive and that changes are needed to ensure that Irish Life remains competitive, he argued that the company is trying to achieve too many changes to quickly. "Jean Wood (the chief executive of Irish Life retail) has tried to steam-roll everything in."
When the changes in the sales structures were first mooted the company said that 80 out of the 400 strong sales-force "didn't validate their income", according to Mr Tierney. The suggestion was that they were not generating sufficient business to justify their salaries, he explains. These people now believe that the new management will be trying to get rid of them, he says.
"They make their living from sales and they are only as good as the last sales they get. If they go through a bad patch or if they. have personal or other problems, their figures fall. There has been a problem for years in the different responses of different managers to changes in salesmen's figures - the variable way people are managed", he says.
The "big fear factor" now is that the company is trying to put a system in place to make it easy to get rid of people, he says. The company is refusing to deal with these concerns, according to Mr Tierney. "The more it's avoided, the more people fear that the company is out to get them. Most Personal Finance Advisers (PFAs) feel that within two years a lot of them will be driven out of their jobs," he maintains.
Mr Tierney rejects the company's assertion that it has spent 15 months frying to negotiate changes with its salesforce. "All we have had is 15 months of ultimata that we had to accept the changes the company proposed. No attempt was made to deal with the concerns of the staff. We had four ultimata before we went to the Labour Court. The company dismissed 30 salespeople last August because they would not co-operate with the changes. We never had negotiations in the way you or I would understand the word," according to Mr Tierney.
One of the immediate issues in the dispute is the compensation of salespeople who are moving to a new role and under new management. Under the company's proposals some 70 per cent of the PFA grade will get no compensation for accepting new sales structures, he maintains. When some former managers moved from management positions". to become PFAs they got compensation of between £20,000 and £40,000 each, according to Mr Tierney. The PFAs want to be. compensated properly too, he says.
Another immediate issue is the company's requirement that the sales-force use new hand-held technology. "Up to now they have been using laptop computers which they have had to buy themselves. We want to get a comprehensive new technology agreement in place to bring in any more technology", he says.
The biggest problem at the moment is that "there is not an ounce of trust between the two parties," Mr Tierney maintains. This is because the company has introduced four restructuring plans since 1988 he says. "These plans have done nothing for the field staff. All they achieved was cost cutting in the chief office and in the salesforce."
Mrs Tierney accepts the company's contention that sales by the field force have fallen. But he argues that the company is unfair in blaming the sales-force for the fall.
The company has a bad image and its investment performance has been poor, says Mr Tierney. He cites the Mespil flats controversy; the company's write off of its investment in GPA and the withdrawal by the nurses of the pension scheme they had with Irish Life.
"You cannot blame the sales-force for these but they bore the brunt of it. People took out their money when Irish Life was not performing on the investment side and other people did not want to put their money with the company, he argues.
Among the changes being sought by the company is that salespeople research client needs before products are sold to them. "This means that each sale will take more of the salesperson's time. They will have to call two or three times before closing a sale as opposed to one visit now." The company refused to recognise this time as additional expense for the salesperson, says Mr Tierney.
In addition Mr Tierney says that the reorganisation would mean less management support for individual salespeople because each manager's sales team will be doubled. Asked why he thought the Labour Court had come out in favour of implementing the changes with compensation payments to the salespeople, he contends that the court "ignored the whole issue of change".
