Imagine thousands of retirees, living on fixed incomes, anxiously awaiting a pension increase they were promised. Now imagine that increase being held up, not due to financial troubles, but seemingly bureaucratic red tape. This is the reality facing 20,000 retired workers from An Post and eir, prompting the Communications Workers' Union (CWU) to take a stand with a protest next Tuesday outside Leinster House.
The CWU is furious over what they call an unnecessary delay by Minister for Communications Patrick O’Donovan in approving pension increases already agreed upon by unions, trustees, actuaries, and company boards. But here's where it gets controversial: the union argues this delay demonstrates a shocking lack of respect for vulnerable retirees, forcing them to struggle on fixed incomes without the promised adjustments.
And this is the part most people miss: unlike those receiving the State pension, these retirees don’t benefit from annual increases. They rely solely on these agreed-upon adjustments to cover rising living costs.
“There’s absolutely no financial reason for this hold-up,” declared CWU General Secretary Seán McDonagh. He emphasized the pension schemes are private, well-regulated, and financially sound, with no burden on the Exchequer.
The story began in October 2025 when An Post requested a 6% pension increase from January 2025 and an additional 1% from June 2025. Similarly, eir sought a 2.1% increase for its retirees from July 2025. While the Department of Communications acknowledges receiving these requests, they remain vague about a timeline for approval, citing the need for a thorough review process.
A Department spokesperson stated they are “actively working” on approvals, with eir’s request currently under review by the New Economy and Recovery Authority (NewERA). They defend the time taken, arguing it’s crucial for robust governance.
Is this bureaucratic caution justified, or is it an unnecessary hardship for retirees who’ve earned their pensions? The CWU’s protest highlights a pressing question: should pension increases, already agreed upon by all parties, be subject to such prolonged scrutiny?
What do you think? Is the government’s approach fair, or is it time to streamline the process for the sake of vulnerable retirees? Let us know your thoughts in the comments below.
