Eamon Gilmore (centre) with daughter Grainne (left) and wife Carol Hanney

Former Labour Party leader Eamon Gilmore’s wife has been appointed to a major education post with a salary of up to €136,000. Carol Hanney is to take over as CEO of the City of Dublin Education Board (CDETB), just as Mr Gilmore becomes eligible to start drawing from a €2m pension pot on the back of his political career.

The current CEO Jacinta Stewart is retiring at the end of the month – and Ms Hanney has been offered the position without it being advertised externally. The move has led to criticism from one member of the board which rubber-stamped the appointment, who says he was “furious”.

Asked about Ms Hanney’s promotion to CEO, which takes effect on March 1, the Department of Education said it is the result of an agreement reached with the relevant trade union when 33 former VECs were merged into 16 ETBs.

Gilmore’s wife lands €136k education post as he retires (Kevin Doyle, Independent.ie)


Sponsored Link

67 thoughts on “One Last Job

    1. ahjayzis

      Would you if your party was about to be annihilated? Of course they don’t care, every single one of them is well above pension age and will never have to deal with any money troubles – if the state goes into an even worse recession and more cuts come, we’ll still pay these parasites many times the average industrial wage for continuing to breathe. Bertie Ahern’s made over a million from us since the onset of the crisis.

  1. Liz

    What now? A five second check on her linkedin shows that Carol Hanney held a CEO position before –
    appointed to Dun Laoghaire VEC *IN 2008*.

    1. Cian

      DLVEC was merged in with the City VEC. Its fairly logical that if you have a CEO you deem competent available on the books, presumably still being paid their old salary (this being the state, after all – nobody gets fired) you make them the CEO in this scenario.

      Politicians spouses *are* entitled to have careers. Nick Clegg’s wife was realistically significantly more successful than he was – should she have stopped all advancement for his 5 years at the cabinet table?

      1. Liz

        A redeployment of permanent CEOs, which did not just affect Carol Hanney. The following statements also made by the Department of Education:

        “A situation was created where there was not a sufficient number of positions at the grade of CEO to accommodate all of the existing post holders who had been appointed in a permanent capacity,” a department spokesperson said.

        “To address the redeployment of surplus post holders and in accordance with Government policy, the department entered into an agreement with the relevant trade union.”
        (in the ‘Dublin People’)

      2. Brenketsu

        Yeah but there is a thing called fairness, when I was working in I.T and wanted to move to the Software development department instead of security, I still had to go true and interview system where by outsiders where invited to also have a chance on the position, this is not avoidable according to laws which nobody should be above, nobody.

    2. Andy

      Facts like that are hardly relevant Liz!
      No politician’s family member could ever possibly be successful on their own bat. It’s always gifted to them.
      Like everyone else who earns over €70k/€100k. It’s always because of contacts, inequality, insider dealing or cronyism, Irish Water, SiteServ, the Bilderbergs………etc take your pick

          1. Fergus the magic postman

            I’m aware of chemtrail conspiracies thanks. Contrails on the other hand exist.

            So, again, contrails?

      1. Liz

        Ha! Indeed. If 33 VECs were merging a lot of positions may have been affected – presumably including previously appointed CEOs. It’s hardly surprising that a there was an agreement, as the Department of Education explained.

  2. classter

    Doesn’t look good at all.

    Less so, so far as I can see, ’cause of Gilmore himself. But because the suggestion is that the union leadership gets to choose the CEO. To the point, where they do not even advertise it externally.

  3. perricrisptayto

    That was a STROKE of good luck for Mrs G.
    Bit like that time when she sold that bit of a plot of land to the Dept of education.
    She should start playing the lotto.
    Ah well,you make your own luck in life dont you?

  4. Fergus the magic postman

    Is my memory playing tricks, or was there one a time when Labour was against such cronyism?

    FG must have rubbed off on Labour really really hard over the last 5 years, & in doing so it’s likely they have rubbed them out.

    1. classter

      The cronyism here seems to be in favour of relatively well-paid public sector employees.

      And no, Labour has never been against that.

  5. Digs

    She got a job that pays well. Shoot her! So what?

    What should people be allowed earn? What’s the max a person should earn. Ridiculous thread. Idiots everywhere…

      1. Deluded

        Gerrup the yard! You’re only saying that because he’s a Labour man. Which is annoying because I agree with you.

    1. Fergus the magic postman

      Putting your love for the status quo to one side, do you think it’s fine & dandy how she got the job?

    1. Clampers Outside!

      Isn’t that the point as to why positions are supposed to be advertised and filled in a correct manner…. it has to change.
      Accepting it, is just giving in.

      Come on the SocDems! :)

    1. classter

      Whatever about the amount, why is he allowed to start drawing from it before the age of 65?

      I thought that nonsense of a ‘pension’ as sson as you leave the Dail had been changed?

      And if not, why not?

  6. Brook Slope

    33 VECs merged in to 16 ETBs
    Shouldn’t there have been up to 16 other former employees interviewed alongside her for the vacant position.
    As they had an opportunity to reply and didn’t mention that interviews were conducted then we can only assume that Mr Gilmore’s wife was selected on grounds other than merit.
    If this was a private company then that is OK but the generous salary is being paid by taxpayers who should at the very least expect that the best candidate of those available would be hired.

    I don’t even want to think about the Unions dictating who should be hired in to Management roles in the public sector at the moment.

    1. classter

      ‘I don’t even want to think about the Unions dictating who should be hired in to Management roles in the public sector at the moment.’


  7. Liam Deliverance

    Would this CDETB City of Dublin Education Board, be associated with Dublin and Dun Laoghaire Education and Training Board (DDLETB)?

  8. Anne

    “Eamon Gilmore (centre) with daughter Grainne (left) and wife Carol Hanney”

    Hanney, Gilmore.. hmmm

    How long are they married? Weird to never take his name. Maybe most wives married to TDs keep their maiden name though..

    And before anyone tells me a lot of women keep their own name.. I don’t think so, not those of Gilmore’s age anyway.

    1. classter

      What an odd thing to be critical about.

      My mother is of their age & she kept her maiden name. Does this make her a scrounger?

      1. Anne

        Where did I relate her keeping her maiden name to being a scrounger?
        How would I know if your mother’s a scrounger?

        I would have thought most women would take a man’s name, particularly when they have children.. and particularly of their generation. I don’t want to hear about your mother again, thanks.

        Anyway, it’s besides the point.. it’s blatant nepotism.

      2. Andy

        My wife kept her surname.
        My experience has been women with good careers often keep their names (sometimes just in a work environment [email, business cards, linkedin etc]).
        Typically stupid comment from Anne. Quelle surprise….

          1. Andy

            I didn’t respond to your comment because you haven’t a clue what you’re talking about.
            You consistently misinterpret post content and respond in bizarre tangents.
            It’s like dealing with a child.

          2. Anne

            Haven’t a clue huh? No, you don’t.. na na na na na.
            Very mature so you are.

            But cmere, how do you propose to ““increase the effective income tax rates on almost everyone” and “entice those in VLWI households into the income tax net” without addressing childcare and accommodation costs. You’d just put more children into hotels Andy.. and thankfully we’re not part of a society that’ll ignore that.

    2. Caroline

      She has strayed from the group norms, and must be punished!

      Women changing their names doesn’t bother me except when it makes my life more complicated. Today I was presented with a form where I had to fill in my surname and then a few lines later my “surname at birth”. Well just no. I don’t understand the question and I refuse to respond to it. You do the extra paperwork, Mrs.

      1. Anne

        Well, I’m not saying there’s anything wrong with it, what I’m getting at is, it may be done on purpose to avoid attention. These goons are so blatant tis all the one anyway.

        But your surname at birth is the one you were given on your birth cert loike.. no. :)

    3. Barbara

      Wow you’re totally off the mark! I know of at least 10 women of their vintage who kept their maiden name

  9. Truth in the News

    Its seems to be “Gilmores Way” in this case, what about her sale of land in
    Galway which netted a substantial price, and now this from a social elite who
    used to lecture Fianna Fail about ethics, and as they hit the rocks wait and see
    the strokes they will pull before they leave office.
    These Public Appointments and should be filled in an open and transparent way
    and in the election, the recruiting of presiding officers , poll clerks and vote counters should be by open public recruitment….funny there is no Jobbridge
    scheme on this one.

        1. Anne

          I’d say, that an equally qualified or more qualified ‘nobody’ could get the same opportunity to be considered and apply for the job.

        2. f_lawless

          why are none of the people defending her appointment on this comment section addressing the crux of the issue: ie that she got the position without it being advertised externally?
          Might they be affiliated with a certain party I wonder..hmmm

        3. Fergus the magic postman

          Use your loaf. You’re not really a big thick gob-daw are you Same Old?

          On the off chance that you are, just read the responses above from Anne & f_lawless (^just above this, follow the arrows^^^ with your eyes, good lad) and then maybe try to get some learning, or brain exercise or something. Start slow, maybe CBeebies or something. We find it very educational for our toddler.

          1. Nice Jung Man

            It’s a shame that you spoil your often insightful and relevant contributions with petulant anger Fergus.

            Same old was merely pointing to the competence of the candidate as being a compelling factor in an appointment process. There is nothing here to suggest the candidate lacks competence for the role. Plus everyone knows that in the public sector this sort of thing happens all the time.

            Calling other people ‘toddlers’ etc is ironically the exact same thing Joan Burton was doing in the debate the other night, shouting people down. For shame.

          2. Fergus the magic postman

            That wasn’t anger Jung Man.
            Sure if I was to get angry on here every time somebody on here deliberately lets the point in hand go over their head, or is incapable of getting the point, sure I’d have burst a vessel long ago.

            I will concede I have a low tolerance of such behaviour though, & if your going to do it, well then you might just make me mock you.

  10. some old queen

    The main issue here is the closed shop operated by the Unions. They (rightly) protect their members rights but when it gets to the point where an employer is only allowed to choose from within its member base, they are no better than the cronyism they were founded to fight.

    If you want to move ahead within the public sector then you must be in the right union. This is fact. That is not protecting worker’s rights, that is demanding special privileges and is probably the single biggest factor in the prevention of reform within the HSE.

  11. Cromuel

    If 30 VECs merged to form 16 ETBs does that mean there are now only 16 CEO posts, as would be the practice in the private sector?

  12. Seán Óg

    This is utter rag journalism lifted from uber rag headquarters Independent Newspapers. Hanney did nothing wrong here – nothing. There is a redeployment scheme in place that was agreed years ago. All teachers and education staff in the employment of the DoES are eligible for it. Why single this woman out? Rag journalism, and nothing more.

    I’m a teacher in a school which is closing down, just as Hanney was in a VEC that was closed down. I am also going to “benefit” from this in being redeployed to a different school (I’d prefer to be made redundant and get the tax-free payment, but I don’t have that choice). Other than giving the state an address where they give me a job within 50km of that address, I have no choice in what school I get.

    For the record, I worked with Carol Hanney very briefly years ago. I found her to be a lovely woman. I have no meas whatever for the betrayal that the Labour party has done in the past five years, most particularly giving their advisers obscene salary increases while pulverising teachers with not only the USC which everyone pays but the even larger PRD that public servants pay and, most of all, these utterly futile Croke Park hours and this rush to make Irish teaching as yellow pack as the English system. That party of smoked salmon socialists is finished, and deservedly so. But this article is just wrong and unfair at every level.

Comments are closed.

Sponsored Link