RBSI's Channel Island Job Losses Could Be Greater Than Previously Thought

by Carla Johnson, Investors Offshore.com

19 July 2002

The Jersey Evening Post revealed earlier this week that the extent of job losses at Royal Bank of Scotland International (RBSI) could be far greater than at first anticipated.

Last week, the Channel Island newspaper reported that some 20 back office positions from the bank's Jersey operation, and 10 from its Guernsey arm, were on the line as part of a streamlining initiative which will see inward payments centralised in the Isle of Man. At the time, RBSI announced that:

'The RBSI group is making some changes to its operations, which will have an impact on some staff but no impact on the way that customers deal with the banks in the RBSI group.'

However, having obtained new information from another source, the JEP went back to the bank, which then admitted that 600 letters have been sent to RBSI employees in the Channel Islands, offering those over 50 early retirement, and those in affected departments but under that age 'early departure' packages.

Speaking to the newspaper this week, a spokeswoman for the bank was keen to stress the voluntary nature of the scheme:

'No one is under any compulsion. This is a purely voluntary offer. It gives people the opportunity to register an interest because we know there is an interest in both options,' she explained.

This was later confirmed by RBSI's Director of Offshore Manufacturing, John Shelley, who told the newspaper that: 'It is absolutely not compelling. We are doing this to stay away from compulsory redundancy.'

When questioned over the bank's long-term plans with regard to the Island, Mr Shelley told the Jersey Evening Post that:

'We are committed to having a major banking business on the Island. We have so many customers who live and work and run businesses here that I could not contemplate moving away.'

However, he added that: 'It is true there are cost differentials between Jersey and the Isle of Man, which is something we regularly debate with the government here.'

Recommended