AIR Corps pilots are seeking a £10,000 a year tax free "retention" allowance from the Department of Defence. They want it as compensation for not being able to take better paid jobs in civil aviation.
The Representative Association of Commissioned Officers (RACO) will present the case for the allowance at a special meeting today of the Conciliation and Arbitration scheme.
The general secretary of RACO, Mr Brian O'Keeffe, said it was virtually impossible for Air Corps pilots to take early retirement.
Most wanted to leave because of the limited promotion outlets within the Air Corps and because many were assigned to "mahogany bombers" (desk jobs) by the time they were 40. If they were in Aer Lingus they could expect at least another 15 to 20 years flying, plus much better pay.
"There is huge resentment among Air Corps pilots," he said, because of the failure of the Department to implement the 1990 Gleeson Report on pay and conditions in the Defence Forces. This recommended a tax free "retention" bonus be paid to pilots, based on rank and length of service.
An interim payment of £3,000 was introduced, but it was discontinued in 1993.
Mr O'Keeffe said there was no scientific basis to the RACO claim being presented at today's, conciliation meeting.
"Money won't solve the problem. But it may focus minds in the Department on why this problem still remains an issue in 1996," he said.
RACO is anxious to prosecute the claim while airlines are going through a downward cycle, rather than wait until demand for pilots by civil airlines starts to increase and exacerbates the problem.
There are about 100 pilots in the Air Corps, all of whom have given an undertaking to remain with the service for at least 10 years after qualifying. If they receive further training to operate the Government jet they give an undertaking to serve an extra four years.
Mr O'Keeffe said RACO no problem with this, but it believed that pilots who had completed their undertakings should be allowed to leave.
In theory, they can do so. In practice, the Minister for Defence almost invariably invokes his legal right to refuse permission for early retirement on the basis that to do so would impair the ability of the Air Corps to defend the State.
There was no comment from the Department of Defence yesterday.