They won't get the back pay because the preferred bidder won't pay the debt that have been incurred on wages?
-
This site is sponsored by Lang & Potter.
Meeting
- Thread starter Graham Evans
- Start date
Keepitgreen
🇰🇪 Welicar Donor
♣️ PACSA Member
♣️ Senior Greens
✅ Evergreen
✨Pasoti Donor✨
🌟Sparksy Mural🌟
I can't find it on line but in today's Herald it states:
The consortium leading the takeover race are unlikely to foot the entire backdated wage bill.
Staff held a meeting with acting chairman Peter Ridsdale yesterday afternoon to raise their concerns.
He said "The mood at the moment is one of worry. I've been honest with them; I can't guarantee at this stage that they will be given 100%".
Yet they worringly plough on with 100% effort.
The consortium leading the takeover race are unlikely to foot the entire backdated wage bill.
Staff held a meeting with acting chairman Peter Ridsdale yesterday afternoon to raise their concerns.
He said "The mood at the moment is one of worry. I've been honest with them; I can't guarantee at this stage that they will be given 100%".
Yet they worringly plough on with 100% effort.
So the reciever gets paid, PR gets paid (although he said he wasn't going to), Mastpoint get to keep more of their money, yet the most innocent victims lose out....
Really stinks, doesn't it.
Really stinks, doesn't it.
Unfortunately when a business goes belly-up there are casualties. I do not like to see it but it is in the nature of administrations, receiverships and liquidations. Those in charge must make it as painless as they can for employees, especially in difficult economic times.
Quintrell_Green":zxe294f4 said:
I don't think that's true in this case. What money would they have got or will get if you don't count fans contribution?
They have been constantly fed a line to keep things going for the betterment of others, IMHO
