Europrice shut its doors

barney 20v

calvin_zola wrote: »

up ou that, only causing trouble is all you are

how so?

Tommy987

Tommy987 wrote: »

Do you mind if I ask what specifically you are protesting for? (Genuine question)

[/Quote]

This person won't be answered as they don't seem to actually know themselves.
They will be receiving all their entitlements

wellboytoo

Think it's time to close the doors on this thread....

cartell_best

Some posts on this thread are just absolutely amazing! Forgive me if I'm wrong? Because a company with a few outlets is being hindered in settling a financial package to a number of outlets because of one of its outlets doing what it should, and fighting for what is rightfully theirs? What has brought about this single store taking such action? Maybe its because they are on the frontline and know how to deal with this company and for the Waterford store to fight for this should tell us something!

I don't work for them and I'm sure most of us don't. They are fighting because they know the company they are up against! I say fair f**ks to them. If they had treated their work force properly from the start, I'm certain it wouldn't have come to this stage. If we're at a point where fighting for workers rights resulting in an occupy mentality is needed, then so be it. If we all just lay down and die when an organisation thinks they can carry on with what they think is by their mentality acceptabe! No thanks, The staff in Waterford are to be commended..They are fighting a battle that is becoming all to familiar in Ireland. And at least they are standing up for their rights! Maybe some stores should learn by example in this scenario...

Newaglish

cartell_best wrote: »

Some posts on this thread are just absolutely amazing! Forgive me if I'm wrong? Because a company with a few outlets is being hindered in settling a financial package to a number of outlets because of one of its outlets doing what it should, and fighting for what is rightfully theirs? What has brought about this single store taking such action? Maybe its because they are on the frontline and know how to deal with this company and for the Waterford store to fight for this should tell us something!

I don't work for them and I'm sure most of us don't. They are fighting because they know the company they are up against! I say fair f**ks to them. If they had treated their work force properly from the start, I'm certain it wouldn't have come to this stage. If we're at a point where fighting for workers rights resulting in an occupy mentality is needed, then so be it. If we all just lay down and die when an organisation thinks they can carry on with what they think is by their mentality acceptabe! No thanks, The staff in Waterford are to be commended..They are fighting a battle that is becoming all to familiar in Ireland. And at least they are standing up for their rights! Maybe some stores should learn by example in this scenario...

What are they fighting for? The former directors of the company have no control over how they are treated once the liquidator is appointed. The liquidator will organise for their entitlements to be paid as quickly as possible through the government scheme that repays every single Irish employee in the same scenario.

What makes this case special?

SheFiend

According to todays News and Star the staff did not sign the letter due to a clause which stated they could not question the liquidation company about overtime or holiday pay.
They believed that to sign the letter would be waiving their right to claim those payments if the payments were not made.
Is a clause like this standard practise for liquidation procedures? I would be suspicious of it myself if i was in that situation.

cartell_best

Newaglish wrote: »

What are they fighting for? The former directors of the company have no control over how they are treated once the liquidator is appointed. The liquidator will organise for their entitlements to be paid as quickly as possible through the government scheme that repays every single Irish employee in the same scenario.

What makes this case special?

There's a little thing called Pride and whats right and whats inherently wrong! If there was sufficient and capable management in place in the first place, regardless of what the outcome could have been, surely the direction that this store has taken was avoidable? "The liquidator will organise for their entitlements to be paid as quickly as possible"... have you ever dealt with liquidators? I have and believe me its a dog eat dog world and at the end of the day its financial outcome superceeds moral or professional ethics.

Newaglish

SheFiend wrote: »

According to todays News and Star the staff did not sign the letter due to a clause which stated they could not question the liquidation company about overtime or holiday pay.
They believed that to sign the letter would be waiving their right to claim those payments if the payments were not made.
Is a clause like this standard practise for liquidation procedures? I would be suspicious of it myself if i was in that situation.

No, that does sound quite unusual. I would need to see the letter though to see how it was phrased. I imagine they would have just been signing the EIP1 form which would have a clause stating that they confirm the amounts on the form are correct. I'm not sure if they've misunderstood that clause or it's something completely different.

Newaglish

cartell_best wrote: »

There's a little thing called Pride and whats right and whats inherently wrong! If there was sufficient and capable management in place in the first place, regardless of what the outcome could have been, surely the direction that this store has taken was avoidable? "The liquidator will organise for their entitlements to be paid as quickly as possible"... have you ever dealt with liquidators? I have and believe me its a dog eat dog world and at the end of the day its financial outcome superceeds moral or professional ethics.

I worked as a liquidator for years. I know how it operates. Your "dog eat dog" stuff is nonsense. All the actions of the liquidator are based on company law and it's fradulent to incorrectly prefer one creditor over another.

For all of your bluster and emotion about pride and what's right and wrong, you're hilariously quick to abandon "moral and professional ethics" in favour of money.

If you could give me one specific, concrete thing that the employees are hoping to achieve, that would be great. They're already going to get their outstanding wages and redundancy. If it's the case that they're just mad and angry about their situation, I think the lesson is: grow up, welcome to the real world, move on to something else.

barney 20v

Newaglish wrote: »

I worked as a liquidator for years. I know how it operates. Your "dog eat dog" stuff is nonsense. All the actions of the liquidator are based on company law and it's fradulent to incorrectly prefer one creditor over another.

For all of your bluster and emotion about pride and what's right and wrong, you're hilariously quick to abandon "moral and professional ethics" in favour of money.

If you could give me one specific, concrete thing that the employees are hoping to achieve, that would be great. They're already going to get their outstanding wages and redundancy. If it's the case that they're just mad and angry about their situation, I think the lesson is: grow up, welcome to the real world, move on to something else.

Exactly ! The liquidator can not provide these people with pride or a sense of justice .
He can however do his job and facilitate the payment of outstanding money etc - but it's hard to organise payments for people doing the sit in ... Meanwhile all the other employees must wait .
I said it before / all they have done is delayed the inevitable !
A pointless protest !!

SweetCaliber

barney 20v wrote: »

Exactly ! The liquidator can not provide these people with pride or a sense of justice .
He can however do his job and facilitate the payment of outstanding money etc - but it's hard to organise payments for people doing the sit in ... Meanwhile all the other employees must wait .
I said it before / all they have done is delayed the inevitable !
A pointless protest !!

If they were promised payment of wages then they wouldn't be sitting in. however they are so they must have no idea about getting their wages paid, or have not been informed.

They might also want their wages there and then considering they are owed last week's wages too. That's also a reason to sit in until they get their money.

cartell_best

Newaglish wrote: »

I worked as a liquidator for years. I know how it operates. Your "dog eat dog" stuff is nonsense. All the actions of the liquidator are based on company law and it's fradulent to incorrectly prefer one creditor over another.

For all of your bluster and emotion about pride and what's right and wrong, you're hilariously quick to abandon "moral and professional ethics" in favour of money.

If you could give me one specific, concrete thing that the employees are hoping to achieve, that would be great. They're already going to get their outstanding wages and redundancy. If it's the case that they're just mad and angry about their situation, I think the lesson is: grow up, welcome to the real world, move on to something else.

Well, you were a liquidator! Fair play to you! Nice one!

barney 20v

lee3155 wrote: »

If they were promised payment of wages then they wouldn't be sitting in. however they are so they must have no idea about getting their wages paid, or have not been informed.

They might also want their wages there and then considering they are owed last week's wages too. That's also a reason to sit in until they get their money.

They were informed - they took this action
And as a result they did not get paid like all the rest of the staff at other stores .
Who did they expect to pay them all they are owed on the morning they started this sh##e? The owner? No longer has a say in it- the liquidators ? they can not pay only facilitate the statutory payments !
Pointless self serving ridiculous protest.

cartell_best

Guys, if i could be so bold as to suggest there may be particular people with hidden agendas making comments for some reason or another. The guys in the Waterford store, fair play to ye. It really is better the devil you know. Keep up the good work Eurprice waterford. Waterford news and star has ye as their front page so ya can't be all wong!

Sully

Mod Note

I think most would agree this thread is an absolute mess. It is being actively discussed by the moderation team in regards to its future but for now I think its best everyone calmed down and left their "I'm right, your wrong" debate outside of this topic. The workers have had their say, others have had their say against the workers. I don't see any reason why we need to continue with such a discussion and therefore I think this thread should just be about news and developments in relation to the workers protest.

The News & Star today has a report on this, which you may like to pick up in your local news agents for more info and to get away from the hustle and bustle in here.

Sully

In my personal view..

It would appear from the news paper that a meeting did take place between staff and the owner of the store after (I assume by the way the article has it laid out) the court approved a liquidator. They were indeed asked to sign a document to waive their rights to additional entitlements but they would be given one weeks wages for doing so. The staff in Waterford, at least, refused. I fail to see how the company can not pay those staff from the other stores who signed the document the weeks wages, if they signed the document. I fail to see how a few workers refusal would hold up that process. Either way, its irrelevant. If one group of workers wishes to pursue their legal entitlements, then so be it. I don't see how we need to debate this any further.

Whether or not the document was legal, there is no official answer and I don't think any poster here has proven to be qualified in such. So perhaps until facts are produced, that debate is sidelined?

The manager met with the liquidator which brought them into the store, the morning after the above meeting. The locks were changed. Whether or not this was legal, there is no official answer and I don't think any poster here has proven to be qualified in such. So perhaps until facts are produced, that debate is sidelined?

I think that covers all the issues we are going around and around here in. As an aside, the Liquidator released a statement today saying their full entitlements would be paid by the state as per "standard procedure". If this is the case, I don't understand why they are holding the protest?

Also a meeting was supposed to be had with the director of the store and the staff today. Was there anything of substance happen?

ziedth

I wonder is overtime/holiday pay an issue? I'd imagine you can build up quite a few hours that would be worth a few quid and im not sure would it be covered by the state.

Newaglish

Sully wrote: »

I don't think any poster here has proven to be qualified in such.

*ahem*

ziedth wrote: »

I wonder is overtime/holiday pay an issue? I'd imagine you can build up quite a few hours that would be worth a few quid and im not sure would it be covered by the state.

You're entitled to 8 weeks arrears of wages in total from the State, at a maximum of €600 per week. This covered arrears of wages, bonuses and overtime.

Holiday pay works a similar way, with its own separate cap of 8 weeks (if I remember correctly) again at €600 per week.

I would imagine most employees would qualify to receive their full arrears.

My only real question the whole time has been to figure out why the protest is actually happening.

Sully

Newaglish wrote: »

*ahem*



You're entitled to 8 weeks arrears of wages in total from the State, at a maximum of €600 per week. This covered arrears of wages, bonuses and overtime.

Holiday pay works a similar way, with its own separate cap of 8 weeks (if I remember correctly) again at €600 per week.

I would imagine most employees would qualify to receive their full arrears.

My only real question the whole time has been to figure out why the protest is actually happening.

No offense, but I have no idea who you are or if you are actually qualified.

Sure, didn't you know I was a qualified doctor?

Tubbs4

Sully wrote: »

No offense, but I have no idea who you are or if you are actually qualified.

Sure, didn't you know I was a qualified doctor?

a doctor you say well i have this itch ...
Well i support what they ate doing but hope they ate stuck there too long and it gets resolved quickly.
What is law and what happens are two different things

Nypd

Their Facebook page says that they are to receive all that they are entitled to.

Hoffmans

Nypd wrote: »

Their Facebook page says that they are to receive all that they are entitled to.

GOOD NEWS , THO I WOULD HOPE THEY GET THAT ONTO SOME SORT OF DOCUMENT THROUGH A SOLICITOR MABEY.....after all it could be a snakey trick to get them to leave.....

cahill2012

barney 20v wrote: »

Exactly ! The liquidator can not provide these people with pride or a sense of justice .
He can however do his job and facilitate the payment of outstanding money etc - but it's hard to organise payments for people doing the sit in ... Meanwhile all the other employees must wait .
I said it before / all they have done is delayed the inevitable !
A pointless protest !!

The staff had a meeting tonight,got ther entitlements,evrything,that they were fighting for,in writing.So,before u go mouthing off educate yourself.End of

cahill2012

barney 20v wrote: »

They were informed - they took this action
And as a result they did not get paid like all the rest of the staff at other stores .
Who did they expect to pay them all they are owed on the morning they started this sh##e? The owner? No longer has a say in it- the liquidators ? they can not pay only facilitate the statutory payments !
Pointless self serving ridiculous protest.

Again,educate yourself.Its people like u thats wrong with this country tut tut,shame on u.They got everything in writing tonight

green123

cahill2012 wrote: »

The staff had a meeting tonight,got ther entitlements,evrything,that they were fighting for,in writing.So,before u go mouthing off educate yourself.End of

cahill2012 wrote: »

Again,educate yourself.Its people like u thats wrong with this country tut tut,shame on u.They got everything in writing tonight

of course they got what they were entitled to.

they were always going to get what they are entitled to.

the government guarantees that they get what they are entitled to.

that is what people here have been trying to tell you.

the protest was a waste of time because they would have got their entitlements anyway.

calerbass

green123 wrote: »

of course they got what they were entitled to.

they were always going to get what they are entitled to.

the government guarantees that they get what they are entitled to.

that is what people here have been trying to tell you.

the protest was a waste of time because they would have got their entitlements anyway.

They were,nt always going to get what they were entitled to only for sitting in.

The government only guarantees stat redundancies, not holiday pay, or owed wages.

Employers are not willing to pay redundancy now due to only a 15% rebate back as opposed to 60% up to awhile ago, which was changed in the budget.

The only proof of inability to pay, is to show the books, which did not happen.
Everything was only rumour from the liquid man and the wicklow man.

If you think protesting for your rights is a waste of time, your sadly mistaken.

Employers can't be allowed to walk of into the sunset and leave workers in the mess that they did.

green123

calerbass wrote: »

They were,nt always going to get what they were entitled to only for sitting in.

The government only guarantees stat redundancies, not holiday pay, or owed wages.
.

Newaglish wrote: »

*ahem*

You're entitled to 8 weeks arrears of wages in total from the State, at a maximum of €600 per week. This covered arrears of wages, bonuses and overtime.

Holiday pay works a similar way, with its own separate cap of 8 weeks (if I remember correctly) again at €600 per week.

I would imagine most employees would qualify to receive their full arrears.

My only real question the whole time has been to figure out why the protest is actually happening.

calerbass

you are wrong and the employees were wrong and they wasted their time.

what have they gained by this protest ? they would have got their entitlements anyway.

have a read of this from

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/employment/unemployment_and_redundancy/redundancy/redundancy_payments.html

The Protection of Employees (Employers' Insolvency) Acts 1984 - 2004 protect certain outstanding entitlements relating to the pay of employees in the event of their employers becoming insolvent as defined in the Acts.

Subject to certain limits and conditions (including statutory time limits), money due to employees in a range of situations may be paid by the Department of Social Protection out of the Social Insurance Fund. Instances where the Department may pay from this fund include circumstances where money due as a result of:

Arrears of pay (including arrears of pay due under an Employment Regulation Order)
Holiday and sick pay
Entitlements under the minimum notice and terms of employment, employment equality and unfair dismissals legislation
Court orders in respect of wages, holiday pay or damages at common law for wrongful dismissal.

Newaglish

calerbass wrote: »

They were,nt always going to get what they were entitled to only for sitting in.

The government only guarantees stat redundancies, not holiday pay, or owed wages.

Employers are not willing to pay redundancy now due to only a 15% rebate back as opposed to 60% up to awhile ago, which was changed in the budget.

The only proof of inability to pay, is to show the books, which did not happen.
Everything was only rumour from the liquid man and the wicklow man.

If you think protesting for your rights is a waste of time, your sadly mistaken.

Employers can't be allowed to walk of into the sunset and leave workers in the mess that they did.

Your post is completely factually incorrect.

Appointment of a liquidator is sufficient proof of the company's inability to pay. The government will pay the 100% redundancy to the employee and will become a creditor of the company themselves for the 85% balance that the company would normally pay.

The government also pays arrears of wages and holiday pay as I outlined above.

barney 20v

cahill2012 wrote: »

Again,educate yourself.Its people like u thats wrong with this country tut tut,shame on u.They got everything in writing tonight

They were always going to get what they are legally entitled to... i have made that point over and over.


I have to point out that this was always going to happen and that the staff in other stores got everything in writing yesterday morning a full 8-9 hours ahead of the waterford staff....if the waterford staff had sought proper advice and educated themselves this could have been avoided.

I have nothing to be ashamed of, i have stated facts all along and have been proven to be correct!

cahill2012

barney 20v wrote: »

They were always going to get what they are legally entitled to... i have made that point over and over.


I have to point out that this was always going to happen and that the staff in other stores got everything in writing yesterday morning a full 8-9 hours ahead of the waterford staff....if the waterford staff had sought proper advice and educated themselves this could have been avoided.

I have nothing to be ashamed of, i have stated facts all along and have been proven to be correct!

Your obviously backing up someone who works for them.Matter closed,later!