Wrightbus, £15m and the Evangelical Super Church

ArrBee

I can't understand why it would be legal to do what was done.

Just because the "charity" is called a "church", doesn't make it either.

ohnonotgmail

ArrBee wrote: »

I can't understand why it would be legal to do what was done.

Just because the "charity" is called a "church", doesn't make it either.

you cant understand why it would be legal for the owner of a company to withdraw from it?

theoneeyedman

banie01 wrote: »

Whilst I'd agree 100% that the funds were all properly accounted for.
Where a disbursement of company funds results in a profit becoming a £1.2 million pound loss I'd seriously question the actual ethics and morality of the directors who signed off on said disbursement.

Where a company that has a viable order book, cannot continue trading as its "charitable donations" have put its accounts deep in the red, the actions of those who approved the donations even tho legal need to be called out for the recklessness they are.

That the action was legal, does not make it moral.
Which is quite ironic given where the money went.

This makes sense to any normal person.

A question, was it the company that donated to the church, or Mr Wright in a personal capacity? Was it money 'due' to him as a shareholder of the bus company, which he donated to the church? For example, some sort of a dividend as a shareholder?

I ask because in some of the news reports over the weekend, that was kinda the way it was presented, Mr Wright referred to as a shareholder who donated to the church. Sounded like a legalese statement, and possibly fed to the reporter by the man himself or his reps, but a suptle difference nonetheless.
All bullsh1t of course, it's reprehensible behaviour by any measure, legal or not, and as for Morals.......

I always heard, 'The nearer to Church, the further from God'.

Gunmonkey

How could he receive that amount as a dividend if the company made a loss in that year? No dividend would be issued.

Now if it was £4.2m from his own pocket as a donation....you thin maybe he could have invested a part of that into Wrightbus to keep the company afloat for another year or so, potentially riding out Brexit and potentially securing new tenders once the supply chains after UK leaves are established. For him to allow the company he is CEO of and has his name on to go under when he has more than enough to offer a short term loan, or whatever the term would be, and instead pump it into such an inane vanity project is insanity.

Damien360

banie01 wrote: »

Whilst I'd agree 100% that the funds were all properly accounted for.
Where a disbursement of company funds results in a profit becoming a £1.2 million pound loss I'd seriously question the actual ethics and morality of the directors who signed off on said disbursement.

Where a company that has a viable order book, cannot continue trading as its "charitable donations" have put its accounts deep in the red, the actions of those who approved the donations even tho legal need to be called out for the recklessness they are.

That the action was legal, does not make it moral.
Which is quite ironic given where the money went.

I don’t know company tax law but can you or someone else answer this. As the company was loss making, it has no corporation tax due as there is no profit. Can a charitable donation be made before the tax is due to avoid tax ? Is this just tax avoidance. Is the church subject to different tax due ?

punisher5112

Damien360 wrote: »

I don’t know company tax law but can you or someone else answer this. As the company was loss making, it has no corporation tax due as there is no profit. Can a charitable donation be made before the tax is due to avoid tax ? Is this just tax avoidance. Is the church subject to different tax due ?

Church is a charity so it would make total sense if he knew things were going down to swindle money elsewhere.

The Satanist

HaHa dot gif

PVNevin

From The Times, Newton Emerson:
"Ten years ago my wife, who is Catholic, worked for Wrightbus, the Ballymena coachbuilder that has just entered administration with the loss of 1,200 jobs. She did not experience or witness any sectarian prejudice and has been horrified by the barely disguised gloating at the company’s demise, with some clearly regarding it as an Orange bastion of DUP-voting Brexit supporters who deserve their fate.
Sinn Fein, which has expressed sympathy for staff, tried to sabotage their jobs in 2006 by telling American customers that Wrightbus refused to employ Catholics. In fact, Wrightbus had a mixed workforce in proportion to Ballymena’s population and no finding of religious discrimination was upheld against it."

I haven't read the rest of Emeron's article because it requires a subscription.

I oppose the easy knowingness of a social type that is happy to condemn all protestant workers as bigots because a proportion of them vote DUP. Yet those who condemn DUP voters are blind to their own prejudices.
Sinn Fein are the dance partner of the DUP in the sectarian two-step organised to split the working class.
The same Sinn Fein that appeals to the "Nationalist", ie Catholic, people; and who endlessly cheer on the "demographic change" that will
bring Sinn Fein to power.
The same SInn Fein that colluded with the DUP in crashing Stormont so that both they and the DUP could move sideways from their responsibility for savage cuts in state spending.

Working people are served neither by the DUP or Sinn Fein - two parties profoundly hostile to socialism.

humberklog

^ above post.. .

I usually enjoy Newton's take on things but...
Isn't NI about 55/45 in favour of protestants? And the workforce was about 80% protestant?

And while Ballymena might be about 80%ish in protestant population it's really not that big of a stretch to have a comparable national average in its workforce in such a small country.

Didn't know Newton was married to a catholic.

PVNevin

I also was aware of Emerson's 'looseness' with the figures; but I think the numbers he suggests are closer than yours.
On another point, it is only of a certain secondary value that his wife is Catholic.
Who knows, she may be an arch Unionist?

The most important issue is that workers must, and do, reject the sectarian split/ head count. And instead base their political calculations on the interests of working people as a whole. Analyse the DUP, and Sinn Fein, from the perspective of class.

This class analysis is the prospect that is beginning to open up again.
Paisley and his gang; and Sinn Fein and their phoney claims to progressives, are both now threadbare. They are in situ simply by inertia.
The socialist alternative has not yet been presented, to replace these con artists.

I think commentators on social media must have the courage of their convictions and fight the socialist corner.
Sectarian arguments are essentially not at all strong and base themselves totally on the 'facts on the ground'.

Well, supposedly a fact on the ground was that the Wrightbus workers were dyed-in-the-wool reactionaries (because they vote, supposedly, DUP).
Do you think those workers you saw on UTV were these ogres the idea of which the pseudo lefts and Sinn Fein constantly perpetuate?
(There is a short tv piece at the end of this report:
https://www.itv.com/news/utv/2019-09-26/growing-staff-anger-as-hopes-fade-for-wrightbus-buyer/
)
This is a very useful socialist analysis on the rotten heart of unions:
"Why are trade unions hostile to socialism?"
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2019/09/28/matu-s28.html

Where were the union 'champions' of workers while the Wrights were stripping the company of its worth? A practice that was in the published accounts for years.
Unite are acting now as job agents for other companies.
Occupy Wrightbus? Unite recoil in horror at the thought.

humberklog

Don't get me wrong PV i wasn't banging a drum for parity and i know my figures are askew.
I heard a brief synopsis of the "traditions" of the workforce/town on the radio and did think to myself... "I'd have thought things had changed up there by now...".

Part of your post reads like what the late David Irvine (PUP) used to say. A man i generally agreed with.

ongarite

See this Twitter thread.
Someone has done a deep dive on the Wright company structure and finances.
https://twitter.com/dup_online/status/1175358929162907648?s=19

PVNevin

humberklog wrote: »

Don't get me wrong PV i wasn't banging a drum for parity and i know my figures are askew.
I heard a brief synopsis of the "traditions" of the workforce/town on the radio and did think to myself... "I'd have thought things had changed up there by now...".

Part of your post reads like what the late David Irvine (PUP) used to say. A man i generally agreed with.

"..a brief synopsis of the traditions of the workforce/ town on the radio..."

By whom? Can you link this?
And the workforce themselves, as opposed to synopses?
Do the Wrightbus workers not have the right to be listened to directly.
As opposed to spin from cynical commentators with a definite, reinforce the 'split' dogma, agenda?

No, the opinions I express have nothing whatsoever to do with David Ervine.

My opinions are based on the historical struggle for socialism. Worldwide.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

aerburdz wrote: »

You can be sure they don't feel for you.

What an odd thing to say. It would be weird if they did, considering they don’t know of my existence. Does one only sympathise with people if it’s reciprocal?

gctest50

Can't say too much i suppose, we have our own "version" here, teh god is the financial manager so he is :


https://mobile.twitter.com/newsworthy_ie/status/1036994445118464000?lang=en

ArrBee

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

you cant understand why it would be legal for the owner of a company to withdraw from it?

Correct.

I thought that the only money you could withdraw from company accounts was your own salary. Anything beyond that is embezzlement??
Also, that directors of a company can be held accountable for the decisions of the company where those actions are predictably not in the best interests of the company.


Maybe the above only applies to public companies or something but I always understood that company and personal money are not the same thing.

Essentially there are a whole raft of laws that govern the running of a company and I am surprised that none of them have been broken by passing money from one family business to another family business charity.

ohnonotgmail

ArrBee wrote: »

Correct.

I thought that the only money you could withdraw from company accounts was your own salary. Anything beyond that is embezzlement??
Also, that directors of a company can be held accountable for the decisions of the company where those actions are predictably not in the best interests of the company.


Maybe the above only applies to public companies or something but I always understood that company and personal money are not the same thing.

Essentially there are a whole raft of laws that govern the running of a company and I am surprised that none of them have been broken by passing money from one family business to another family business charity.

The directors are responsible to the shareholders. in this case they are one and the same people. The company made a charitable donation. The company is entitled to do that. I would be surprised if there was anything actually illegal with that transaction. That is not to say it was a smart thing to do but people do stupid things all the time and we dont consider them criminal.

Muahahaha

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

The directors are responsible to the shareholders. in this case they are one and the same people. The company made a charitable donation. The company is entitled to do that. I would be surprised if there was anything actually illegal with that transaction. That is not to say it was a smart thing to do but people do stupid things all the time and we dont consider them criminal.

Probably not illegal but definitely dodgy and the workers who have lost their jobs have a right to be annoyed. The charitable donation itself is free from income tax and now its been reported that Jeff Wrights sister was on the board of the super church and took a salary of £1m in a single year.

ohnonotgmail

Muahahaha wrote: »

Probably not illegal but definitely dodgy and the workers who have lost their jobs have a right to be annoyed. The charitable donation itself is free from income tax and now its been reported that Jeff Wrights sister was on the board of the super church and took a salary of £1m in a single year.

I agreed with Banie earlier when they said this was well dodgy.

Ferm001

Looks like holy Jeff has f**ked over his ex workers again. Owners of JCB Company wanted to take business over, and looked like deal had been done, only for Jeff to up the price on the land around the factory.

Muahahaha

Its mad stuff, he is going to send the whole company down if they cant arrange for someone to take it over and so far he seems to be putting obstacles in the way to prevent it. There is also the engineering supply chain where there is 1,700 jobs, a fair chunk of those will be lost too if Wright Bus cant be saved.

McMurphy

Muahahaha wrote: »

Its mad stuff, he is going to send the whole company down if they cant arrange for someone to take it over and so far he seems to be putting obstacles in the way to prevent it. There is also the engineering supply chain where there is 1,700 jobs, a fair chunk of those will be lost too if Wright Bus cant be saved.

Was reading about it earlier, JCB buses would have been such a cool concept.



What's his (Wright's) game?

punisher5112

AKennedubb wrote: »

They have been saved, an English businessman Joe Bamford came to an agreement with Jeff Wright.

In principle

meathstevie

Pastor Jeff may ultimately be facing charges relating to organizing a fraudulent bankruptcy of the coach builders business me thinks.

LoughNeagh2017

I remember on the news one of the workers was saying "Who is going to employ a 60 year old man? It's over for me now", there is a chicken factory down the road that is always looking new workers, it is funny this is the same type of man who would tell people on the dole to go work in a chicken factory but when it comes to them being unemployed the minimum wage job in the chicken factory is beneath them.

In all seriousness though, imagine slaving away wasting your life making a scumbag like that owner richer, makes me sick to think about, my uncle also is a wealthy business owner and you'll never meet a worse man, he employs the europeans to increase his profits and had an affair with his Lithuanian secretary.

sk8erboii

LoughNeagh2017 wrote: »

I remember on the news one of the workers was saying "Who is going to employ a 60 year old man? It's over for me now", there is a chicken factory down the road that is always looking new workers, it is funny this is the same type of man who would tell people on the dole to go work in a chicken factory but when it comes to them being unemployed the minimum wage job in the chicken factory is beneath them.

In all seriousness though, imagine slaving away wasting your life making a scumbag like that owner richer, makes me sick to think about, my uncle also is a wealthy business owner and you'll never meet a worse man, he employs the europeans to increase his profits and had an affair with his Lithuanian secretary.

LOL he employs europeans?? How terrible