AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Rockwood redundancy row

26th September 1996
Page 12
Page 12, 26th September 1996 — Rockwood redundancy row
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

• Nearly 200 former transport workers of Rockwood Holdings look set for a legal clash with the firm's receivers.

Coopers & Lybrand, which now owns Cork Gully— Rockwood Holdings' receivers from six years ago--says it "does not accept at this point" that the claims from the 188 ex• workers are valid.

Coopers & Lybrand is now in discussing the situation with the workers' lawyers.

The driving and warehouse staff were working at Rockwood Holdings' £25mturnover subsidiary Rockwood Distribution when the group failed. They have issued a High Court writ demanding several hundred thousand pounds of compensation from Coopers & Lybrand. This would cover the difference between the redundancy payments given to the staff by the receivers and the amounts they would have received under a union agreement, says the Transport and General Workers Union, which is co-ordinating the action.

The move follows a House of Lords legal judgement last year which allows workers sacked between 1986 and March 1994—and after 14 days of the appointment of a receiver—to claim their full notice payments from the receiver.