State of Illinois boycotting Bank of America

[ExiledInIllinois]

The workers' claims should be included with the creditors' .... and if this were a Christian country, one would want to see those claims at the TOP of the list, and not the bottom of the list.

 

Bingo! Exactly... What is wrong with that?

[PastaJoe]

Different states have different rules about notification required for layoffs that exceed a certain % of the workforce. But sixty days notice to the state of the intent to lay people off is not the same thing as 60 days paid severance to those employees. There is no such severance requirement that I have heard of and no business in their right mind would ever pay that much severance if the reason they were laying off people was because they were running out of money!

 

The state is within its rights to penalize the employer for failure to provide notice, but that doesn't necessarily mean that the workers are going to benefit. And as has been pointed out, it's quite absurd to think BoA should be required to hand cash to an enterprise that is clearly going under. Isn't that how we got here in the first place?

 

It's a federal law. Workers were given three days' notice that they were losing their jobs, but federal law requires either 60 days' notice or 60 days' pay for the laid-off workers of companies that employee 200 or more. When my company of +200 employees in New York closed, they had to give us 60 days notice.

[KD in CA]

I don't know if there was a policy in place, or a state law, that dictates the severance. The workers are most upset that the company CONCEALED their intent to close from them and then literally pulled the rug out from under them with 3 days' notice.

Which is certainly understandable, but sadly is a practical necessity. Very few people get a two month termination notice for obvious reasons. Plus, the company didn't know for sure that it was losing the bank line until it was actually pulled, so it may have really happened within a few days.

 

The workers' claims should be included with the creditors' .... and if this were a Christian country, one would want to see those claims at the TOP of the list, and not the bottom of the list.

Absolutely agree, and I believe that employee payroll claims are in fact at the top of the heap in bankruptcy proceedings.

 

Regarding BofA - I think the issue here is that the company said it's the Bank who froze them, therefore making it impossible to honor their commitment...this somewhat implies that they're acknowleding a commitment.

I've dealt with bank lines a lot and in fact saw a very similar situation when I was an auditor. In that case the company was lying to the bank about it's financial status to try to stay afloat. I went in to do the audit, and after the bank took one look at the draft financial report they pulled the credit line and the company shut down immediately -- no warning to the employees at all. Bank lines come with lots of conditions (known as covenants) that the company must meet in order for the line to stay in place and available. This is to reduce the risk to the bank of a default which in turn is what allows them to lend at a low rate. The alternative to to borrow venture money without the covenants but at a rate twice as high (or more).

 

It is highly unlikely that BoA pulled a credit line if the company was in full compliance with the agreement, as that would open them up to significant legal risk. It is far more likely that the company was in default of the line, were warned by BoA, and when they couldn't make ends meet, had the line pulled before BoA lost all their money.

[John Adams]

I'm thinking of boycotting McDonalds until they pay my salary. They're sitting on a pile of dough.

 

They are the target of the next windfall profit tax.*

 

As defined by you.

[Steely Dan]

There is no question in my mind now that you are the biggest on this board. Do you have an ounce of humanity in your soul?

 

I apologize GG. I've been unemployed for awhile and I guess I have a lot of sympathy for these people.

[Chef Jim]

No, I think the workers should get paid...by their employer. It's not BoA's responsibility to pay the workers of their debtors.

 

As an aside...where'd this "federal 60 day requirement" come from? Whenever a company I've worked for has gone under, I've gotten two weeks if I were lucky.

 

Shiit, all I got was shown the door.

[DC Tom]

Absolutely agree, and I believe that employee payroll claims are in fact at the top of the heap in bankruptcy proceedings.

 

 

Yes, they are.

 

Former employees, though...I mean, if you're laid off without compensation, then two weeks later your company shuts down, anyone working at the time the company closes gets priority, but I don't know about anyone else.

[DC Tom]

I apologize GG. I've been unemployed for awhile and I guess I have a lot of sympathy for these people.

 

You should sue Wells Fargo.

[KD in CA]

It's a federal law. Workers were given three days' notice that they were losing their jobs, but federal law requires either 60 days' notice or 60 days' pay for the laid-off workers of companies that employee 200 or more. When my company of +200 employees in New York closed, they had to give us 60 days notice.

Ok, but that's neither here nor there. No one is arguing the employees' right to sue the owners or pursue their severance in bankruptcy courts per established law.

 

But the point was the demonetization of BoA, which is so far off the mark of any reasonableness that it's hard to imagine an elected official being irresponsible enough to try to hold them responsible for the financial status of a private, unrelated entity.

[Chef Jim]

Tell me what should be done to see these people through the rest of the month?

 

The want ads.

 

Oh hey, I have an idea. How about some savings.

[John Adams]

They had to see what was coming and closed down when they had 60 days of pay left for the employees. As I said above I don't think it's BOA's responsibility but someone has to help these workers. Who are they going to sue for their money?

 

What? Every time someone gets screwed in a bankruptcy is someone responsible for the workers?

 

Do you understand that one of the fundamental bases for our business culture is risk? There's a risk that people go out of business. A risk that the people who sold that company goods won't get paid. A risk that people who ordered products from that company won't get delivery (or their money back). And on and on.

 

There's no such thing as the "someone to help the workers" fairy.

 

My business is having a tighter end of the year. Usually we give huge bonuses. This year they will likely be less. It's a bummer. It's a fact. The fairy won't rescue my employees if they were counting on the big bonus and it won't put money in my pocket to give the traditionally big bonus.

 

Facts are stubborn things. Don't be so naive.

[GG]

I apologize GG. I've been unemployed for awhile and I guess I have a lot of sympathy for these people.

 

That's alright. There will be more pain, and usually the ones getting the worst of it are the ones you don't read about.

[Steely Dan]

You should sue Wells Fargo.

 

You're sooooooo not funny!! Jack-ASS!!

 

The want ads.

 

Oh hey, I have an idea. How about some savings.

 

You really don't give a about anyone but yourself do you?

[KD in CA]

You really don't give a about anyone but yourself do you?

Lighten up, Francis.

 

But I'll answer this point seriously:

 

They had to see what was coming and closed down when they had 60 days of pay left for the employees.

Yes, they likely did know what was coming when they had 60 days pay left. But do you know what would happen if every company in the US that had less than 60 days of employee comp in the bank decided to close their doors to ensure severance? There would be literally hundreds of thousands of companies going under (including mine).

 

So what were they doing during that interim period? Likely trying very hard to renegotiate their line with BoA (that they were already in default on) or other lenders in an effort to save the company. You'd be amazed at the amount of effort going into such activities across the country these days. But again, a credit line is for liquidity for a viable business, not for paying severance.

 

 

 

 

There's no such thing as the "someone to help the workers" fairy.

btw, this is going on my sig line.

[John Adams]

btw, this is going on my sig line.

 

Frankly, I thought my line about Jason Peters's catlike quickness to a fumbled ball was better but I'll take it.

[Chump Change]

I apologize GG. I've been unemployed for awhile and I guess I have a lot of sympathy for these people.

 

Almost 9,000 posts on a message board in less than two years.

 

Don't take this the wrong way, but if it was me being unemployed for that long I don't think I'd be spending the majority of my time here.

 

Again, I don't want to seem 'heartless' but seriously.

[Chef Jim]

You really don't give a about anyone but yourself do you?

 

No I don't. That's why I spend most of my waking hours working with people to make their financial lives a lot better than they currently are. It's just up to them to make the choice to do so. Schmuck.

[DC Tom]

What? Every time someone gets screwed in a bankruptcy is someone responsible for the workers?

 

Do you understand that one of the fundamental bases for our business culture is risk? There's a risk that people go out of business. A risk that the people who sold that company goods won't get paid. A risk that people who ordered products from that company won't get delivery (or their money back). And on and on.

 

There's no such thing as the "someone to help the workers" fairy.

 

My business is having a tighter end of the year. Usually we give huge bonuses. This year they will likely be less. It's a bummer. It's a fact. The fairy won't rescue my employees if they were counting on the big bonus and it won't put money in my pocket to give the traditionally big bonus.

 

Facts are stubborn things. Don't be so naive.

 

And if anyone knows fairies, it's John Adams... [/bill in NYC]

 

 

Seriously, have you taken a look at our culture recently? The avoidance of risk is the fundamental basis of current American culture. We live in a risk-averse society. How the hell do you expect the average worker to understand that simply having a job implies a reasonable risk of losing it?

[Steely Dan]

Almost 9,000 posts on a message board in less than two years.

 

Don't take this the wrong way, but if it was me being unemployed for that long I don't think I'd be spending the majority of my time here.

 

Again, I don't want to seem 'heartless' but seriously.

 

Where do you get 9,000 from?

 

I have sent out over 100 resume's. I have filled out over 50 applications at companies that would pay me less than I can live on and I'm trying to keep a job in my field. If you'll notice I'm not here all day. There are big gaps in my postings.

 

It doesn't help when you have to tell people you were fired for "assaulting" a fellow employee. I tell them the truth but who knows what they believe. I've never been unemployed before in my life. My references are stellar and the problem is that there just aren't that many jobs available today.

 

No I don't. That's why I spend most of my waking hours working with people to make their financial lives a lot better than they currently are. It's just up to them to make the choice to do so. Schmuck.

 

Wow that's great! When you're not working that charity how do make money?

[DC Tom]

Where do you get 9,000 from?

 

I have sent out over 100 resume's. I have filled out over 50 applications at companies that would pay me less than I can live on and I'm trying to keep a job in my field. If you'll notice I'm not here all day. There are big gaps in my postings.

 

It doesn't help when you have to tell people you were fired for "assaulting" a fellow employee. I tell them the truth but who knows what they believe. I've never been unemployed before in my life. My references are stellar and the problem is that there just aren't that many jobs available today.

 

It sucks. I've been there (except for the "assaulting a fellow employee" part - I mean, I do it every day, verbally. Just told a guy today he should rub both his IQ points together and start a fire. I'm just not fired for it, for some odd reason.)

 

 

I don't know what to tell you, really. Have you considered arson?