Fohorn, banners and offensive speeches, about 80 employees of BPG Sealants Europe, formerly a French joint venture with Besanon, made noise in front of their company headquarters in Ruil-Malmமைsen on Tuesday morning.
After several demonstrations in front of their factory, which specializes in mastic production, employees wanted to address their management, which currently employs 208 people to compete for the site’s announced closure in October. The company explains this decision by “high efficiency of its production equipment,” which is exacerbated by the health crisis.
“The closure is not entirely justified,” said Mohamed Asoy, secretary of the Economic and Social Council (CSE) and a representative of the CFTC. “We know this is a new merger.
The first court hearing is on February 9
Now the staff wants to challenge this decision just before the courts. The first hearing is scheduled for February 9 in Pontois Court. “Our expert has requested some documents and the management refuses to hand them over,” Mohammed Asoy explains.
In this practice, the staff listed the services of Mee Fyodor Rilov, a media lawyer for the staff of Goodyear in Amiens, Continental in Cliorix or Samsonite in Henin-Beaumont. Through this he wants to get contracts to manage the relations for the PPG team of the Bessons factory.
“It simply came to our notice then. We would like to see if management can interfere with this business relationship. There are clauses to be respected in this agreement, then there is the law, ”he explains. Its purpose is therefore to challenge the legitimacy of plant closure.
Mr. Fyodor Rilov has already planned a procedure in this direction. “If we do not manage to obtain these documents, we will initiate this action because the speed with which they acted does not respect the legal deadline,” he adds.
Generally, management should allow at least six months to pass between the plant closure notice and its operation. According to the schedule submitted to CSE, the end of the process is scheduled for February. “One could reasonably argue that the legal deadline was not respected,” he underscores.
However, the information-consultation process leading to the termination of the site’s operation has already been delayed. “There was a flaw in the practice at the first meeting. Directe told management to do it again,” said Mohamed Asoy. But staff representatives opposed it by boycotting the next meeting.
PPG management claims to have handed over the documents
When contacted by PPG management, he pointed out that they could not be reached for comment on the closure of the plant as long as the information-consultation process with CSE was ongoing. At the February 9 summary hearing, he says this has nothing to do with the end of the site’s operation.
“CSE has appointed an expert on strategic orientation. This expert returned his expertise, but on the last day, CSE decided to appoint another expert, assuming he was not doing his job properly,” explains one executive representative. Provided to the expert. “CSE did not make a recommendation regarding the first expertise, so they have the documentation,” he adds.