Leading Article: Failed rescue offers a painful lesson

Monday 14 March 1994 19:02 EST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

NOT many readers will be able to place John Watson and Anthony Unwin. Yet the case of these two pilots, working for a charter company called Paramount Airways, gave rise last month to a judgment in the Court of Appeal that nearly put thousands out of work.

Paramount was forced into administration in August 1989. The administrators sent out letters promising that employees' salaries would still be paid - but adding at the end, in a deliberate form of words, that they did not adopt or assume liability for their contracts of employment. Sadly, the rescue failed and the firm's entire workforce was later laid off. The two then sued for holiday pay and salary in lieu of notice.

Upholding a lower judge, the Court of Appeal said last month that the formula the administrators had relied on was a dud. No matter what form of words they put in correspondence, the administrators had implicitly adopted the workers' employment contracts by continuing to pay them.

That judgment opened the way for people sacked from thousands of busted companies to sue for redundancy or holiday pay. More ominously, it sent such a shockwave around the offices of receivers and administrators that, until yesterday, many were making a policy of sacking all the workers of insolvent companies in order to avoid putting themselves at legal risk. This may have been too hasty. By being precise about agreements with workers at bankrupt firms, both receivers and administrators might possibly have found a way to avoid liability without wholesale sackings. But these are uncharted legal waters.

But given the panic caused by the judgment, it was wise of Michael Heseltine yesterday to announce his intention to legislate. With effect from yesterday, he said, an amendment to the law will allow administrators to take responsibility only for workers' salaries and pensions, and receivers to avoid personal liability when they keep workers on. Workers may still lose their jobs when a company goes bust, therefore; but there will no longer be a perverse incentive for creditors and administrators to close down a business that could be saved.

Mr Heseltine's action will do nothing to help the specialists who may now face millions of pounds in legal claims. But it will help to remind the wider public that the rescue procedures of receivership and administration established under the 1986 Insolvency Act are to companies what intensive care is to human beings. They may often fail. They usually bring with them a great deal of pain. But they mark the beginning of a new lease of life.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in