Here Come the Lawsuits

Is heroin as good as they say?

Is there any Law firm which is representing US employees (without the retainer fees) who were let go ? Looks like Juroviesky and Ricci is only for Canadian Employees who were let go.

I looked at the Juroviesky website. They think they can get the Severed Employees far more than just an equal share of whatever the eventual breakup amount is. All the other law firms I've heard are saying the best they can do is file for prorata payouts, which means pennies to me, so why bother? And they are not asking for any retainer or other fees from the employees--they'll get paid from the massive Nortel trough that the other law firms are drinking from. Even if this is a long shot, looks like nothing to lose. I'll listen in and see what they say. If nothing else, would be good to see someone in there stirring things up.

Nortel Downfall Part 10
Part 10 deals with the events of last week.

Hey there, thanks a lot for the part 10, I liked it.

Emma

Good one!

lawyers have been retained for 250K. anything they get, even severances if nortel pays or gets out bankruptcy, will result in a 30% fee.

Let’s not forget that Frank Dunn has extensive legal representation in the CCAA proceedings – as if he has not already bilked the company, shareholders, and employees for enough money!

How does he sleep? Like a baby I bet!

He is not tossing and turning like the average Nortel employee or ex employee, wondering how they are going to pay the bills. He is not wondering what to do for medical coverage, or if he can get a reasonable paying job in today’s abysmal high tech labor market. Or wondering, do I have to sell my house? Could I sell my house in the current real estate market? etc. etc. …

Here is an excerpt for the CCA service list:

McCARTHY TETRAULT LLP
Suite 5300, Toronto Dominion Bank Tower
Toronto, Ontario M5K 1E6
Thomas G. Heintzman
Junior Sirivar
Email: theintzm@mccarthy.ca
Tel: 416.601.7627
Fax: 416.868.0673
Email: jsirivar@mccarthy.ca
Tel: 416.601.7750
Fax: 416.868.0673
Lawyers for Frank Andrew Dunn

Hey...thats the same law firm that John Manley works at.....mmmmm.

Doesn't that make you want to puke.
We should send him down to juarez mexico

How much is this saying about the intent? A lawyer friend says this could be very powerful if the retirees and former employees get a vote that could stop Nortel's plans.

"We are of the opinion, that the Nortel terminated Canadian employees should be removed from the unsecured creditor class and should formulate its own class for the purpose of voting due to recent termination pay and severance pay law amendments. So even if the CCAA judge decides to permit the Nortel pension fund members or the post retirement health beneficiaries to make individual votes on the compromise plan, the terminated employees' separate class can still stop the restructuring plan by indicating its intentions to vote no until a satisfactory cash offer is made for its claims."

Under Canadian CCAA, there is no such thing as "secured" creditors...just creditors..As long as they get the court to agree that their names are the list..they are entitled to the payment post restructuring or insolvency..Whether it is a dime for a dollar or in full, it is worth trying !

Ah but is it truly worth it, or is it just ego stroking?
Apparently lawyer retainer fees run from 250 to 1k.
That is just the retainer fee.
There will be more after that.
It is very possible whatever a person gets back the lawyer gets.
A dime on a dollar for joe schmuck?
Not likely.
Pennies on the dollar likely and they you have your lawyer costs.
Everybody on an individual basis has to ask the question if it really is worth it? I know people who lost hundreds of thousands due to Dunn and after all was said and done they really got nothing for their troubles (court, laywer, settlement). After all is said and done why do you think this situation is better with regards to payback. I'd say the situation will be worse for jane schmuck since it is bankruptcy protection as opposed to what happened after the book cookings.

Remaining "unsecured" with only a "potential" to receive full payment remains no guarantee. This is time consuming and employees need their money now, especially in this climate where opportunity for employment is becoming increasingly dire.

Perhaps it would have been much faster and easier if the existing employees went on strike on behalf of the departed as well as their own interests should they be one of the many more falling under the company's ongoing axe.

I don't know why the secured creditors would never accept this deal as CEO claimed given they will get their money regardless being first in line so why not allow severances to at least be allowed next in line than unsecured. I would imagine the creditors would become frustrated with the 90 day stall /delay over which time they only burn more money as compound interest grows.

The creditors should care more if ongoing operations came to an abrupt halt to immediately decreasing the value of assets that must be sold to satisfy them. Rather than Mike and his bonus team with big bi business creditors holding the machine hostage. perhaps the machine should have reverse the tables and gone on strike to hold them hostage.

Existing employees should not abandon their fallen comrades in hopes this won't come to concern them. United they stand, divided they fall =)

I hope the lawyers make the case obvious in that the good employees are the very company in the greatest need of securing these big business funds being tossed around neglecting their by far greater humanitarian need, than prioritizing paying big debt to big companies to a multiple greater paid management's benefit. They should not let the Goliath win.

I agree with you but don't think existing employees are motivated to strike or make some kind of statement regarding their fallen co-workers. They actually have the power to do something now cause once you are out, they won't have any leverage. It's a shame that they don't do something.

you make it to parliament hill yet?

What kind of power are you talking about ?...Better join the I believe cult...

They can't do anything as these execs have the hands on their throats...I have heard they even go after the people posting their dissent in the internal forum..

Good luck sticking your head out..These guys are ruthless as they have shown..if you are not part of the GE club and friends, you're hanging on by the thread..that the state of minds of the remainings. Unless you find a job and leave on your own, better just to shut up and work away..sad but that the way it is...They can't wait until someone come in to buy off pieces of Nortel so they can latch on and get out of the hell hole.

It is the Lawyers who will ultimately bury Nortel.

Haven't we had enough lawsuits already ?! MC

Seems once a company folds, lawsuits come out of the woodwork galore.

The Norwegian Blue Nortel pining for the fjords is already dead, everyone is eying its estate. Others pretending its on palliative care are marketing its deteriorating organs to possibly pay for further medical costs with no guarantees. =)

Why is everyone complaining so much about severance, at least in the USA? Severance is NOT a right - most states are 'right to works', which means that an employer can dump you at any time without owing you anything.

I agree that it's a horrible thing to sever 10+ of salary for people who've dedicated a lifetime to a company when they are let go, but the rules are clear, and it shouldn't come to a surprise to so many that the Z-man would pull a 'NO SEVERANCE FOR YOU!"

"Why is everyone complaining so much about severance, at least in the USA?"

You are forgetting that these are Nortel employees. Queens of entitlement.

"Severance is NOT a right ... an employer can dump you at any time without owing you anything."

And even in the case of severance rights under Canadian law, a company truly never owes an employee for anything. You go to work, you do your job and go home. If that's unsatisfactory for you then find another job that suits you. Simple as that.

Move on people.

I guess for some that had a signed agreement with Nortel and the fact the it is legislated law that they get severance....I would be complaining too.....wouldn't you?...Especially in the US where it king for starting a law suit for the most minor issues.....I don't think this is a minor issue.

Ironically, US employees have slightly better protection than Canadian in this case, since the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (WARN) Act is apparently being triggered for groups of 50 or more employees terminated.

John Manley was quoted as saying the other day that "this is not what I signed up for".
That tells you all you need to know about the Canadian federal, provincial and municipalities and how much they want to assist Nortel.

Henry, there are a couple of points about why severance is important

First and foremost, there are a good number of Nortel employees who lost their jobs and were given written contracts that they would receive severance payments for a period after their termination. Nortel revoked those ALREADY SIGNED agreements. That is unethical any way you slice it.

Also, there are many long time employees at Nortel who saw the storm clouds coming but still stuck with the company anyway. Part of their reason for staying was based on the longstanding NT policy of giving severances to help people make the transition to a new employer. Mike Zeroman reinforced this commitment IN WRITING when he issued a notice in late 2008 that severances would be given to people hit by layoffs.

Lastly, after the bankruptcy was filed the Nortel executive management has tried to push through a new bonus plan for themselves so that they would have extra financial cushion to help them after they were removed from the NT payroll. So in essence, the executives tried to pay themselves severance payments prior to actually being severed.

Bottom line....... if zeroman and the executive management can't/won't pay severance for employees then they should not put out written notifications that severance payments would occur. Also, they should not be paying themselves extra money above and beyond their standard employment earnings if they do not want to give employees the same consideration.

Well said.

Z-man and his cronies are nothing more than lying hypocrites. They have transformed this company into a soulless meat grinder that has destroyed many people's sense of well being.

By promising severances they tricked employees in order to extract the last remaining loyalty from hard working employees. This was the ultimate act of betrayal and it is no wonder that many have been calling Mike Z. "Judas" for his behavior.

To add insult to injury they now intend to give themselves substantial bonuses directly tied to the number of people they layoff without severance.

They have no shame.

Notification and Severance is a legal requirement in Ontario.

http://www.labour.gov.on.ca/english/es/guide/gu...

Below is an excerpt from a response I received from Ontario gov't when asking how CCAA (bankruptcy protection) can overrule Ontario employment standards act.

-----

Dear xxxx;

Thank you for your correspondence to the Ontario Ministry of Labour. The Employment Standards Act, 2000 (ESA) sets out the rights and responsibilities of most employees and employers in Ontario workplaces. It covers a number of employment standards, including the payment of wages, hours of work, and termination of employment.

You are correct in stating that federal legislation, the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (CCAA), governs how a company deals with protection against bankruptcy, and how monies owing are paid out. The effect of provincial laws, such as the ESA, may be limited in cases of bankruptcy protection, bankruptcy or insolvency.

Specific questions about the CCAA process at your workplace should be directed to the court-appointed Monitor. Questions about the CCAA statute itself should be directed to Industry Canada at 1-800-622-6232.

For information on employee rights in bankruptcy protection and bankruptcy/receivership, please see the following link: http://www.labour.gov.on.ca/english/es/bankrupt...

In your email, you also reference chapters 15 and 16 of “Your Guide to the Employment Standards Act, 2000” pointing out that bankruptcy is not an exemption to notice of termination or severance pay. Employees are owed their ESA entitlements, including termination and severance pay, even if the employer has filed for bankruptcy. However, once a company has filed for bankruptcy, amounts owing under the ESA prior to or after the bankruptcy has occurred, are governed by the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (BIA), which is also federal legislation. The federal BIA ranks creditors in the order in which they will be paid. If the trustee confirms there are insufficient funds in the estate to pay all the creditors, employees may not receive their entitlements.

For information on filing an employment standards claim, please see “Filing an ES Claim” at the following link: http://www.labour.gov.on.ca/english/es/guide/in.... If you do file a claim with the Ministry of Labour, it is important to include that your employer is subject to CCAA proceedings on the claim form to ensure timely processing of your claim.

You may also wish to speak with a lawyer if you have questions about what course of action, if any, you could pursue. If you do not have a lawyer, you may call the Lawyer Referral Service at the Law Society of Upper Canada at 1-800-268-8326 to obtain the name of one. For more information on the Lawyer Referral Service, please see the Law Society’s website: http://www.lsuc.on.ca/public/a/faqs---lawyer-re...

For more information on the ESA, please refer to the Ministry of Labour website, www.labour.gov.on.ca. Alternatively, you may contact the Employment Standards Information Centre at 1-800-531-5551.

As you may know, the federal government administers the Wage Earner Protection Program that applies to bankruptcies and/or receiverships of an employer that took place after July 7, 2008. This program offers some compensation to employees who are owed money from a bankrupt employer. For more information on the Wage Earner Protection Program, call Service Canada at 1–800–683–6516.

The federal government proposes – in its 2009 budget – to expand the WEPP to include termination and severance pay. Minister Fonseca has written to his federal counterpart, the Honourable Rona Ambrose, requesting that the current cap per worker under WEPP be increased to reflect this expanded scope in coverage, and to make such coverage retroactive to the program’s start on July 7, 2008.

Thank you xxxxx.

Exactly!

Also, the Ontario Law requires minimum notice period or notice pay in lieu of notice. And, the Ontario law specifically indicates that insolvency is not an exception! The “explanation” by Nortel HR and various commentators is that CCAA is a Federal law and overrides the provincial laws, what kind of explanation is this? Why do we have provincial laws with false statements in them? Who wrote these laws? Where does Judge Jeffrey Morawetz explain this contradiction? Where is it stated in Canadian Federal law that employees can be denied their right to severance?

Here is an excerpt for the website referenced by jssj1:

An employee is not entitled to severance pay if he or she:
..
..
has lost his or her employment because the contract of employment is impossible to perform or has been frustrated by an unexpected or unforeseen event or circumstance. THIS DOES NOT INCLUDE BANKRUPTCY OR INSOLVENCY …

Good point!

This should be addressed by your lawyer, if you have one, to the Monitor , E & Y Inc. Lawfirm. I really wonder if the Monitor is aware of this Legal jargons?
Perhaps you are a Lawyer to come up with this thought or research?
I really wonder if the Ontario Judge will entertain personal letters
regarding their plight with NORTEL NETWORKS!!!

Under normal circumstances. But now there is a ch11 reality and this will likely kill some parts I think.

CCAA does not remove the requirement for notification/severance. The issue of course is that these now just become claims against the company like all other claims.

Since all the other major creditors will have legal representation in the procedings the employees should do the same and attempt to get as much as possible out of the process.

(Juroviesky and Ricci is not necessarily the best option)

"Buzzards usually don't kill healthy lambs but will attack newborns and a weak dying one."

Between the lawyers and recruiters the next few months should be interesting.

If nothing else, the SLT"s parachutes and bonuses should go to those they laid off. Then the Buzzards can have them.

Another albatross around ye olde necke.

The magic crystal ball can already envision the settlement terms: bankrupt and out of cash, ex-Nortel employees will be entitled to a free Connect HDX system for personal use as well as a lifetime license of Clarify CRM software.

I would tend to agree with you.
But let's play devils advocate here.
Let's "assume" ex nortel employees by some miracle manage to get something quite large. Let's assume this law firm comes through on its suggestion ex-nortel employees get most of their severance and notice paid in full. I agree I find it very hard to believe they can deliver.
I actually think only the big creditors will get something, and that will be pennies on the dollar. I am convinved the average schmuck will get nothing at all but a lawyers bill they won't pay.
Having said all of this what about Current Nortel Employees, or ones to be released in the future by layoff, or sellout.
How can they get on this bandwagon?
Surely if anybody deserves something the remaining employees should be at the top of the list.