News
Workers pay the price in B&T’s battle of wills
Sad news this week; after 145 years Butler and Tanner printed its final sheet last Friday.
Although the closure was sudden, it shouldn’t come as much of a surprise – the relationship between Unite (the union) and B&T chairman Mike Dolan was strained to say the least.
In fact, the way both parties tore chunks out of each other in the pages of PrintWeek (let’s be honest, the story was in danger of becoming the print industry’s answer to the McCartney/Mills divorce), it was becoming clear that any possibility of agreement was increasingly unlikely.
I would like to stress, I’m not being flippant here. I’m all too aware that almost 300 jobs have been lost and hundreds more lives have been affected by the historic firm’s closure.
And, of course, it would be slightly rich of me to decry the role of the media in the Butler and Tanner closure, being the editor of the media outlet that reported on the rising animosity between the protaganists of this sorry saga.
But who’s to blame for the closure is largely irrelevant now (although the mud slinging looks set to continue for a while yet) as I’m sure both Dolan and Unite could lay claim to being the wronged party.
But we should try to ignore the specific claims and counterclaims of what the two parties did or didn’t want or would/wouldn’t agree to (after all, the talks went on behind closed doors, and I have no way of knowing the agendas of either party). The reason for the closure is simple, the two sides could not agree and it became a battle of wills.
And with any battle, it’s always the foot soldiers and rarely the generals that end up making the ultimate sacrifice.
Darryl Danielli is editor of PrintWeek.
Advertisement
Comments
Darren Haine - 01 May 2008
The Union and ACAS thought talks were continuing on monday and what about 90 days consultation? It was a big bloody surprise! "Tearing chunks out of each other"? No, whilst all sorts of accusations were being thrown at us very publicly and in e-mails, we continued on in a dignified manner trying to negotiate a resolution to help the company have a sustainable future. The mention of McCartney/Mills is flippant. Who is to blame is absolutely relevant and lets hope truth and justice will prevail. As a Union we can sit and discuss cost savings(8%2007 & 5%proposed2008) and new working practices but we won't sell our rights(yes he tried to buy them) or sign a contract that effectively meant you could be sued for any mistakes. This is 2008 not 1838. In my opinion only one reason for closure Despot Dolan. An absolute tragedy to a good bunch of people. I hope and pray we all find a better place. DARREN HAINE - Pre-Press FOC
Darren Haine - 01 May 2008
Mr Danielli may I suggest you have a read of this report and bear in mind who bought our company out last year.
http://www.theworkfoundation.com/aboutus/media/pressreleases/privateequity.aspx
Then do some proper journalistic work to find out what the real sticking points were in this dispute.
Clive Keeble - 02 May 2008
It might at this time be more useful if the editor of PrintWeek leaves the analysis for a later date and at this time keeps to the facts.
There is a glaring ommission in all reports on this closure ; who has been appointed as "insolvency practitioner" to oversee the voluntary liquidation of B&T ??
It would have been far more useful to the situation if there was at least one journalist who was prepared to question this lack of an official name, instead of merely reporting hearsay that B&T is in voluntary liquidation.
To post comments please log in here