B+L Ireland

Quote
Anonymous said:
Valeant absolutely know that 20% is not realistic and using Rochester as comparison is a diversion from the real reason which is the ego and greed of Pearson et al. The fact is that a profit is being made on the lenses produced in Waterford, just not enough for Valeant. Their closure plan threat is either an empty threat or if it does exist then it must include moving production to Rochester, a plant that has no expertise and little knowledge of the processes to make the daily lenses (that's not an attempt to offend Rochester, they are experts on the products they make and are great people). So, what to do? Reject the 20% proposal and call their bluff? Accept the cut and they will come back with another cut in 6 months time?
Calling their bluff seems only option, unlike the USA and other areas they operate in, Valeant will not be able to close and move equipment elsewhere - why? Because the workers there will take the plant over and not allow anything to be removed. Yes, it will mean the Waterford folks will lose out but that's a given no matter what happens. By not allowing Valeant move they will lose the daily lens business, and maybe they don't care but they will lose more than the $20M they seek and maybe the publicity will effect their attempt to takeover other companies and place them under the spotlight of Reg and Financial authorities. It could be the first blow to the house of cards they have built.
Click to expand...

Another muppet, nobody said production is going to Rochester, it's going to the big empty advance factory in Poland, as will Rochester production in future, ya know when Cuomo's subvention runs out, a done deal.
 












Anonymous said:
Valeant absolutely know that 20% is not realistic and using Rochester as comparison is a diversion from the real reason which is the ego and greed of Pearson et al. The fact is that a profit is being made on the lenses produced in Waterford, just not enough for Valeant. Their closure plan threat is either an empty threat or if it does exist then it must include moving production to Rochester, a plant that has no expertise and little knowledge of the processes to make the daily lenses (that's not an attempt to offend Rochester, they are experts on the products they make and are great people). So, what to do? Reject the 20% proposal and call their bluff? Accept the cut and they will come back with another cut in 6 months time?
Calling their bluff seems only option, unlike the USA and other areas they operate in, Valeant will not be able to close and move equipment elsewhere - why? Because the workers there will take the plant over and not allow anything to be removed. Yes, it will mean the Waterford folks will lose out but that's a given no matter what happens. By not allowing Valeant move they will lose the daily lens business, and maybe they don't care but they will lose more than the $20M they seek and maybe the publicity will effect their attempt to takeover other companies and place them under the spotlight of Reg and Financial authorities. It could be the first blow to the house of cards they have built.
Click to expand...

By the time anyone figures out Valeant made the wrong choice waterford would be long gone so bluffing is the WRONG DECISION. Companies screw up all the time. Do you care if you can say "i told you so" or "I still have a job I can negotiate for".
 






It's not about bring able to say I told you so. It's about a lot more than just Waterford, Valeant need to be treated like the bullies they are, and the the only way to deal with bullies is to confront them. It could well be Rochester or St Louis or Greenville next, they may have made our company unrecognisable but we have always stuck together and looked after our B&L family, why stop now?
 






please lets try and get along with MFitzy and Dmain clitfin, they are only trying to help us. angelo conti is the bad guy here. if we accept their generous offer then maybe some of our kids might be available to work for minimum wage for the kind of local-born bully that we have become accustomed to, wouldn't that be great. (hopefully MF's decent union rep dad is not too dizzy from turning in his grave day in and day out) god be good to him, he stood up for me one time
 






Anonymous said:
please lets try and get along with MFitzy and Dmain clitfin, they are only trying to help us. angelo conti is the bad guy here. if we accept their generous offer then maybe some of our kids might be available to work for minimum wage for the kind of local-born bully that we have become accustomed to, wouldn't that be great. (hopefully MF's decent union rep dad is not too dizzy from turning in his grave day in and day out) god be good to him, he stood up for me one time
Click to expand...

Reference to the deceased is totally inappropriate, your sentiments are correct, but the means of delivery is disgusting, moron.
 






























Top Bottom
Back
Quote