Tag: severance pay

Categories
Brandon Blog Post

SEVERANCE PAY ONTARIO & BANKRUPTCY-BARRYMORE FURNITURE UNPAID WORKERS ANGRY

severance pay ontario

If you would prefer the audio version of this Brandon’s Blog or reading subtitles, please scroll to the bottom of this page and watch the picture at the bottom.

Introduction

On February 5, 2020, the Toronto Star wrote about the bankruptcy of Barrymore Furniture Co. Ltd. (Barrymore) titled “Barrymore Furniture has filed for bankruptcy — leaving a throng of angry, unpaid workers in its wake”. It talks about the sad story of this family-owned business going into bankruptcy. It also states that the workers will not receive termination pay, severance pay or benefits. For the record, my Firm is not involved in this bankruptcy file.

The purpose of this Brandon’s Blog is to describe the sad story of the Barrymore bankruptcy and what happens to severance pay Ontario (as well as other employee remuneration) when a company goes bankrupt. But first, a little primer.

Who is entitled to severance pay Ontario?

“Severance pay” is a settlement that is paid to a qualified employee who has their employment “severed.” When a long-term employee loses their job, it makes up an employee for losses (such as loss of standing) that happen.

Severance pay is not the same as termination pay. Termination pay is given instead of the called for notification of termination of work. Not everyone is entitled to severance pay.

A worker gets approved for severance pay if his/her employment is terminated and she or he:

  • has worked for the company for 5 or more years (whether continuous or not or active or otherwise) and
  • his/her employer:
    • has a payroll in Ontario of a minimum of $2.5 million; or
    • severed the employment of 50 or more workers in a six-month period because all or part of the company completely closed.

To determine the amount of severance pay Ontario a worker is entitled to receive, you multiply the employee’s normal wages for a normal week by the sum of:

  • the # of actual full years of employment; as well as
  • the # of completed months of employment divided by 12 for a year that is not finished.

The maximum amount of severance pay Ontario to be paid under the Employment Standards Act is 26 weeks.

The Barrymore bankruptcy

Barrymore was a Canadian producer, wholesaler and had a retail store of high-end furniture. It started in business in Toronto going back to 1919. On November 29, 2019, Barrymore tried a business restructuring by filing a Notice of Intention To Make A Proposal (NOI). On December 9, 2019, Barrymore sought and received, a Court Order enabling for an extension of time to submit a restructuring Proposal. Barrymore had until February 12, 2020, to submit its debt settlement plan and other necessary documents.

Barrymore failed to submit on time its cash flow statement, as called for by the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada) (BIA). On January 17, 2020, Barrymore filed an Assignment in Bankruptcy.

Barrymore filed its NOI to try to accomplish a few things:

  1. Give it some breathing room from its creditors by invoking a stay of proceedings.
  2. Allow it to operate during the crucial holiday shopping season.
  3. Try to find a buyer for its business.

The post-NOI period

Once the NOI was filed, Barrymore began a sales process to try to find a buyer for the entire Barrymore business. Seventeen parties were identified as being potential purchasers. Only seven were interested in performing due diligence.

At the same time, the Proposal Trustee got proposals from two professional liquidators. They did that so in case no buyer closed a purchase of Barrymore, they could hit the ground running in liquidating the assets.

Unfortunately, nobody submitted an offer for Barrymore’s business. Hence, Barrymore’s bankruptcy.

Barrymore’s statement of affairs

The Barrymore sworn statement of affairs shows assets of $240,000. The assets are inventory ($200,000) and machinery and equipment ($40,000). Barrymore has 5 secured creditors for $4.3 million. The single largest secured creditor is its chartered bank with a claim of $3.7 million. Assuming the Bank’s security is good and in the first position, the estimated asset value of $240,000 won’t go very far!

The sworn statement of affairs also shows 118 unsecured creditors with claims of $3.2 million. So with total claims recorded in Barrymore’s books and records of $7.5 million and the books showing only $240,000 of assets, there is a huge imbalance. The family that owns the business is shown to be owed $1.7 million as an unsecured creditor. The former employees are also unsecured creditors.

With that financial imbalance, it is no wonder the licensed insolvency trustee (formerly called a bankruptcy trustee) in the Barrymore bankruptcy could not run the business. Instead, it received Court approval to enter into a liquidation agreement with one of the liquidators. The liquidation sale to the public has begun. Either the amount shown in the books for inventory value is too low, or, the liquidator has the authority to bring in new goods to put into the bankruptcy sale, or both. It is too much effort to go through for inventory worth so little compared to the Bank’s secured debt!

The employer went bankrupt did not pay employees

I don’t know what the real individual claims of each former employee might be, but it can include:

  1. Wages or salary
  2. Vacation pay
  3. Termination pay
  4. Severance pay
  5. Benefits

The Barrymore employees are members of the United Steelworkers Union. The Steelworkers Toronto Area Council represents the former Barrymore employees. Both the Union and the former employees are naturally quite upset over the bankruptcy.

“Once again, working people are victims of a rigged system that disregards their interests while giving priority to wealthy investors,” said Carolyn Egan, President of the Steelworkers Toronto Area Council. Her comment is understandable. However, based on the sworn statement of affairs, it does not look like any “wealthy investors” are getting paid.

Protecting employees from the bankrupt employer

The United Steelworkers and the Canadian labour movement as a whole have been lobbying for reforms to Canada’s bankruptcy and insolvency legislation for numerous years to give greater top priority to workers and pensioners.

I have written many blogs on the topic of how various federal politicians have put forward Bills to give workers and retirees more rights. Several bills proposing such reforms were provided previously in Parliament, but none made it into legislation by the Liberal federal government.

Rather, only some warm words and minor amendments relating to Director responsibilities were included in the last federal budget and passed. To put it bluntly, the Liberal federal government has rejected enacting legislation to protect workers and retirees when an employer enters insolvency proceedings.

The Liberal majority government showed no interest in any meaningful reform in the area of employee rights in bankruptcy or insolvency. Perhaps for their next budget, the minority government will be forced to look seriously at it.

What happens if my employer owes me money & goes bankrupt?

The BIA created a device for workers of a company that entered either bankruptcy or receivership and are owed money. It does not cover employees of a company trying to right-size itself through a restructuring proposal. The Wage Earner Protection Program Act (WEPPA) provides for wages or benefits, including termination and severance pay, accumulated in the 6 months prior to the business becoming bankrupt or placed right into receivership.

The WEPPA ended up being law due to the federal government’s previous concern that when employees experienced “the company went bankrupt and didn’t pay me wages” there was seldom an opportunity for employees to obtain any of their income owed. As discussed, shortly, there are limits to or caps on what employees may receive.

WEPPA calculation: Who cannot submit?

However, you do not qualify for WEPPA if, throughout the time for which amounts owed to you are past due, if you:

  • were a Director or Officer of the business;
  • had a management placement in the company; or
  • were management whose tasks included making financial decisions on the negotiation or non-payment of amounts owing.

WEPPA calculation Canada

You could qualify if:

  • your previous employer has really gone into bankruptcy or receivership; as well as
  • you have overdue wages, salary, vacation pay or unreimbursed costs from the firm throughout the 6 months prior to the date of bankruptcy or receivership.

The WEPPA gives funds to Canadian employees owed money when their employer enters into either bankruptcy or receivership. The WEPPA provides a punctual settlement of qualifying employee earnings. The quantity of the qualifying employee earnings is an amount equivalent to 7 times maximum regular insurable profits under the Employment Insurance Act. As of January 1, 2020, the maximum yearly insurable earnings amount is $54,200. This means that the max amount a former employee can claim under WEPPA is $7,296.17 in 2020.

Receivers and bankruptcy trustees are required to tell employees of the WEPPA program and provide workers information regarding amounts owing. From the day of bankruptcy or receivership, trustees, as well as receivers, have 45 days to send out Trustee Information Forms revealing the amounts owing to each of the workers.

So payment under WEPPA is something, but may not fully compensate each former employee. Of the amount paid by Service Canada, who administers the employment insurance system, the amount of $2,000 per employee paid out is a super-priority against the current assets of the company. The balance of amounts paid to each employee, up to the maximum, are unsecured claims.

So, in Barrymore’s case, the total of all the individual first $2,000 amounts paid to each former employee will rank in first place against the inventory at the date of bankruptcy. This claim ranks ahead of all listed creditors, even the secured creditors.

Wrapup

Have you lost your job due to the fact that your employer entered into bankruptcy or receivership? Were you a Director of a company that went bankrupt or into receivership and now you are being chased for statutory personal liabilities? Is your company in financial trouble and you just don’t know how to save it? Is the pain, stress and anxiety of excessive debt currently negatively affecting your health?

We understand your pain. We will certainly ensure that no bill collectors call you. We will take all the migraines, stress and anxiety you are experiencing off of your shoulders and place it onto ours. We will repair things so that you can march forward in a healthy and balanced way, pain-free, debt-free and guilt-free.

It is not your fault that you remain in this scenario. You cannot fix it on your own since you have actually only been shown the old methods. The old ways do not work anymore. The Ira Smith Team makes use of brand-new ways which will return you promptly to a hassle-free life while getting rid of your debt.

Get in touch with the Ira Smith Team today. We have decades as well as generations of experience helping people and businesses seeking financial restructuring and debt relief. As a licensed insolvency trustee, we are the only specialists certified and overseen by the Federal government to provide debt settlement and financial restructuring services.

We provide a totally no cost appointment to help you solve your issues. We understand your discomfort that your debt creates. We can also end that painful feeling right away from your life. This will certainly allow you to start afresh again. Call the Ira Smith Team today to ensure that we can begin assisting you as well as get you back into a healthy and balanced, stress-free life Starting Over Starting Now.

Categories
Brandon Blog Post

BANKRUPTCY LAW, A SHOE STORE CHAIN AND GOLF: WHAT DO THEY HAVE IN COMMON?

bankruptcy law

If you would prefer to listen to the audio version of this BANKRUPTCY LAW, A SHOE STORE CHAIN AND GOLF: WHAT DO THEY HAVE IN COMMON? Brandon’s Blog, please scroll down to the bottom and click on the podcast.

Introduction

I am writing this Brandon’s Blog more as an interesting story for those that live in the GTA and enjoy golf. Although as you will see, bankruptcy law does play a major role in this tale, it really is a story about what is probably the most famous Canadian golf course.

Bankruptcy and Insolvency Canada

Before getting into the interesting Greater Toronto Area golf course story, by way of background to it, I will first describe the bankruptcy law aspect.

A bankrupt shoe store chain workers lost their jobs when a Receiving Order (as a Bankruptcy Order was then called) was made putting an Ontario shoe store chain, Rizzo & Rizzo Shoes Ltd., into bankruptcy. All salaries, wages, commissions and vacation pay were paid to the date of bankruptcy. The province’s Ministry of Labour audited the company’s payroll books and records.

The Ministry’s audit determined that although the employees were all paid up to date, liability for termination or severance pay was owing to former employees under the Employment Standards Act (ESA). The Ministry delivered a proof of claim to the bankruptcy trustee (now called a Licensed Insolvency Trustee) (Trustee).

The Trustee disallowed the claim under the provisions of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (R.S.C., 1985, c. B-3) (BIA). The Trustee’s disallowance was based on the ground that the bankruptcy of an employer acts to terminate the employment of the workers. This does not constitute termination by an employer. Therefore, no such liability for severance or termination pay exists.

The appeal of the Trustee’s disallowance

The Ministry successfully appealed the Trustee’s disallowance to the Ontario Court (General Division). The Trustee appealed to the Ontario Court of Appeal. The appellate court restored the Trustee’s decision. The Ministry sought leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada but ultimately terminated that application.

After the discontinuance of the appeal, the Trustee paid a dividend to Rizzo’s creditors, therefore leaving much fewer funds in the bankruptcy estate.

After that, five previous staff members of Rizzo applied to set aside the discontinuance, add themselves as applicants to the Supreme Court of Canada leave to appeal. An order was made approving them to continue the appeal.

The Supreme Court of Canada decision

In a 1998 decision, the Supreme Court of Canada ultimately decided that the bankruptcy of an employer does terminate the employment of the workers. However, the Court felt that it was necessary to take a wider view of the ESA. The Court felt that one of the objects of the ESA was to protect the rights of employees when they lost their job. A finding that the severance and termination pay sections of the ESA to not apply in bankruptcy circumstances is incompatible with both the object of the ESA.

The Court went on to find that the legislature does not intend to generate ridiculous results if employees dismissed before the bankruptcy of an employer would generate a completely different result than those employees who lost their job by the bankruptcy of an employer.

Therefore, the Supreme Court of Canada found that employee rights to severance pay or termination pay is a claim provable in bankruptcy even if the dismissal occurred by the bankruptcy of the employer. This claim is an ordinary unsecured claim and does not have any priority.

The broader effect of the Supreme Court of Canada Rizzo & Rizzo decision

The obvious effect of the Rizzo & Rizzo decision is the bankruptcy law decision. However, the decision also stands for the concept that a statue must be looked at in a broader context. The Supreme Court decision in paragraph 21 states that “…statutory interpretation cannot be founded on the wording of the legislation alone”.

It goes on to say that “Today there is only one principle or approach, namely, the words of an Act are to be read in their entire context and in their grammatical and ordinary sense harmoniously with the scheme of the Act, the object of the Act, and the intention of Parliament.”. This codified what can be called a modern approach to the interpretation of legislation.

So what does this have to do with a golf course?

Looking at the title of this Brandon’s Blog, I think I have now covered off the first two parts, namely, bankruptcy law and shoe store. Now for golf! On October 23, 2019, the Court of Appeal for Ontario released its decision in Oakville (Town) v. Clublink Corporation ULC, 2019 ONCA 826.

All golfers in the GTA know that Clublink owns and operates a chain of golf clubs in Ontario and Quebec, as well as Florida. The most famous and iconic golf course in the Clublink family and all of Canada is Glen Abbey in Oakville, ON. Clublink purchased this golf course in 1999.

Glen Abbey was the initial golf course solely created by Jack Nicklaus, one of the greatest professional golfers of all-time. The style of the course shows a specific focus on the viewer experience. Along with this value, the Town of Oakville believes Glen Abbey has substantial historical value. Glen Abbey has held the Canadian Open 30 times – 3 times greater than any other course in Canada. It, therefore, is connected with some of the most memorable events in Canadian golf history.

The 18th hole is significant as a result of its connection to Tiger Woods. In the final round of the 2000 Canadian Open, he hit a six-iron shot 218 yards from a bunker on the right side of the fairway to about 18 feet from the hole. The shot had to fly over a huge pond protecting the green.

On October 22, 2015, Clublink told the Town that they plan to redevelop Glen Abbey into a residential and mixed-use neighbourhood. Clublink proposed to develop 3,000 to 3,200 residences and 140,000 to 170,000 square feet of office and retail space. If Clublink’s plan to build succeeds, the word “four” will no longer be yelled out on the property!

The Court case

In November 2016, Clublink submitted applications to change the Town’s Official Plan and zoning by-laws and looked for authorization of a plan of subdivision, in connection with its redevelopment plan of Glen Abbey. In 2017, the Town recognized Glen Abbey as a considerable cultural heritage property under s. 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act (OHA). This notification stated the property’s cultural heritage value according to the provincial requirements of the OHA.

Clublink did not object to the heritage designation. Rather, they made an application to the Town under section 34 of the OHA to demolish and remove Glen Abbey. The Town alerted Clublink that their s. 34 application was legally beyond the range of a section 34 OHA application but was correctly within the range of s. 33 of the OHA which permits an owner to relate to altering a designated property.

Clublink commenced its very own application in the Superior Court for an affirmation that they could make an application under s. 34 of the OHA “for the demolition and removal of buildings and structures on the lands municipally known as 1313 and 1333 Dorval Drive … including but not limited to the tees, greens, hazards, fairways and cart paths”. Clublink was successful in its application and the Town of Oakville appealed the decision to the Ontario Court of Appeal.

What is the difference?

A study of the OHA is not why I am writing this Brandon’s Blog. The important point to know is that under s. 33 of the OHA, the owner may appeal to the Conservation Review Board. The Conservation Review Board holds a hearing and produces a report, in which it is to recommend whether the application must or ought to not be authorized. The Conservation Review Board’s report is not binding on the metropolitan council.

Unlike s. 33, if the metropolitan council rejects the owner’s application under s. 34, the owner of the property can appeal to the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal (LPAT). The local council is bound by the LPAT decision.

So as you can see, Clublink needs the Court ruling to stand that its s. 34 application is the correct one.

Is a golf course a structure?

In order to be successful, Clublink needs to prove that a golf course is a structure. The application judge found that Glen Abbey is both composed of structures as well as the golf course itself is a structure for the objective of s. 34 of the OHA. Clublink had actually correctly mounted its application under s. 34.

The application judge reached this decision because of the uncontroverted evidence before him was that Glen Abbey was the product of substantial engineering, design and construction. Relying on judicial and also administrative decisions from other contexts, he decided up that a golf course fits within the meaning of a “structure” as being a “thing constructed”.

After a very lengthy analysis, the Ontario Court of Appeal, with one Judge dissenting, confirmed the lower court’s decision.

So what does this have to do with Canadian bankruptcies laws?

The majority decision relied upon the Rizzo & Rizzo case. The Ontario Court of Appeal followed the confirmation in the bankruptcy law case by the Supreme Court of Canada that a strict dictionary or common usage interpretation of the word “structure” was inappropriate. A “…statutory interpretation cannot be founded on the wording of the legislation alone”.

Rather, a wider modern law approach must be used. The “…words of an Act are to be read in their entire context and in their grammatical and ordinary sense harmoniously with the scheme of the Act, the object of the Act, and the intention…”. Therefore, finding that a golf course has detailed engineering, design and construction, it is a structure and Clublink was correct.

This is how bankruptcy law ties into a bankrupt Ontario shoe store chain and a golf course. It took a bit of a journey to piece it all together, but I am so glad that you stuck with me.

Summary

As you can see, not everything necessarily is how it appears at first blush. When I look out onto a golf course, I would never say, “what a marvellous structure”, but it is.

In the same way, financial decisions that we make along the way do not always turn out as we once thought it would be. Sometimes these decisions are forced upon us by life getting in the way, and sometimes they are voluntary. Nevertheless, when financial hardships strike, you need to find a way to solve your financial problems.

Do you have way too much debt? Before you reach the phase where you can’t stay afloat and where financial restructuring is no longer a viable alternative, contact the Ira Smith Team. We know full well the discomfort and tension excessive debt can create. We can help you to eliminate that pain and address your financial issues supplying timely, realistic and easy to implement action steps in finding the optimal strategy created just for you.

Call Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. today. Make a free appointment to visit with one of the Ira Smith Team for a totally free, no-obligation assessment. You can be on your path to a carefree life Starting Over, Starting Now. Give us a call today so that we can help you return to an anxiety-free and pain-free life, Starting Over, Starting Now.

Categories
Brandon Blog Post

SEARS CANADA DEFINED BENEFIT PENSION PLAN SHORTFALL: MP SCOTT DUVALL COMES THROUGH ON HIS PROMISE IN CANADIAN PARLIAMENT

2

Sears Canada defined benefit pension plan shortfall: Introduction

On November 6, 2017, Hamilton Mountain NDP MP Scott Duvall rose in the House of Commons for leave to introduce Bill C-384. It is titled “An Act to amend the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act and the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (pension plans and group insurance programs)”. Mr. Duvall’s motivation was the Sears Canada defined benefit pension plan shortfall.

Sears Canada defined benefit pension plan shortfall: Hamilton Mountain MP Scott Duvall introduces Private Member’s Bill C-384

Here is what Mr. Duvall said:

“Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this time to thank my seconder, my colleague who has done great work and works very hard in this House, and who has also helped me a lot on this bill.

I rise today to introduce a private member’s bill titled, an act to amend the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act and the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act. This bill will amend the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act and the CCAA so that companies will have to bring any pension plan fund to 100% before paying any other secured creditors. It also makes amendments to require companies to pay any termination or severance pay owing before paying any secured creditors.

Other amendments will prevent a company from stopping the payment of any post-retirement benefits during any proceedings under the BIA or CCAA. These amendments will inject some fairness into a process that often sees the interests of workers, retirees, and their families placed behind all others.

We must fix the imbalances in current legislation and provide Canadian workers, retirees, and their families with the protection they expect and deserve. I am hopeful that all my colleagues in Parliament will put aside their partisan differences and support this bill. Canadian workers, retirees, and their families deserve no less.”

Although he did not mention it specifically by name in the House of Commons, Mr. Duvall has said that he would introduce such a Bill as a result of the Sears Canada defined benefit pension plan shortfall.

Sears Canada defined benefit pension plan shortfall: Hamilton Mountain MP Scott Duvall walks the walk

In our September 27, 2017 blog, TORONTO BUSINESS BANKRUPTCY PROTECTION: NDP WANTS FEDERAL INSOLVENCY LAWS CHANGED SO THERE IS PENSION PLAN SECURITY WHEN FINANCIALLY TROUBLED BUSINESSES FAIL, we told you that Hamilton Mountain MP Scott Duvall, the NDP pension plan critic, informed a group at the United Steelworkers’ Hall that he will present a private member’s bill to secure employees’ pension plans and benefits, and pressure business to offer termination or severance pay, prior to paying secured lenders.

With his Bill C-384, Mr. Duvall has lived up to his promise.

3bestaward
sears canada defined benefit pension plan shortfall

Sears Canada defined benefit pension plan shortfall: This is actually the second Bill attempting deal with this problem

In our November 1, 2017 blog, SEARS CANADA CLOSING: POLITICIANS WANT NEW LAWS TO PROTECT PENSIONERS DUE TO SEARS CANADA CLOSING, we reported that Bloc Québécois MP Marilène Gill’s Private Member’s Bill C-372, passed First Reading. That Bill is titled “An Act to amend the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act and the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (pension plans and group insurance plans)”. In that blog, we described the provisions included in that Bill.

Like Mr. Duvall, Ms. Gill is trying to pass legislation to avoid another Sears Canada defined benefit pension plan shortfall insolvency situation.

Sears Canada defined benefit pension plan shortfall: What does Bill C-384 actually say

The purpose of this blog, is to describe the terms of Mr. Duvall’s Bill.

Mr. Duvall’s Private Member’s Bill C-384 passed First Reading. It is very similar to Ms. Gill’s BIll C-372. He wishes to amend the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (BIA) as follows:

  • In order to be approved by the Court, a corporate restructuring proposal under the BIA, for a company with a prescribed pension plan, the Proposal must include payment in full of any unfunded pension liability or solvency deficiency. The amount is calculated at the time of the filing of the Notice of Intention To Make A Proposal (NOI) or the Proposal if there is no NOI filed.
  • New section 69. 7 be added to the BIA that in the restructuring proposal of an employer, upon filing, until the discharge of the Licensed Insolvency Trustee (LIT), or the insolvent employer becomes bankrupt, all amounts that the employer must contribute under any arrangement for the benefit of the employees, must continue throughout the restructuring period. This would cover any pension plan, health, injury or accident plans and group insurance coverage.
  • The unfunded pension liability or solvency deficiency calculation is called “special payments” in Bill C-384. The calculation is by section 9 of the Pension Benefits Standards Regulations, 1985.
  • In a receivership, the receiver is personally liable for paying any unfunded pension liability or solvency deficiency. However, the receiver’s liability is only from the proceeds of the sale of current assets.
  • In either a receivership or corporate bankruptcy, the charge for any unfunded pension liability or solvency deficiency would rank ahead of the charge of any other secured creditor. It is interesting to note that the Bill does not attempt to provide such a security ranking to anything other than the pension liability or solvency deficiency.
  • The Officers and Directors of the company are not entitled to the benefit of this secured charge. Even if they are participants in the pension plan that has the unfunded pension liability or solvency deficiency.
  • New subsection 136(1) (d. 001) to the BIA, creating an extra class of preferred creditor. A preferred creditor is an unsecured creditor who ranks ahead of the ordinary unsecured creditors and ranks after the secured creditors. The Bill states that it would say that the amount of any termination or severance pay owed to an employee by a bankrupt employer, less any amount previously paid by the LIT, would rank in priority right after the wages owed to the employee.
  • There are also proposed amendments to the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (CCAA) in Bill C-384. It is to bring the same changes in that statute as those to the BIA described above. The intent is that the treatment under both statutes is the same.

Sears Canada defined benefit pension plan shortfall: Now it is up to Justin Trudeau and his Liberal Party

We will now have to wait and see what happens to both Ms. Gill’s and Mr. Duvall’s Private Member’s Bills. As we previously reported, it is unusual that a Private Member’s Bill becomes real legislation. As the Liberals hold a majority in Parliament, if they don’t want it, or a revised Bill for the same purpose, to pass, it won’t.

Sears Canada defined benefit pension plan shortfall: Does your company need a restructuring and turnaround plan?

Is your company insolvent and needs to restructure? Is your business viable but can only employ people and carry on business if it can restructure its debt? Contact the Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Team. If we meet with you early on, we can create a restructuring and turnaround strategy. That way your company won’t have to be like Sears Canada closing.

sears canada defined benefit pension plan shortfall 0
sears canada defined benefit pension plan shortfall
Categories
Brandon Blog Post

SEARS CANADA CLOSING: POLITICIANS WANT NEW LAWS TO PROTECT PENSIONERS DUE TO SEARS CANADA CLOSING

2

Sears Canada Closing: Introduction

Following the Sears Canada failed restructuring, is the Sears Canada closing of all stores. It is leaving 16,000 retirees unclear about the future of their underfunded pension plan. Support is expanding for brand-new laws to better protect Canadian workers during a company’s collapse.

Sears Canada Closing: What CARP has to say

CARP, a nationwide not-for-profit group formerly called the Canadian Association for Retired Persons, was recently on Parliament Hill to meet dozens of MPs as it lobbies for law adjustments.

Wanda Morris, vice-president of CARP, stated that CARP is requesting for the unfunded pension liability be provided priority position so it goes to the front of the line.

Pensioners hold no priority when it pertains to dividing up assets through a bankruptcy, and Ms. Morris wants protection for retirees for underfunded defined benefit pensions when the company goes through a restructuring or into bankruptcy.

Ms. Morris stated that along with the practically 16,000 retirees at Sears, CARP estimates that there are about 1.3 million workers in Canada that possibly could be in danger with defined advantage pension. Sears Canada closing all stores has made the plight of retirees a front and centre issue for CARP.

Sears Canada Closing: Private Member’s Bill C-372 passes First Reading

On Oct. 17, Bloc Québécois MP Marilène Gill suggested a member’s bill, C-372. The intent is to change the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act and the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act.

The change attempts to correct the injustice dealt with by retired workers whose pension as well as group insurance policy benefits are not secured when their company declares bankruptcy or undergoes restructuring. The changes are a result of the Sears Canada employees and retirees treatment, as a result of Sears Canada closing locations.

Sears Canada Closing: What the NDP has to say

Hamilton Mountain MP Scott Duvall plans to introduce his very own private member’s bill to try to solve this problem. While he notes he has actually had talks with Gill, he claimed his suggestion will be a bit different.

Mr. Duvall specifies that his bill will amend the regulations from where it’s worded currently. He wishes that when a company goes into bankruptcy protection, the pensioners will be a secured creditor. He is also responding to the process which has led to Sears Canada closing store locations,

Sears Canada Closing: Bloc MP Marilène Gill and her Bill C-372

On October 17, 2017, MP Marilène Gill rose in Parliament and stated:

“Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to introduce my first bill in the House today, a private member’s bill that seeks to amend the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act and the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act.

This bill seeks to correct the injustice faced by retired workers whose pension plans and group insurance plans are not protected when their company goes bankrupt or undergoes restructuring.

I will do everything in my power to ensure that this bill receives royal assent, that way, we can help prevent retirees, like those from my riding who are here today to support me, from losing their pensions, and improve the existing legislation by giving pension plans’ unfunded liabilities preferred creditor status, among other things. I hope my colleagues will be supporting this bill.”

Sears Canada Closing: Can it get Royal Assent?

BILL C-372 which passed First Reading on October 17, 2017 is named “An Act to amend the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act and the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (pension plans and group insurance plans)”.

Private member’s bills such as this one rarely pass the House. However, I thought it would be useful to describe what Ms. Gill’s views are as a result of Sears Canada closing.

Below is my analysis of how BILL C-372 proposes to amend the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada) (BIA) and the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (Canada) (CCAA). The impetus of course is certain high-profile corporate restructurings/failures with underfunded defined benefit pension plans. With Sears Canada closing, Ms. Gill put forward her private member’s bill.

The most recent corporate failure which initiated her private member’s bill of course was a result of Sears Canada closing.

Sears Canada Closing: Bill C-372 proposed BIA and CCAA amendments

Bill C-372 wishes to amend the BIA as follows:

  • In order to be approved by the Court, a corporate restructuring proposal under the BIA, for a company with a prescribed pension plan, the Proposal must include payment in full of any unfunded pension liability or solvency deficiency calculated at the time of the filing of the Notice of Intention To Make A Proposal (NOI) or the Proposal if there is no NOI filed.
  • The unfunded pension liability or solvency deficiency calculation is by section 9 of the Pension Benefits Standards Regulations, 1985.
  • In a receivership, the receiver is personally liable for paying any unfunded pension liability or solvency deficiency but only from the proceeds of the sale of current assets.
  • In either a receivership or corporate bankruptcy, the charge for any unfunded pension liability or solvency deficiency would rank ahead of the charge of any other secured creditor.
  • The Officers and Directors of the company are not entitled to the benefit of this secured charge. Even if they are participants in the pension plan that has the unfunded pension liability or solvency deficiency.
  • In a corporate restructuring proposal or bankruptcy, the amount not paid under the Wage Earner Protection Program Act (Canada) (WEPPA). It is the amount to adequately indemnify the beneficiaries in the event the employer ceases to take part in a group insurance plan. Such a plan is one that provides for the payment of benefits to, or in respect of, employees or former employees for, among other things, life, disability, health or dental insurance is a preferred claim. It will be a preferred, but still an unsecured claim.
  • The amount equal to the difference between any severance pay or compensation in lieu of notice owed by an employer to an employee and any amount previously paid by the trustee for that severance pay or compensation in lieu of notice.

There are also proposed amendments to the CCAA in Bill C-372. It is to bring the same changes in that statute as described above. The intent is that the treatment under both statutes is the same. I won’t repeat those again.

3bestaward
sears canada closing

Sears Canada Closing: Will Bill C-372 become law?

As I stated above, it is very rare that a private member’s bill becomes real legislation. The other reason is that the Liberals hold a majority in Parliament. If they don’t want it to pass, it won’t.

On October 25, 2017, Innovation Minister Navdeep Bains said the Liberal government has no plans to change laws to protect pensioners in the wake of Sears’ bankruptcy. That is a pretty definitive statement.

So right now it seems there is a lack of political will to make the proposed law amendments. I suspect that on a financial basis, there will also be opposition for the following reasons:

  • In most cases, it will be impossible to have a successful large corporate restructuring if 100% of unfunded pension liability must be paid. Therefore, jobs will not be saved if we have more corporate bankruptcy filings instead of restructurings.
  • Lenders will have to now ignore current assets in the borrowing base of corporations. This will make corporate borrowing much more difficult for solvent corporations with pension plans to carry on business.
  • Lenders may have to reserve the entire amount of any unfunded amounts. They will rank ahead in a receivership or bankruptcy.
  • Severance pay or compensation in lieu of notice will now be a claim ranking ahead of trade suppliers in a corporate restructuring or corporate bankruptcy. This may alter the amount of an unsecured credit line a supplier will be willing to give to a customer.
  • It will cause more chaos to normal lending and trade practices which will be a problem for any government.
  • Claims under the group health indemnity provisions may not result in any real benefit to employees of a company going through either a corporate restructuring or bankruptcy. There is rarely funds left over after the claims of secured creditors.

We will keep monitoring this important issue. We will update you when MP Scott Duvall puts forward his private member’s bill and as other matters arise.

Sears Canada Closing: What To Do If You Or Your Company Need A Financial Restructuring?

It is now Sears Canada closing time. If you’re attempting to discover a means to restructure your firm’s debt, so that you can avoid a Sears Canada closing scenario, call Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. If we meet with you early on, we can create a restructuring and turnaround strategy. That way your company won’t have to be like Sears Canada closing.

Our strategy for every person is to create a result where Starting Over, Starting Now occurs, starting the minute you walk in the door. You’re simply one telephone call away from taking the crucial steps to go back to leading a healthy, balanced and tension free life.

sears canada closing 8
sears canada closing

 

 

Categories
Brandon Blog Post

SEARS CANADA NEWS TODAY: ARE THEY SABOTAGING THEIR OWN RESTRUCTURING?

2 6

 

Sears Canada news today: Introduction

“I will certainly not invest one red cent in your shop … no severance, no sale,”

A (typical comment) posted on the Sears Canada Facebook page before the company blocked new comments and made old ones vanish.

Well there has been a lot of Sears Canada News today and in the last month. The company sought bankruptcy protection only last June 22, 2017. It has been only a little over 1 month, but there has been so much media attention it seems a lot longer.

Sears Canada news today: Social media backlash

We’ve seen on social media that Sears Canada is facing a backlash when it comes to how they’re handling this liquidation. Notice that I am using the word liquidation, as opposed to restructuring. This is in spite of they are currently operating under the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (Canada) (CCAA). This statute is designed as a restructuring statute.

Sears Canada news today: Why KVETCH about a KERP?

It comes just as the company began its liquidation sales at those fifty-nine stores they’re looking to close. There is a boycott in Canada that is gaining some traction on social media. People are upset with Sears Canada’s senior management. They obtained on the first Court application, approval from the Court on their plan to pay themselves retention bonuses. These bonuses would be paid under the terms of what is commonly called in complex corporate restructurings a “Key Employee Retention Plan” (KERP).

The retailer introduced that, as part of a Court-supervised restructuring procedure. It is shutting 59 of its 255 shops and letting go 2,900 workers. None of them will get severance pay. Sears also will stop payments to the employees’ defined benefit pension plan. The retailer recently accepted to delay that pension plan payment issue till September 30th.

Sears also accepted the compromise with the former employees to maintain paying health benefits for an extra 3 months until the end of September. This is so the people could have that time to get alternate coverage. It is still not great though. The employee pension plan will remain underfunded. The employees will have to look for a new health plan. To date, there is no provision for former staff to receive any sort of package.

Sears Canada news today: What exactly is a KERP?

It is normal in complex corporate restructurings to set up a KERP. The concept of a KERP began in US corporate restructurings in the 1990’s. The theory is that to have a successful restructuring, senior management have specific knowledge and ability. If they walked away from the company in bankruptcy protection, such as to accept a senior position elsewhere, the company would have a much more difficult and costly time in restructuring. Hence the idea was born that those essential managers should be promised a bonus to create the most value possible in the restructuring for the stakeholders. This is in addition to their normal compensation.

Often KERPs are now viewed as either:

  1. a standard item that senior management expects to receive; or,
  2. a greedy money grab negatively affecting other stakeholders.

I have not yet read any material to show why the Sears Canada bankruptcy protection case is so complex. I have not read how Sears Canada could not liquidate without existing senior management. It is earlier and current senior management who have not created a retail vision niche for Sears Canada for years.

Sears Canada news today: Time to “come back”

Thankfully, all CCAA protection orders have a standard “come back” clause. The reason for this is that not every stakeholder receives notice of the company applying for the bankruptcy protection order. Any stakeholder can come back to Court to oppose any part of the original order they did not receive notice of. They could not tell the Court of their position, and now want to come to Court with their complaints.

The Court appointed a law firm to represent the interests of the employees and former employees. As part of their motion material filed with the Court, they are asking the Court to amend the Sears Canada KERP. They state:

  1. the amounts are excessive under the circumstances; and
  2. the KERP does not incentivize senior management to enhance the value of Sears Canada.

It will be very interesting to follow this.

Sears Canada news today: It didn’t have to be this way

You may recall that Target Canada took a slightly different route towards its former employees when it decided to liquidate and leave Canada. It also liquidated under the CCAA. In our blog “TARGET CANADA CLOSING: $5.4 BILLION AND COUNTING”, we told you about the liquidation and that Target US established a trust fund for payment of the Target Canada obligations to its employees. For sure personal hardships occurred. At least they tried to soften the blow.

So now, while Sears Canada wants customers to come and buy at the liquidation sale, they have a PR nightmare on their hands.

Sears Canada news today: No comments please

It is so bad, that Sears Canada is not permitting public messages on its Facebook page. Most the messages from the public so far are negative against the company. CBC News recently noted that Sears Canada’s Facebook page was riddled with remarks from Canadians objecting exactly to what was happening to the company’s employees. Sears Canada has removed those comments from its Facebook page as well as blocking new comments.

sears canada facebook comments layoffs
Picture courtesy of CBC News

Sears Canada news today: Certainly a funny way to stay in business

You must wonder if Sears Canada really wants to restructure, or if they are just liquidating their inventory. They are also trying to sell whatever other assets they can. If it was a true restructuring, you would think that senior management would want to see more customers who would be loyal to (the new) Sears Canada when it would exit bankruptcy protection.

So instead of growing a loyal customer base, Sears Canada’s actions have spawned a strong and growing “Boycott Sears” momentum. They’re going to have to deal with that. It’s going to be interesting to see exactly how this plays out while Sears Canada currently is shopping for a buyer.

According to Sears Canada, the unhappy remarks did not motivate it to close the public articles or to remove many of the bitter statements. Regardless, the former employees are still faced with now with the question “how do you collect salary owed to you from an employer that goes out of business”.

Sears Canada news today: What to do if you or your company have too much debt

If your company or you are experiencing financial problems, contact Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. We’re here to tell you on your restructuring and other options to avoid bankruptcy. If necessary, we can also talk to you about your bankruptcy options.

We can help you put your financial house back in order and set you on a path to debt free-living. You’ll be amazed at the difference one phone call to Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. can make.

Contact us today. We are a licensed insolvency trustee and will listen to your issues and offer compassionate, professional assistance to aid you to avoid bankruptcy.

With our help, you can regain control of your life, Starting Over, Starting Now.

UPDATE: CHECK OUT OUR NEW VLOG BY CLICKING ON:

SEARS CANADA IS CLOSING: THE #1 REASON YOU HAVE TO RUN AND NOT JUST WALK TO REDEEM YOUR GIFT CARDS AND CREDITS

SEARS CANADA CLOSING DOWN 1

Call a Trustee Now!