Swiss company INEOS rips off UK,wages war against its UK employees

[chalga]

You really don't have a clue about what is going on do you?

The major investment to update facilities hasn't been made and won't be made in the current climate.

Capital expenditure is made on a daily basis to replace worn out and obsolete plant for safety reasons and happens in every company. It is part of every companies costs and balance sheet. But with no real arguement it is being used in a desperate smear attempt by a union that has totally lost the plot.

 

QUOTE:

 

Capital expenditure, or investment, is only sensibly committed if you've got profits flowing from it in future. That's where Ineos says its accounts look odd, because they don't anticipate making profits at Grangemouth in the next five years. Hence, the write-down in the petro-chemical plant's valuation, from nearly £400m to zero.

 

So,INEOS did not 'sensibly commit' then did they?...........resulting in huge losses,the write down in valuation from £400m to zero,and then the result of the mess that INEOS created was to let the workforce take the hit,along with the UK taxpayer............and if the 'gun to the head' trick on the workforce and the taxpayer didn't work,manufacture a union argument to close the plant and claim that it is their fault for the losses already accrued,their fault and the taxpayer that future investment would not be forthcoming..all while the millionaire sits on his money,allegedly doesn't pay UK taxes,and expects the workers and the taxpayer to bale him out from the bad decisions that he has made.

 

---------- Post added 24-10-2013 at 09:27 ----------

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/pharmaceuticalsandchemicals/10401061/Grangemouth-Unite-union-to-make-last-ditch-attempt-to-save-plant-and-800-jobs.html

 

 

QUOTE:

 

As tempers frayed, Lord Foulkes said in the House of Lords: “This Government and the Scottish government and the workforce have been blackmailed by a billionaire sitting in a £130m yacht in the Mediterranean."

[Ousetunes]

Oh how nice to see the big wigs at Unite begging on their bended knees.

 

For a union used to holding the country and government to ransom, they're now holding out their little hands pleading that their members get their jobs back!

 

Irony. Nice.

[Uptowngirl]

QUOTE:

 

Capital expenditure, or investment, is only sensibly committed if you've got profits flowing from it in future. That's where Ineos says its accounts look odd, because they don't anticipate making profits at Grangemouth in the next five years. Hence, the write-down in the petro-chemical plant's valuation, from nearly £400m to zero.

 

So,INEOS did not 'sensibly commit' then did they?...........resulting in huge losses,the write down in valuation from £400 to zero,and then the result of the mess that INEOS created was to let the workforce take the hit,along with the UK taxpayer............and if the 'gun to the head' trick on the workforce and the taxpayer didn't work,manufacture a union argument to close the plant and claim that it is their fault for the losses already accrued,their fault and the taxpayer that future investment would not be forthcoming..all while the millionaire sits on his money,allegedly doesn't pay UK taxes,and expects the workers and the taxpayer to bale him out from the bad decisions that he has made.

 

It seems perfectly reasonable to me. Capital plant value is depreciated every year. If the plant is obsolete and no longer up to the job it eventually gets written down to zero pretty much like a 10 year old Toyota. INEOS had a plan to modernise the plant and adapt it to use imported shale gas, but only if the pension problem, which had been ongoing since 2008, were resolved.

 

The fact that without resolution INEOS announced plant closure rather vindicates the writing down of the plants value as presumably most will be consigned to scrap. Perhaps if you understood accountancy you would be better able to debate instead of grasping at straws and ranting.

 

I would be very surprised to see INEOS change its mind now that the union has folded its cards. INEOS has other plants around Europe where its investment would be better spent. UNITE gave them all the ammunition they needed to walk away from Grangemouth. I would be more concerned with trying to stop the refinery closing than worrying about an out of date loss making chemical process plant.

[Speckled Hen]

Oh how nice to see the big wigs at Unite begging on their bended knees.

 

For a union used to holding the country and government to ransom, they're now holding out their little hands pleading that their members get their jobs back!

 

Irony. Nice.

 

When £55,000 average salary and a final salary pension scheme with retirement at 57 just isn't enough. I'm thinking that might no longer be on the table.

[geared]

their own ineficiency had turned into a loss making business,then try to blame the workforce and unions for it being loss making.

 

So it's the fault of the management that the North Sea has stopped providing enough raw materials to run the plant?

 

I suppose it's also their fault that the rapid expansion in the American Gas market has made it un-economical to buy Gas over here????

[chalga]

It seems perfectly reasonable to me. Capital plant value is depreciated every year. If the plant is obsolete and no longer up to the job it eventually gets written down to zero pretty much like a 10 year old Toyota.

 

 

I thought it was made clear in the quotes that I made from the guy who is writing about the losses being 'capital expenditure' of over 400m......what has he bought with all that investment money?..........how has it become obsolete if he has invested 400m in it,which is presumably new stuff to replace the 'old Toyota'..........if he has spent all that money on capital investment and still wrote the plant down to zero,what has he spent the money on.......even older Toyotas?...........how can the plant be obsolete after investing so much money?

 

---------- Post added 24-10-2013 at 09:44 ----------

 

So it's the fault of the management that the North Sea has stopped providing enough raw materials to run the plant?

 

I suppose it's also their fault that the rapid expansion in the American Gas market has made it un-economical to buy Gas over here????

 

So let the millionaire use his own money to invest in it then.If he has allegedly not paid tax in the UK for years,why is he expecting the UK taxpayer to do it for him?........if he has spent 400m on capital investment and then wrote it down to zero,is that the fault of the taxpayer or the workers?.

[Uptowngirl]

I thought it was made clear in the quotes that I made from the guy who is writing about the losses being 'capital expenditure' of over 400m......what has he bought with all that investment money?..........how has it become obsolete if he has invested 400m in it,which is presumably new stuff to replace the 'old Toyota'..........if he has spent all that money on capital investment and still wrote the plant down to zero,what has he spent the money on.......even older Toyotas?...........how can the plant be obsolete after investing so much money?

 

You still don't get it do you. The Grangemouth plant has a book value of around £6 billion. Its value will depreciate by at least 10% of that each year and money needs to be continually spent as plant needs replacing. That isn't the same as having to make a major modification to the whole process because the raw material the chemical plant was built to process is no longer available.

[Obelix]

I thought it was made clear in the quotes that I made from the guy who is writing about the losses being 'capital expenditure' of over 400m......what has he bought with all that investment money?..........how has it become obsolete if he has invested 400m in it,which is presumably new stuff to replace the 'old Toyota'..........if he has spent all that money on capital investment and still wrote the plant down to zero,what has he spent the money on.......even older Toyotas?...........how can the plant be obsolete after investing so much money?

 

---------- Post added 24-10-2013 at 09:44 ----------

 

 

So let the millionaire use his own money to invest in it then.If he has allegedly not paid tax in the UK for years,why is he expecting the UK taxpayer to do it for him?........if he has spent 400m on capital investment and then wrote it down to zero,is that the fault of the taxpayer or the workers?.

 

The 400m is expenditure on keeping the 10 year old Toyota running, you know like a replacement exhaust, battery, tyres, oil change, spot of welding etc. You can do that all you like but you wont change that 10 year old car into a new one running on a different type of fuel. To do that you need to spend some considerable sum and buy a new car - and they are not doing that unless the pension issue is fixed because their corporate investors simply wont stump up the guarantee.

[Uptowngirl]

 

So let the millionaire use his own money to invest in it then.

 

You've hit the nail on the head there. The shareholders will invest their money where they expect a return. UNITE have made Grangemouth uninvestable at this moment in time.

 

To quote Peter Jones "I'm out".

[Waldo]

I might have more sympathy for companies who are acting ,quite legally.over tax,but then when unions,quite legally,try to defend their interests,said company takes its ball home and in effect says 'there's no problem with us doing what millions of taxpayers think is morally wrong,but there is a problem when what many trade unionists and others think is morally right is affecting us'

 

They're not saying there is a problem with strike action. They're just saying that a strike will make the whole enterprise financially unviable, and so, preferable for them to close the business rather than keep it running and keep losing money.

 

At least, that's how I understand the situation.