Curious on the Severance PayablesGood thing we have Bennet Jones on the case, so to speak, keeping an eye on various creditor claims. Of course we don't know all the monetary details, but the severance discussion, needs some review. It might be a small amount, or it might be a claim based on previous employment contracts.
There are two issues: 1. How much are the severance claims and 2. Do they rank in front of Debentures or pari passu?
Employees did okay in receivership, as there were minimal layoffs. I think most executives did okay too. The question now is what severance were they entitled to?
Here's a more gutting case:
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/sears-employees-complaints-1.4190110
That's how a quick receivership goes, when there is no sympathy for employees. Hopefully low paid Sears employees can recover a bit more that is owed to them, as they were just getting by to begin with. A ruthless capitalist system, at its worst.
Calgary receiverships are definitely a bit kinder to employees, who are also much better paid than Sear's employees. But of course the receiverships are not so kind if you are an investor that has lent money to the company, to help them keep paying the salaries, and severance packages of the employees.
We'll know more details in the next few weeks as they must go to Court to rule on all the allowable claims, and we'll then be able to see which ones were truly disputed.
I still say dragging this out a few more weeks, back in December, would have given a bit more cash for the company, to pay off creditors with. We'll never know the true audited financials, and which creditors triied to make grabs for cash, under normal business, perhaps through padded invoices.
Let's see what we find out about the severance payables, in the next few weeks.