Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
“I WORKED THERE for 45 years, and this is how they treat us?”
That is the question asked by John Finn, one of the Clerys workers who stood outside the offices of Natrium Consortium, the new owners of the former department store, this lunchtime.
Standing on the North Wall Quay in Dublin the former staff members shouted:
The workers united will never be defeated.
It’s been 11 weeks since they lost their jobs, but they aren’t giving up without a fight, they said.
The store closed suddenly in June, resulting in more than 400 people losing their jobs.
This included employees of Clerys as well as concession holders. Many of the workers had been working at the department store for decades.
Following the purchase of the store, Natrium immediately moved to liquidate its operating company. Overnight, the workers say their lives changed forever.
“I was due to retire in 2017. I gave 45 years to the company and I was there since the Guiney days,” said Finn.
“I knew I was going to retire next year, but I never expected to be pushed into it early like this. These people are a great bunch to work with and the way we have been treated has been disgraceful. I worked there a long time, but it is the other workers, the ones with mortgages and young families that I worry for,” he said.
Today’s protest was organised by the trade union Siptu, who is critical of the liquidation being carried out without any discussions with the Clerys workers.
The trade union said no plans for the payment of workers’ outstanding wages or redundancy entitlements were communicated to them.
Nuala Noone, originally from Galway, has lived in Dublin ever since she got her job in Clerys 43 years ago.
She worked in the office doing administrative work. Noone said she received no communication about what was happening to the company or her job.
That’s why we’re here today.
“The way we have been treated has really hit home to people, I think. Clerys was an iconic store, everyone up and down the country knew about it. Then all of a sudden it’s gone.”
You knew everyone, all ages worked there, everyone was friendly, it was a great place to work. It is such a downer from being in there everyday to nothing.
Veronica Newport, who worked in the store 15 years, said it was “Ireland’s heritage store”.
I loved working there, I loved the people, the customers, it was my bread and butter, for me and a lot of other people.
She told TheJournal.ie that if the company had have been open and honest with the workers, then they could somewhat understand.
“It was the way it was done. It was there one day and gone the next. It is no way to treat workers in this day and age.”
Clerys’ Santa Claus
A man who donned the red suit every Christmas for the festive shoppers said the whole thing is a “disgrace”.
“Clerys was unlike any other store. I played Santa Claus for 4 years in the store, and I really enjoyed it. It was a great place to work. These people here today are absolutely lovely people, and no one deserves to be treated the way they have been treated,2 said Sean Whelan.
When the day comes that Natrium reopens the store, I want to see pickets outside, day in, day out, until people are paid every cent they are owed.
The latest estimate for the cost of liquidation from the Department of Social Protection shows it is set to cost the taxpayer €2.5 million.
The Department’s Social Insurance Fund will have to pay out all the outstanding statutory redundancy payments for the workers.
“It is the taxpayer that is paying out €2.5 million to sort out this mess. When the store opens we need to be outside until all of that money is repaid,” said Whelan.
Speaking at a jobs announcement today, the junior social protection minister Kevin Humphreys said he was “extremely angry” that the taxpayer had been left to foot the bill for the job losses.
He said his department would be working to ensure that those whose lost their jobs can get back into employment.
Meanwhile, Jobs Minister Richard Bruton said he was unhappy with the situation but described it as an “isolated incident”.
He added: “But this [had] an appalling impact on the workers and something we need to learn lessons from.”
- First published at 11.45am. Additional reporting from Hugh O’Connell
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Busy night for dfb
C Watch
Well done B watch. Good save
Jaysus! SRT’s mobilised to domestics now? Spare the water lads ;-)
Thank God all are safe and no fatalities!
Chip-pan roulette ?
It was on fm104 tonight that someone petrol bombed that family
Yeah and they were sxxm bags 2 one of them chased a little 13 year old girl down the road with a knife live by the sword this is what happens
General Exclusions
We shall not be liable for
War and Terrorism
Notwithstanding any provision to the
contrary within this insurance or any
endorsement thereto it is agreed that
this insurance excludes liability, loss,
damage, cost or expense of
whatsoever nature directly or
indirectly caused by, resulting from
or in connection with any of the
following regardless of any other
cause or event contributing
concurrently or in any other
sequence to the loss;
(1) war, invasion, acts of foreign
enemies, hostilities or warlike
operations (whether war be
declared or not), civil war,
rebellion, revolution,
insurrection, civil commotion
assuming the proportions of or
amounting to an uprising,
military or usurped power, or
(2) any act of terrorism.
An act of terrorism means an
act, including but not limited to
the use of force or violence
and/or the threat thereof, of any
person or group(s) of persons,
whether acting alone or on
behalf of or in connection with
any organisation(s) or
government(s), committed for
political, religious, ideological or
other purposes including the
intention to influence any
government and/or to put the
public, or any section of the
public, in fear.
This endorsement also excludes
liability, loss, damage, cost or
expense of whatsoever nature
directly or indirectly caused by,
resulting from or in connection with
any action taken in controlling,
preventing, suppressing or in any
way relating to (1) and/or (2) above.
If the Company alleges that by reason
of this exclusion any liability, loss,
damage, cost or expense is not
covered by this insurance the burden
of proving the contrary shall be upon
the Insured.
In the event any portion of this
endorsement is found to be invalid or
unenforceable, the remainder shall
remain in full force and effect.
have your say