 鲜花( 0)  鸡蛋( 0)
|
道化工亚省工厂将裁员& [+ R2 {- o' R }3 C2 W
Dow Chemical's Alberta facilities will see layoffs
0 W7 S3 N$ j) ]' n& n. x
0 D1 X' ~, o, O# A" oEDMONTON — Some employees at Dow Chemical’s Alberta facilities have been notified they will be laid off but the full extent of the job cuts won’t be known until late next week, a company spokesperson said Wednesday.9 z0 l; `# G- _ F+ N7 ^
2 j0 @1 H4 b2 a3 n' [/ KMary-Lea Crawford, public affairs manager for Dow at Fort Saskatchewan, would not say how many layoff notices have been handed out so far. 5 ~! b6 @4 v/ @* M$ R" v( |
* \. {3 i; g$ E9 E+ F
The cuts are not expected to be as deep as the 11-per-cent target announced by the U.S.-based company in December, she said.
( n. x+ h% B1 Z& e( l' x
! P# L- ^0 W& @, w/ |, yDow employs about 630 people in Alberta, with 550 in Fort Saskatchewan with the balance at its Prentiss facility near Red Deer.: @( S1 w" d! q/ G- }* Q0 M" ~0 ^
, @; ^0 ]8 p- i% s+ T% q5 bDow posted weaker-than-expected fourth-quarter results on Tuesday because demand has plummeted in markets such as the construction, electronics and automotives.# i' Q; Y6 a) E1 [2 N! @
. D. o: ^% C _7 k0 S) WDow has tried to revamp its earnings profile over the past two years, first by announcing plans to sell a 50- per-cent stake in its cyclical basic plastics business to Kuwaiti investors for more than $9 billion. Then, in July, it announced plans to spend more than $15 billion to acquire Rohm and Haas using proceeds from the joint venture.
3 C, p7 }8 K/ C8 T8 f- c) D% V7 V$ l; I) S( G! g" W0 G# E
Dow’s plans faltered when Kuwait backed out of the joint venture. Rohm and Haas said its merger agreement with Dow, was not contingent on the Kuwait transaction.
h' d' ^/ b+ n; l
6 G8 b1 _+ F5 G# v) M6 g5 k& \Philadelphia-based Rohm and Haas sued Dow in a bid to force the deal to close. Dow filed its response to the lawsuit on Tuesday.5 A+ a' f. d, N3 o- a1 ?
( L) P/ G' A9 K! v" K8 }3 o+ r C# rDow argued the agreement was not binding, because it was impossible to carry out “without jeopardizing the very existence of both companies.” |
|