Investment at Darwen firm Crown Paints welcomed despite lost jobs

UNION bosses at Darwen-based Crown Paints have welcomed news of investment despite the loss of 10 jobs.

Crown Paints said last year it would shed 70 jobs nationwide as it brought in new technology to fill cans with paint more efficiently.

As a result, it was expected 10 jobs would go in Darwen and 60 at the firm’s plant in Hull, where the new £1million technology would be implemented.

Despite the prospect of Darwen job losses, GMB convenor for the Darwen site Bob Welham said the future was promising.

He said: “We will deal with 10 redundancies here no problem. We will probably have more than that volunteering to go. We need investment in technology to keep up with our competitors and if we didn’t buy this machine our opposition would be able to produce more paint at a cheaper cost than us and Crown Paints would fade.

“I believe the company has ambitions and wants to move forward and wants additional work, which would create employment.”

Mr Welham said he planned to speak with bosses about a proposal to offer jobs to redundant workers in Hull.

He said: “We want to help people at both sites and if more people than needed volunteer for redundancy here then we are proposing we could offer people in Hull the chance to come here.”

Comments (7)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

11:52pm Fri 18 Jan 13

fireonthemountain says...

No - sorry , I must have misread this .

"We will deal with 10 redundancies here no problem. We will probably have more than that volunteering to go"

Is that because there is so much more alternative work in Darwen ?

"We want to help people at both sites and if more people than needed volunteer for redundancy here then we are proposing we could offer people in Hull the chance to come here.”

Is that because there is a shortage of labour in Darwen ?

I've an idea - sack the union morons . They contribute nothing .
No - sorry , I must have misread this . "We will deal with 10 redundancies here no problem. We will probably have more than that volunteering to go" Is that because there is so much more alternative work in Darwen ? "We want to help people at both sites and if more people than needed volunteer for redundancy here then we are proposing we could offer people in Hull the chance to come here.” Is that because there is a shortage of labour in Darwen ? I've an idea - sack the union morons . They contribute nothing . fireonthemountain
  • Score: 0

7:09am Sat 19 Jan 13

2 for 5p says...

Poetry: :-)

10 men get there pens.
Poetry: :-) 10 men get there pens. 2 for 5p
  • Score: 0

12:26pm Sat 19 Jan 13

louderfasterlonger says...

fireonthemountain wrote:
No - sorry , I must have misread this . "We will deal with 10 redundancies here no problem. We will probably have more than that volunteering to go" Is that because there is so much more alternative work in Darwen ? "We want to help people at both sites and if more people than needed volunteer for redundancy here then we are proposing we could offer people in Hull the chance to come here.” Is that because there is a shortage of labour in Darwen ? I've an idea - sack the union morons . They contribute nothing .
No, its because people are coming up to their retirement age and/or have alternative employment and/or can draw on the fantastic pension and redundancy schemes that their moronic unions fought so hard to secure.

The offer of jobs in Darwen to Hull Employees has been forced through by the moronic unions that are keen to make sure its members on both sites are not forced into a compulsory redundancy situation.

The people who choose to stay will, in April benefit from a second consecutive pay hike of 3.5% in a 3 year deal worth over 12%.

Is that enough contribution for you ? Or would you prefer compulsory redundancies at the National Level set by the Government ?
[quote][p][bold]fireonthemountain[/bold] wrote: No - sorry , I must have misread this . "We will deal with 10 redundancies here no problem. We will probably have more than that volunteering to go" Is that because there is so much more alternative work in Darwen ? "We want to help people at both sites and if more people than needed volunteer for redundancy here then we are proposing we could offer people in Hull the chance to come here.” Is that because there is a shortage of labour in Darwen ? I've an idea - sack the union morons . They contribute nothing .[/p][/quote]No, its because people are coming up to their retirement age and/or have alternative employment and/or can draw on the fantastic pension and redundancy schemes that their moronic unions fought so hard to secure. The offer of jobs in Darwen to Hull Employees has been forced through by the moronic unions that are keen to make sure its members on both sites are not forced into a compulsory redundancy situation. The people who choose to stay will, in April benefit from a second consecutive pay hike of 3.5% in a 3 year deal worth over 12%. Is that enough contribution for you ? Or would you prefer compulsory redundancies at the National Level set by the Government ? louderfasterlonger
  • Score: 0

5:07pm Sat 19 Jan 13

fireonthemountain says...

There is no point in my having a debate with a union man .

If you are happy with the likes of Bob Crowe , (how much a year??!!) ,

If you are happy paying for pilgrims / disruption of holidays by
baggage handlers / distruction of the mines by the likes of Scargill /
British Leyland by Red Robbo - steel - railways - docks by strike action .

If you are happy to see manufacturing gone abroad to more
efficient and competetive countries......

Well - good luck mate .
There is no point in my having a debate with a union man . If you are happy with the likes of Bob Crowe , (how much a year??!!) , If you are happy paying for pilgrims / disruption of holidays by baggage handlers / distruction of the mines by the likes of Scargill / British Leyland by Red Robbo - steel - railways - docks by strike action . If you are happy to see manufacturing gone abroad to more efficient and competetive countries...... Well - good luck mate . fireonthemountain
  • Score: 0

5:56pm Sat 19 Jan 13

louderfasterlonger says...

fireonthemountain wrote:
There is no point in my having a debate with a union man . If you are happy with the likes of Bob Crowe , (how much a year??!!) , If you are happy paying for pilgrims / disruption of holidays by baggage handlers / distruction of the mines by the likes of Scargill / British Leyland by Red Robbo - steel - railways - docks by strike action . If you are happy to see manufacturing gone abroad to more efficient and competetive countries...... Well - good luck mate .
Or perhaps you could just join us in the 21st Century... you are harking back 30 years. Before the oppression of Free Trade Unions created by Anti-union legislation from the Thatcherite Neo-Conservative Government.
And Yes, I would rather pay a union leader who is responsible for representing millions of workers within his organisation a higher Salary than a Politician who represents himself firstly and formost.
And thankyou for luck message, although luck doesn't come into it !
[quote][p][bold]fireonthemountain[/bold] wrote: There is no point in my having a debate with a union man . If you are happy with the likes of Bob Crowe , (how much a year??!!) , If you are happy paying for pilgrims / disruption of holidays by baggage handlers / distruction of the mines by the likes of Scargill / British Leyland by Red Robbo - steel - railways - docks by strike action . If you are happy to see manufacturing gone abroad to more efficient and competetive countries...... Well - good luck mate .[/p][/quote]Or perhaps you could just join us in the 21st Century... you are harking back 30 years. Before the oppression of Free Trade Unions created by Anti-union legislation from the Thatcherite Neo-Conservative Government. And Yes, I would rather pay a union leader who is responsible for representing millions of workers within his organisation a higher Salary than a Politician who represents himself firstly and formost. And thankyou for luck message, although luck doesn't come into it ! louderfasterlonger
  • Score: 0

8:07pm Sat 19 Jan 13

fireonthemountain says...

Interesting comments .

I did say that i would not engage in debate - though I must admit you do
seem an improvement on the normal union men who just spout rhetoric
and when I disagree with them , threaten me with violence .

Yes , true .

May I also say that I utterly agree wih you about politicians .
It is clear your beliefs are sincere , and I have a lot of respect for that .

Now - some points if I may .

1 - let us go back many , many years , to The Beeching Report .
The railways were inefficient , the Conservative Government started to
close them down . Harold Wilson campaigned on an absolute guarantee to reverse said cuts - but when he was elected , carried on .
Then , when the railways went on strike - they lost two mega contracts -
specifically for The Royal Mail , and The Newspapers . Never recovered
from that lost revenue . Union's fault .

2 - You surely cannot disagree that the unions ruined
The British Car Industry - Triumph TR7 factory in Speke - Hillman Imp factory near Glasgow (can't remember its name!) and the Ravenscraig Steelworks that supplied it . Longridge of course . Transit factory off to Turkey . Unions fault .

3 - Do I live in the world 30 years ago ? I wish . When Thatcher turned
the country from "the sick man of Europe" to a world beater . Not easy
after the winter of discontent . As they say , eventually Labour always
runs out of other people's money .

4 - No , I live in today's world - where Cameron is at
least attempting to sort the problems left by the last lot .
Though , like just about everyone I know , I wish he would
listen to the public , and stop overseas aid when it is used to
buy bullets , for cruel African Tyrants , for their fleets of Mercedes ,
and of course their Swiss bank accounts . I would like police on the
streets etc etc .

Think I went a bit off topic there !!

Anyway .

Rock and roll mate .
Interesting comments . I did say that i would not engage in debate - though I must admit you do seem an improvement on the normal union men who just spout rhetoric and when I disagree with them , threaten me with violence . Yes , true . May I also say that I utterly agree wih you about politicians . It is clear your beliefs are sincere , and I have a lot of respect for that . Now - some points if I may . 1 - let us go back many , many years , to The Beeching Report . The railways were inefficient , the Conservative Government started to close them down . Harold Wilson campaigned on an absolute guarantee to reverse said cuts - but when he was elected , carried on . Then , when the railways went on strike - they lost two mega contracts - specifically for The Royal Mail , and The Newspapers . Never recovered from that lost revenue . Union's fault . 2 - You surely cannot disagree that the unions ruined The British Car Industry - Triumph TR7 factory in Speke - Hillman Imp factory near Glasgow (can't remember its name!) and the Ravenscraig Steelworks that supplied it . Longridge of course . Transit factory off to Turkey . Unions fault . 3 - Do I live in the world 30 years ago ? I wish . When Thatcher turned the country from "the sick man of Europe" to a world beater . Not easy after the winter of discontent . As they say , eventually Labour always runs out of other people's money . 4 - No , I live in today's world - where Cameron is at least attempting to sort the problems left by the last lot . Though , like just about everyone I know , I wish he would listen to the public , and stop overseas aid when it is used to buy bullets , for cruel African Tyrants , for their fleets of Mercedes , and of course their Swiss bank accounts . I would like police on the streets etc etc . Think I went a bit off topic there !! Anyway . Rock and roll mate . fireonthemountain
  • Score: 0

3:50pm Mon 21 Jan 13

Libra1 says...

And if the workers don't subscribe to a Union then basically they will have to adhere to every whim set by the Management , ie Pay , holidays, breaks etc etc . Its very easy to condemn the Unions but look at what they have achieved in the work place , better working conditions and Health and Safety for a start.
Condemn Labour by all means but who stands up for the working class , certainly not Thatcher ( Privatise everything ) and not the Tories that's for sure
And if the workers don't subscribe to a Union then basically they will have to adhere to every whim set by the Management , ie Pay , holidays, breaks etc etc . Its very easy to condemn the Unions but look at what they have achieved in the work place , better working conditions and Health and Safety for a start. Condemn Labour by all means but who stands up for the working class , certainly not Thatcher ( Privatise everything ) and not the Tories that's for sure Libra1
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree