Liquidating 1113 collective bargaining
A document may specify a delayed effective date and, if desired, a time on that date, and if it does the document shall become effective on the date and at the time, if any, specified.If a delayed effective date is specified without specifying a time on that date, the document shall become effective at the start of business on that date.The term “descendant” is synonymous with the terms “lineal descendant” and “issue” but excludes collateral heirs.“Devise,” when used as a noun, means a testamentary disposition of real or personal property and, when used as a verb, means to dispose of real or personal property by will or trust. The term includes “gift,” “give,” “bequeath,” “bequest,” and “legacy.” A devise is subject to charges for debts, expenses, and taxes as provided in this code, the will, or the trust.“Devisee” means a person designated in a will or trust to receive a devise. The document must be typewritten or printed, or, if electronically transmitted, the document must be in a format that can be retrieved or reproduced in typewritten or printed form, and must be legible. A corporate name need not be in English if written in English letters or Arabic or Roman numerals, and the certificate of status required of foreign corporations need not be in English if accompanied by a reasonably authenticated English translation.The person executing the document shall sign it and state beneath or opposite his or her signature his or her name and the capacity in which he or she signs.A recent decision in the Walter Energy bankruptcy case gave the Alabama-based metallurgical coal producer the go-ahead to reject its union collective bargaining agreements (CBAs). Further, the court found that the union's rejection of that "proposal" was without good cause because the union was unreasonable to demand anything, noting that only the buyer, as the new post-closing employer, had the financial ability to negotiate a new CBA.The rejection -- purportedly "necessary" as a condition to the debtors' sale of substantially all of their assets to their senior lenders' acquisition vehicle -- rids the buyer of the CBAs. Under this interpretation of the statute, the union was actually considered unreasonable for providing a counteroffer to the debtors; it was impossible for the union to satisfy section 1113, which was never initially enacted to jam unions in liquidating chapter 11 cases.
If it is filed in typewritten or printed form and not transmitted electronically, the Department of State may require one exact or conformed copy, to be delivered with the document, (except as provided in s. When the document is delivered to the Department of State for filing, the correct filing fee, and any other tax, license fee, or penalty required to be paid by this act or other law shall be paid or provision for payment made in a manner permitted by the Department of State.Unlike with most other contracts, under section 1113 a debtor must take specific actions to attempt a consensual resolution before moving to reject a CBA. The court in Walter Energy acknowledged that the "necessary" element has taken on two different forms in different circuits: the Third Circuit's "absolutely essential" view, based on Wheeling-Pittsburgh Steel Corp. United Steelworkers of America, AFL-CIO-CLC, 791 F.2d 1074 (3d Cir. The Third Circuit's more stringent standard requires that prior to rejection, debtors must illustrate that their modifications do not overreach those modifications minimally necessary.First, the debtor must present the union with a proposal that: (a) contains those CBA modifications necessary to permit the debtor's reorganization; (b) assures the fair and equitable treatment of the stakeholders; and (c) is based on the most complete and reliable information then available. 1986), and the Second Circuit's "necessary, but not absolutely minimal" view from Truck Drivers Local 807, Int'l Bhd. The Second Circuit's more flexible definition gives debtors the ability to terminate union contracts so long as their proposal includes necessary changes that will enhance the debtors' ability to successfully reorganize.They are the 10th and 4th largest US coal producers.Other bankruptcy filings by coal companies are expected.