By VICTOR AHIUMA-YOUNG

KADUNA—ORGANISED Labour in Textile industry, has asked the 19 Northern States Governors; owners of the closed Kaduna Textiles Limited to pay workers their entitlements put at N687, 073,346.00.

Under the umbrella of the National Union of Textile, Garment and Tailoring Workers of Nigeria, NUTGTWN, also called on the owners of closed Nortex/Finetex Limited, to pay workers their N379, 688,077 benefits.

Both Kaduna Textiles and Nortex/Finetex Limited, closed about ten years ago, jointly owe workers and NUTGTWN, about N1, 063,761,423.

At a briefing, in Kaduna, NUTGTWN, lamented that the workers had been passing through untold hardship, pleading with the governors and owners of Nortex/Finetex Limited, to honour their obligations to the affected workers and their families.

Giving details of the frustration of labour and workers of the affected companies, General Secretary of NUTGTWN, Issa Aremu, said both Nortex and Fintex closed in September 2003 without settlement of workers’ gratuities amounting to N305,653,887, outstanding salaries amounting to N63,434,190 as well as outstanding union dues amounting to N7.6 million.

According to him, the union had obtained several court judgments compelling owners of Kaduna Textiles and Nortex/Finetex Limited, to pay the entitlements to no avail, saying the union had equally made several appeals, among others, to sway the owners of the affected companies without success.

According to him, “when all efforts by the union to bring the management to a round table discussion failed, the union resorted to legal action, a stiff measure to safeguard our members’ interests to get justice and secure the payment of their terminal benefits. In reaction to the union’s petition, the management filed a counter petition on Friday February 25, 2005, contesting the legality of the union to wind-up the company under receivership. Monday February 28, 2005, a judge of the Federal High Court ruled in favour of the union; that the union has legal right to institute the action.  The case was then adjourned to March 3, 2005.”

Disclaimer

Comments expressed here do not reflect the opinions of vanguard newspapers or any employee thereof.