| Israel 
              Military Industries set to fire 1000 workers and close factories By Haim Bior
 Ha'aretz
 August 11, 2002
 
 
 
 The state-owned defense contractor, Israel Military Industries, 
              plans to fire 800-1,000 employees from its current payroll of 3,700, 
              according to IMI chairman Arieh Mizrahi in a meeting with a delegation 
              from the Histadrut labor federation, headed by its chairman, MK 
              Amir Peretz.  Mizrahi and IMI CEO Udi Ganani made a presentation for Peretz on 
              Thursday, with the participation of senior managers. During the 
              presentation, Mizrahi said that IMI, as part of its streamlining 
              plan, would dismiss 400 employees from plants that would be closed. 
             In addition, 400 more employees would be laid off at factories 
              that would continue operations. Discussions would be held regarding 
              the fate of 200 additional employees who faced either pay cuts or 
              dismissals, Mizrahi said.  The dismissals are based on the findings of the interministerial 
              committee that examined the state of the company and submitted its 
              recommendations to the Finance and Defense ministries in November 
              2001. The committee recommended closing five plants and merging 
              portions of the remaining factories. The report projected that IMI's 
              cash flow deficit would increase by $30-40 million in 2002.  The committee determined that the most realistic option for rehabilitating 
              IMI was through privatization. The report states that in order to 
              help the company, management and employees must cooperate to implement 
              the committee's recommendations.  Last month, IMI postponed the early retirement payments to hundreds 
              of former employees who left the company in the 1990s due to a cash 
              crunch. Company management recently asked the treasury to provide 
              state guarantees for $30 million.  Peretz said in the meeting that the labor union opposed any lay-off 
              plan at IMI and suggested management enter negotiations with the 
              union. Peretz warned against unilateral measures such as dismissals, 
              an early retirement plan or privatization without a prior agreement 
              with the workers union.  "Management errs in convening separate employee meetings using 
              the divide and conquer method," he said.  Peretz expressed opposition to the privatization plan, saying the 
              Histadrut and company employees would act to prevent it. "IMI 
              is one of Israel's most glorious industries and there is no reason 
              to hand it over to tycoons when it can still be rehabilitated," 
              he added. He called on the treasury to finance IMI's past debts 
              - the company's primary burden. The debts are primarily to retirees, 
              banks and suppliers.  IMI's spokeswoman said last night in response that in management's 
              meeting with Peretz no mention had been made of 800-1,000 dismissals. 
              "Any irresponsible figure tossed around regarding firings only 
              damages IMI and its employees," she said.  According to the spokeswoman, management and the employees union 
              are currently negotiating a new wage agreement, after the previous 
              agreement had not been renewed for two years. She stated that there 
              was an optimistic atmosphere at IMI due to the fact that the Israel 
              Defense Forces had decided to acquire Tabor rifles and the company 
              had $800 million in orders for upgrading tanks.  The spokeswoman added that in Thursday's meeting with Peretz, Mizrahi 
              had presented "IMI's capabilities and strategic goals." 
              Concerning separate meetings between management and groups of employees, 
              the spokeswoman said that employees were asked in the meetings to 
              aid the company's marketing efforts and there had been no need to 
              invite a labor representative to the meetings.   |