And while it may not be what the BCWJ wanted - and we'll explain why later - it's a step up from when BTL announced it would not pay those who exceed the 6 year limitation period. What changed their minds? Governmental pressure? Persistent protesting? Nope - they said they came to the decision all on their own.
Reporter:
"Can you share if it's pressure from Central Government that led you to yield to pay severance or perhaps the demonstrations that BCWJ has been holding?"
Kileru Awich, Internal Legal Counsel
"Certainly not. Remember that BTL is managed by its board of directors, our board of directors know and understand their fiduciary duties which include acting in the best interest of the company and the board in its wisdom decided that not withstanding the limitation period and even though BTL is not admitting liability, it is in the best interest of the company to settle these severance payments to our former employees who left more than 6 years prior because these former employees helped build this company and make it what it is today and the company is in a position where it is able to pay these severance payments even though the company is not admitting any liability and even though the limitation period applies. And the company values its reputation as a good corporate citizen and if the company is able to meet these payments, the company had decided to pay these former payments to its employees so to answer your question, Marisol, it is not because of pressure from external sources whether it's from the government or whether it's from demonstrations or from the media. The board took an independent decision based on what is in the best interest of the company and you also have to appreciate that it is in the best interest of these former BTL employees because they won't have to spend money to go to court and pay lawyers. BTL is going to honor these severance payments once our former employees who left more than 6 years prior meet the criteria in section 183 of the labor act."
