Of course, this gets to the nub of the problem. In this case, are the
\"employees\" a collection of singular entities, or are they a single collective
entity.

If the former, then it could be argued, as some indeed have, that abstaining
from voting for the Deed, or voting against it, is sufficient to prove that you
didn\'t \"accept\" the 43% as complete payment, and then GEERS would pay the
full amount.

I personally don\'t believe this. I interpret this as meaning that if the
(collective group of) employees agree to take 43% (which we did, by way of a
vote of Creditors), then GEERS will use that as the level that it considers a
full payout. In support of this, I\'d observe that nobody at the meeting took a
record of who voted which way, so no individual at the meeting can prove that
they voted against the Deed or even that they abstained.

As for the wording of the Deed, I don\'t have the proposed wording (from the
last Report) with me at the moment, but my recollection is that it pretty
explicitly said that all Creditors accept the nominated figures as full payment
of their entitlements.

And that, as they say, is that (as far as I can tell).

Yokki.

At Thu, 14 Nov 2002 11:01:14 +1100, you wrote:
>On 13 Nov 2002 at 23:21, bwallis42 wrote:
>
>> It is clear from the documentation on their web site that your
>> entitlements are payable whether or not a DEED is entered into and
>> they are just trying you one to save money.
>
>The only issue is the wording of the deed. From someone at GEERS, in
>email a while back (I believe I posted this before, but a recap might be
>timely):
>
>8<
>
>If the deed extinguishes employee entitlements or reduces them to a
>lower order of priority this will affect any claim under GEERS . A
>fundamental premise of payment under GEERS is that GEERS priority rights
>must be recognised under the Deed
>if partial payment is made by the Administrator GEERS would pay the
>balance up to the GEERS limits provided the employees had not accepted
>the 43% payment as full settlement of their outstanding entitlements
>GEERS pays all legal outstanding entitlements (subject to the GEERS
>limits of salary caps, redundancy and legal entitlements owing)
>
>>8
>
>So, as I asked here previously: has anyone seen the wording of the deed?
>It wasn\'t written last time I asked :-)
>
>Jane
>
>
>
>
>
>To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>otmushrooms-unsubscribe@...
>
>
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://au.docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]