Mixing
Management communication while monopolies and mergers commission decision pending? [closed]
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
My company has been bought by a company who recently bought our largest competitor also.
The acquisition has been sent to the UK Monopolies and mergers commission. So they need the OK from them before the merger itself can proceed. We've heard practically nothing apart from a brief email from the MD saying it was happening, I think this was only sent because the people buying the company had spoken to the press.
Is the outcome of the commission preventing the management from talking to us or are they simply not communicating?
What are the rules around merging companies and what can and can't be said to who? Specifically the workforce.
management united-kingdom redundancy acquisition
closed as off-topic by Jan Doggen, gnat, mhoran_psprep, user8365, Garrison Neely Sep 23 '14 at 15:15
This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:
- "Questions seeking advice on company-specific regulations, agreements, or policies should be directed to your manager or HR department. Questions that address only a specific company or position are of limited use to future visitors. Questions seeking legal advice should be directed to legal professionals. For more information, click here." – Jan Doggen, gnat, mhoran_psprep, Community, Garrison Neely
suggest improvements |Â
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
My company has been bought by a company who recently bought our largest competitor also.
The acquisition has been sent to the UK Monopolies and mergers commission. So they need the OK from them before the merger itself can proceed. We've heard practically nothing apart from a brief email from the MD saying it was happening, I think this was only sent because the people buying the company had spoken to the press.
Is the outcome of the commission preventing the management from talking to us or are they simply not communicating?
What are the rules around merging companies and what can and can't be said to who? Specifically the workforce.
management united-kingdom redundancy acquisition
closed as off-topic by Jan Doggen, gnat, mhoran_psprep, user8365, Garrison Neely Sep 23 '14 at 15:15
This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:
- "Questions seeking advice on company-specific regulations, agreements, or policies should be directed to your manager or HR department. Questions that address only a specific company or position are of limited use to future visitors. Questions seeking legal advice should be directed to legal professionals. For more information, click here." – Jan Doggen, gnat, mhoran_psprep, Community, Garrison Neely
1
Not hearing much until the details are settled is completely typical and should be expected. They'll tell you when they have reached agreement.
– keshlam
Sep 23 '14 at 13:06
My question is, is there any legal reason why they can't say anything? Or have they taken a decision not to.
– user13543
Sep 23 '14 at 13:58
As far as I know, there's no legal reason. But as @Myles points out, there are plenty of other reasons.
– keshlam
Sep 23 '14 at 14:50
suggest improvements |Â
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
My company has been bought by a company who recently bought our largest competitor also.
The acquisition has been sent to the UK Monopolies and mergers commission. So they need the OK from them before the merger itself can proceed. We've heard practically nothing apart from a brief email from the MD saying it was happening, I think this was only sent because the people buying the company had spoken to the press.
Is the outcome of the commission preventing the management from talking to us or are they simply not communicating?
What are the rules around merging companies and what can and can't be said to who? Specifically the workforce.
management united-kingdom redundancy acquisition
My company has been bought by a company who recently bought our largest competitor also.
The acquisition has been sent to the UK Monopolies and mergers commission. So they need the OK from them before the merger itself can proceed. We've heard practically nothing apart from a brief email from the MD saying it was happening, I think this was only sent because the people buying the company had spoken to the press.
Is the outcome of the commission preventing the management from talking to us or are they simply not communicating?
What are the rules around merging companies and what can and can't be said to who? Specifically the workforce.
management united-kingdom redundancy acquisition
edited Sep 23 '14 at 12:01
asked Sep 23 '14 at 9:36
user13543
closed as off-topic by Jan Doggen, gnat, mhoran_psprep, user8365, Garrison Neely Sep 23 '14 at 15:15
This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:
- "Questions seeking advice on company-specific regulations, agreements, or policies should be directed to your manager or HR department. Questions that address only a specific company or position are of limited use to future visitors. Questions seeking legal advice should be directed to legal professionals. For more information, click here." – Jan Doggen, gnat, mhoran_psprep, Community, Garrison Neely
closed as off-topic by Jan Doggen, gnat, mhoran_psprep, user8365, Garrison Neely Sep 23 '14 at 15:15
This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:
- "Questions seeking advice on company-specific regulations, agreements, or policies should be directed to your manager or HR department. Questions that address only a specific company or position are of limited use to future visitors. Questions seeking legal advice should be directed to legal professionals. For more information, click here." – Jan Doggen, gnat, mhoran_psprep, Community, Garrison Neely
1
Not hearing much until the details are settled is completely typical and should be expected. They'll tell you when they have reached agreement.
– keshlam
Sep 23 '14 at 13:06
My question is, is there any legal reason why they can't say anything? Or have they taken a decision not to.
– user13543
Sep 23 '14 at 13:58
As far as I know, there's no legal reason. But as @Myles points out, there are plenty of other reasons.
– keshlam
Sep 23 '14 at 14:50
suggest improvements |Â
1
Not hearing much until the details are settled is completely typical and should be expected. They'll tell you when they have reached agreement.
– keshlam
Sep 23 '14 at 13:06
My question is, is there any legal reason why they can't say anything? Or have they taken a decision not to.
– user13543
Sep 23 '14 at 13:58
As far as I know, there's no legal reason. But as @Myles points out, there are plenty of other reasons.
– keshlam
Sep 23 '14 at 14:50
1
1
Not hearing much until the details are settled is completely typical and should be expected. They'll tell you when they have reached agreement.
– keshlam
Sep 23 '14 at 13:06
Not hearing much until the details are settled is completely typical and should be expected. They'll tell you when they have reached agreement.
– keshlam
Sep 23 '14 at 13:06
My question is, is there any legal reason why they can't say anything? Or have they taken a decision not to.
– user13543
Sep 23 '14 at 13:58
My question is, is there any legal reason why they can't say anything? Or have they taken a decision not to.
– user13543
Sep 23 '14 at 13:58
As far as I know, there's no legal reason. But as @Myles points out, there are plenty of other reasons.
– keshlam
Sep 23 '14 at 14:50
As far as I know, there's no legal reason. But as @Myles points out, there are plenty of other reasons.
– keshlam
Sep 23 '14 at 14:50
suggest improvements |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
This would be pretty normal. I don't know the local rules regarding this but the logic behind not sharing info is sound. This process can have major details change pretty rapidly and it wouldn't be fair for employees to make life decisions around information until it is 100% decided. Also leaked details can drastically effect share prices (imagine insider info that the merger hit a snag and may not go through) which in turn feed back into the merger process.
answered Sep 23 '14 at 14:12
Myles
25.4k658104
1
To add: The rules on insider trading might also tie the hands of management quite a bit. To the extent that they can't reveal any information to the employees that is not also available to the shareholders/general public.
– Bart van Ingen Schenau
Sep 23 '14 at 15:27
suggest improvements |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
This would be pretty normal. I don't know the local rules regarding this but the logic behind not sharing info is sound. This process can have major details change pretty rapidly and it wouldn't be fair for employees to make life decisions around information until it is 100% decided. Also leaked details can drastically effect share prices (imagine insider info that the merger hit a snag and may not go through) which in turn feed back into the merger process.
answered Sep 23 '14 at 14:12
Myles
25.4k658104
1
To add: The rules on insider trading might also tie the hands of management quite a bit. To the extent that they can't reveal any information to the employees that is not also available to the shareholders/general public.
– Bart van Ingen Schenau
Sep 23 '14 at 15:27
suggest improvements |Â
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
This would be pretty normal. I don't know the local rules regarding this but the logic behind not sharing info is sound. This process can have major details change pretty rapidly and it wouldn't be fair for employees to make life decisions around information until it is 100% decided. Also leaked details can drastically effect share prices (imagine insider info that the merger hit a snag and may not go through) which in turn feed back into the merger process.
answered Sep 23 '14 at 14:12
Myles
25.4k658104
1
To add: The rules on insider trading might also tie the hands of management quite a bit. To the extent that they can't reveal any information to the employees that is not also available to the shareholders/general public.
– Bart van Ingen Schenau
Sep 23 '14 at 15:27
suggest improvements |Â
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
This would be pretty normal. I don't know the local rules regarding this but the logic behind not sharing info is sound. This process can have major details change pretty rapidly and it wouldn't be fair for employees to make life decisions around information until it is 100% decided. Also leaked details can drastically effect share prices (imagine insider info that the merger hit a snag and may not go through) which in turn feed back into the merger process.
answered Sep 23 '14 at 14:12
Myles
25.4k658104
This would be pretty normal. I don't know the local rules regarding this but the logic behind not sharing info is sound. This process can have major details change pretty rapidly and it wouldn't be fair for employees to make life decisions around information until it is 100% decided. Also leaked details can drastically effect share prices (imagine insider info that the merger hit a snag and may not go through) which in turn feed back into the merger process.
answered Sep 23 '14 at 14:12
Myles
25.4k658104
answered Sep 23 '14 at 14:12
Myles
25.4k658104
answered Sep 23 '14 at 14:12
Myles
25.4k658104
answered Sep 23 '14 at 14:12
Myles
25.4k658104
25.4k658104
1
To add: The rules on insider trading might also tie the hands of management quite a bit. To the extent that they can't reveal any information to the employees that is not also available to the shareholders/general public.
– Bart van Ingen Schenau
Sep 23 '14 at 15:27
suggest improvements |Â
1
To add: The rules on insider trading might also tie the hands of management quite a bit. To the extent that they can't reveal any information to the employees that is not also available to the shareholders/general public.
– Bart van Ingen Schenau
Sep 23 '14 at 15:27
1
1
To add: The rules on insider trading might also tie the hands of management quite a bit. To the extent that they can't reveal any information to the employees that is not also available to the shareholders/general public.
– Bart van Ingen Schenau
Sep 23 '14 at 15:27
To add: The rules on insider trading might also tie the hands of management quite a bit. To the extent that they can't reveal any information to the employees that is not also available to the shareholders/general public.
– Bart van Ingen Schenau
Sep 23 '14 at 15:27
suggest improvements |Â
1
Not hearing much until the details are settled is completely typical and should be expected. They'll tell you when they have reached agreement.
– keshlam
Sep 23 '14 at 13:06
My question is, is there any legal reason why they can't say anything? Or have they taken a decision not to.
– user13543
Sep 23 '14 at 13:58
As far as I know, there's no legal reason. But as @Myles points out, there are plenty of other reasons.
– keshlam
Sep 23 '14 at 14:50