A Protective Award of 90 days pay, the maximum the law can provide, was awarded after the tribunal found that receivers Ernst & Young had failed to consult with both the GPMU and Amicus before announcing the redundancies.
At the time, GPMU deputy general secretary Tony Burke had said the redundancies, which amounted to a quarter of the workforce, were totally ruthless.
Burke said the result was a vindication of the unions decision to take legal action.
The behaviour of Ernst & Young was appalling, with many members dismissed at a moments notice, he said.
The former employees were based at Imperial Home Dcors Crown Wallcoverings plant in Darwen, Lancashire.
Crown Wallcoverings went into administrative receivership in last this year with the loss of 212 jobs.
The company appointed Ernst & Young as administrative receivers, after a restructuring of its business failed to leave it with enough adequate working capital to keep it trading.
by Andy Scott
Have your say in the Printweek Poll
Related stories
Latest comments
"From 1949 until the late 2000s Remploy had a network of government-subsidised factories that offered employment specifically to disabled people, originally often war veterans or victims of industrial..."
"Does appear an odd decision as with that level of shareholder funds they would be liable for the staff redundancy and cover the insolvency costs. It’s not like they could take the money and dodge..."
"It always felt that the Labour government were between a rock and a hard place with regard to fixing the mess they were left by the Tories. They have minimal wiggle room and, though not ideal, it..."
Up next...
Lamina Fasline arrived in September
MRP invests £1.8m in new press and mounter
Over 2,800 organisations challenged globally
Two Sides reports rising greenwash cases and campaign success
Founded in 1884