{"id":1579,"date":"2014-02-07T05:35:18","date_gmt":"2014-02-07T13:35:18","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/66.147.244.209\/~canadiu3\/?p=1579"},"modified":"2014-02-07T05:35:18","modified_gmt":"2014-02-07T13:35:18","slug":"skorean-appeal-court-rules-layoffs-of-ssangyong-motor-workers-not-valid","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/2014\/02\/07\/skorean-appeal-court-rules-layoffs-of-ssangyong-motor-workers-not-valid\/","title":{"rendered":"SKorean appeal court rules layoffs of Ssangyong Motor workers not valid"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>SEOUL, South Korea\u2014A South Korean appeal court says the layoffs of 153 employees at Ssangyong Motor in 2009 were unjustified in a belated victory for auto workers who fought pitched battles with riot police at the time.<\/p>\n<p>The 153 were among 2,600 workers that Ssangyong tried to shed in 2009, sparking South Korea&#8217;s worst labour strife in years.<\/p>\n<p>The luxury automaker was hit by the 2008 financial crisis and slumping sales.<\/p>\n<p>The court said the layoffs could not be justified because the company did not go to sufficient lengths to save jobs.<\/p>\n<p>It also said the company overstated its losses.<\/p>\n<p>Ssangyong Motor said it will appeal to the Supreme Court and denied its losses were overstated.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>SEOUL, South Korea\u2014A South Korean appeal court says the layoffs of 153 employees at Ssangyong Motor in 2009 were unjustified &hellip;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":44,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[17],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1579","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","category-news-w","mauthors-the-associated-press"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1579","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/44"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1579"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1579\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1579"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1579"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1579"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}