“The decision to terminate employment arises from the court ruling that ordered the company to cease operations,” stated André Pais in a written message, refraining from further comments when contacted.
On Sunday, the Journalists Union (SJ) revealed that TiN had announced the collective dismissal of its 80 employees on Friday, July 25, asking them to “continue working without pay.”
On July 18, the court did not approve TiN’s insolvency plan, despite it being sanctioned by 77% of creditors.
Luís Delgado, TiN’s sole shareholder, plans to challenge the decision, having 15 days from the date the plan was rejected to file an appeal.
The court — which decided not to approve the plan even though no creditor or stakeholder requested such action — determined that the insolvency plan’s provision that “no actions for debt collection or executions against the guarantors of operations, where the now insolvent party is the holder, may be initiated” violates “the legal framework for personal guarantees.”
In not approving the insolvency plan, the judge terminated “the debtor’s administration of the insolvent estate, assumed since 06/09/2025, as indicated in the request submitted on 06/04/2025,” and declared “the suspension of liquidation as determined by the creditors’ meeting held on 01/29/2025” ended.
The judge further ordered that “the closure of the debtor’s activity be officially communicated to the Finance Department” and “the continuation of the proceedings with the immediate seizure and liquidation of the debtor’s assets.”
This “is an outcome that has been unfolding over months and whose real dimensions must be assessed in all aspects, from journalistic to economic, financial, political, and even judicial,” commented the SJ on Sunday regarding the employees’ dismissal.
The SJ criticized the “incomprehensible and intolerable stance” of TiN’s insolvency administrator, who personally delivered the dismissal notices to about 80 employees, requesting them “to continue working to keep the publications alive, arguing for revenue generation, despite no guarantee of compensation being given.”
“The SJ fears that a sale is being prepared at a bargain price, without ‘the inconvenience and bother’ of people to whom salaries and rights must be granted,” warned the union.
It explained that the notice period for dismissal varies from 30 to 75 days, depending on each employee’s tenure, and “in essence, people owed their June salary, and soon July’s, as well as holiday and meal allowances for May and June, were asked to keep working without assurance of remuneration.”
This is “to maintain a business we suspect will be sold at the last minute,” the SJ warned.
The union cautioned that “those who agree to keep working may be assisting in saving a deal whose details are unclear at present.”
Additionally, “having lost all rights as employees with the now-announced dismissals, there is no guarantee they will be integrated into a company that may eventually emerge,” the SJ added.
