Salaried employees of Avicola Nord SA call upon the authorities to intervene and solve the conflict that arose at the company. Otherwise, they warn they would stage harsher protests than the present ones, Info-Prim Neo reports. Former and current employees of the Falesti poultry-breeding company continue to come to Chisinau to defend their right to work of which they had been deprived by the new administration of the company, as they say. “We ask the President, the Government, the Parliament and the courts to clarify the crisis situation at Avicola Nord SA that has lasted for a year,” the company’s executive director Ion Smurgun told a news conference on Thursday. “The company was thrown into chaos after the director general and eight employees were dismissed. The chaos must be stopped. The new administration, including the director general Serghei Ballo, do not pay salaries on time, do not provide food for the birds and do not make sure that the breeding conditions are observed,” Smurgun said. A year ago, the company’s director and eight accountants were discharged over fiscal evasion. The decision to dismiss them was appealed to court. As none of the new managers came to the trial, the court reinstated the former employees in their posts. The given employees complain that they are not allowed to enter the company and do not receive salaries. “We are humiliated and imposed to apologize for the protests we organized. We cannot tolerate such an inhuman attitude anymore and demand that the court decision to reinstate us be obeyed. Otherwise, we will resort to harsher protests, including blocking of roads and of the company’s activity,” said former accountant Ana Bordeniuc. According to Ion Smurgun, such a critical situation will lead to the company’s bankruptcy. “During the last six months, the taxes paid by the company to the state have decreased five times. In the past, Avicola Nord SA had been conferred the “Best Taxpayer of the Year” title four times.” The present director general Serghei Ballo said earlier that he complied with the court decision and reinstated the former employees, but had to dismiss them again as they do not meet the professional requirements.