Carl Icahn says no to resolution offer in Trump Taj Mahal argument

ntic City’s Trump Taj Mahal Casino Hotel remains set to close on 10 October, after its owner Carl Icahn rejected a settlement offer from a workers’ union that would have ended a dispute with the casino’s employees.

The Associated Press (AP) reported that Icahn opted not to do business with the Unite Here Local 54 union, which is representing workers that are striking after losing benefits regarding health insurance and pension benefits.

That followed the bankruptcy proceedings the casino went through, beginning in October 2014, when a judge approved the benefit cuts.

Around 1,000 employees of the casino went on strike in July and it was announced earlier this month that the casino will close, which will lead to the losses of approximately 3,000 jobs.

Icahn stated to the AP at the time that he had lost nearly $100m on the casino, stating: "It was a bad bet. How much good money do you throw after bad?"

The terms of the offer would cost Icahn $1.3m more than his last offer, according to the union, with the operator paying for the same healthcare that workers across the rest of the city receive from 1 January 2017.

Paid breaks would be restored, housekeeper work load would return to the industry standard and subcontracting protections for workers would be immediately restored.

Peter Battaglini, a bellman at the casino that has worked there since its opening in 1990, said: “We came up with a proposal that will restore what we have lost, while at the same time giving the company time to rebuild its business.”

Tony Rodio, President and CEO of Tropicana Entertainment, operator of Tropicana Casino, owned by Icahn and which has been managing the casino through a subsidiary since March, said: “This was not a negotiating session. As previously announced, the Taj Mahal will close its doors on October 10 2016.

“Bob McDevitt [President of Unite Here Local 54] and the Taj bargaining committee have no one to blame but themselves for this sad outcome. If McDevitt cared even one iota about the future of the employees he would have allowed them to vote on the proposal we offered five weeks ago based on his recommendations, which we believe could have saved the Taj. But in the end he blindsided us and the employees because closing the Taj served his personal purposes."

McDevitt said: “This labour dispute has been going on for almost two years. The company has saved about $25m in labour expenses, but lost between $150m and $200m in revenues. The proposal we put forward today allows all of us to move forward. Now it’s time to see if this company is interested in moving forward or just wants to punish workers and Atlantic City.”