legal action late yesterday.

The company wants the courts to decide once and for all whether the 15 ended their own jobs when they walked out last year in support of a fired shop steward.

Lawyer Mr. Alan Dunch said the move was in response to Government "moving the goalposts'' with its proposed new arbitration law.

"The Government has tried to pull the rug from under us,'' said Mr. Dunch, speaking with Bermuda Forwarders boss Mr. Toby Kempe at his side. "We now consider it necessary to go before the courts to preserve our legal rights.

"Bermuda Forwarders maintain that in walking off the job the men brought their own jobs to an end. I am seeking a declaration from the Supreme Court to that effect. I have little doubt that that is why the BIU has avoided taking the matter to court themselves.

"If the 15 men and the union want to be heard they will have to appear.'' Mr. Dunch said the company had always been prepared to re-employ the 15 men, and had consistently told Government and union of that position. At its meeting with the Premier and Mr. Simmons on Wednesday the company had agreed to assume responsibility for half the men who were still unemployed. But this had been rejected by the BIU.

Commenting on the proposed new trades dispute law, he added: "That act has clearly been brought forward as a band-aid measure with the sole intention of forcing Bermuda Forwarders back to another arbitrary tribunal. That is a position that is unacceptable.

"As a consequence the company has issued proceedings against the BIU in the Supreme Court seeking a declaration that by their acts and own conduct the 15 men in question have brought their own contracts of employment to an end.'' The company had been told by Labour Minister the Hon. Irving Pearman that the new act would not apply to the present dispute.

"The Minister has assured me that the Government will allow the court process to take its natural course with the result of the court process to be considered final and binding.

"We have put the matter before the court, where it always should have been.

We have always taken the view that the impetus should have been on the union to take these steps, but it is only as a result of the Government changing the playing field and moving the goalposts that we have seen it necessary to do so ourselves.''