dry-cleaning businesses at the heart of a battle over union recognition.

The shock move came on the eve of further talks with the Bermuda Industrial Union over holding a ballot at Hamilton Val Cleaners and Paget Dry Cleaners.

But an emotional Mr. Thomson said last night: "Our hearts are saddened for the hard-working, good men and women who work for these two dry-cleaning operations.

Many of these employees had no interest in this dispute. They simply wanted a job and wanted to work.'' And he added: "It is our view that the BIU has little concern for these workers and elected, at our employees' expense and Bermuda's, to embark on their unlawful course of action.'' Mr. Thomson said the three days of disruption and picketing following a wildcat strike had cost his business $22,000 in lost business and he had no option but to close the two shops and put them up for sale.

He added: "Our account is now in an unapproved overdrawn position, we are unable to meet our payroll expenses and our goodwill is crippled.'' Last night BIU president Derrick Burgess refused to rule out further industrial action, saying any decisions were a matter for the members, who will meet next week.

But after an earlier closure threat, Mr. Burgess said that if there were no businesses, there could be no dispute.

The ballot talks with the BIU broke up in a row over the number of employees eligible to vote.

Mr. Thomson insisted all the 30-plus full- and part-time staff at the two shops should vote.

But the BIU insisted on only the 20 or so people employed under the previous owners take part in a ballot.

Mr. Thomson said: "The union want to hand-pick which employees of our two dry cleaners are acceptable to them from our staff of dry cleaners.

"Our position is that all our staff have the inalienable right to be balloted. None of our staff, whether full-or part-time employees, are any less employees of our companies. We will always, no matter who attempts to dictate otherwise, stand up and fight for their rights.'' And Mr. Thomson accused the union of using bully-boy tactics during the ballot talks. He accused BIU president Derrick Burgess of refusing offers of proof of employment at the two firms, refusing third party arbitration and of saying that the only way out of the dispute was to agree with him.

Mr. Thomson further accused union organiser Robert Johnston of threatening that the union resolution would be "back to the streets''.

The latest twist in the dispute comes less than a week after three days of industrial action which crippled bus, ferry and garbage collection services.

The trouble ended when Mr. Thomson agreed to a union ballot at the two shops -- a deal which excluded his other businesses, which were included in the original offer of a ballot.

The row began after Mr. Thomson took over the two shops, which had been unionised -- but all employees had been laid off before he bought the fixtures and fittings.

He later re-employed the former staff in new companies -- under the same conditions as his other businesses, Mailboxes Unlimited and Just Shirts, which included a no collective bargaining clause.

The disruption began after dockworkers refused to handle cargo claimed to be associated with Mr. Thomson's businesses -- a claim later proved wrong -- and the dispute spread.

Cleaners closed Both Mr. Thomson's lawyers and Labour and Home Affairs Minister Quinton Edness pointed out there was nothing illegal in his actions.

Mr. Thomson, however, said pickets and marches by the union were against the law and included essential services. He added that his staff, including those in the businesses unrelated to the dispute, were threatened and intimidated -- as were customers.

But Mr. Burgess last night hit back and accused Mr. Thomson of attempting to present an employee list "padded with ten people''.

He added: "The custom and process in the Country is that when recognition is requested, only the people at the date of that request are allowed to ballot.'' And Mr. Burgess said: "At no time did the union say it was either our way or no way.'' He added that he did not hear Mr. Johnston threaten going back to the streets -- but admitted he heard a challenge on the alleged statement from Mr.

Thomson's advisor, lawyer Alan Dunch.

Mr. Burgess accused Mr. Thomson of deceiving the Country by agreeing "in the interests of the Country'' to the union demand for a two-shop ballot.

He said: "If that was so, he would think about the people he is putting out of a job. He seems to want to blame the union for everything.'' UNIONS UNS