You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-62613625
So what employment law we have, can be completely ignored and nothing will be done.
The government agency said that, following a "full and robust criminal investigation", there was "no realistic prospect of a conviction".
Clucking bell. It gets worse on a daily basis.
Leave it a few months, brush it under the carpet, look the other way. Useless.
Well there's a model for other orgs to follow. The 'P&O Procedure' will now be getting looked at very closely by some now.
Is it not because of the maritime element? I don't think they broke the law, you'd expect they checked it out pretty robustly first.
I don’t think they broke the law
Can't prosecute if that's the case, law needs changing asap.
Good news for the RAF though!
Mick Lynch has been banging on about Grant Schapps promoting a hire and rehire culture. This won’t help.
Mick Lynch has been banging on about Grant Schapps promoting a hire and rehire culture. This won’t help.
And the next time one of the PM hopefuls bangs on about unions, someone needs to pull this up and explain in crayons of needed why unions exist and get support.
Disappointing but entirely predictable.
Shapps words at the time have been proven to be utter bollocks; not the first time for him.
He's another who couldn't be trusted to run a bath.
As for a change to maritine law - absolutely no chance of that happening.
Dubai ports, p&o ferries, shapps - arseholes all.
A civil investigation is still ongoing.
Not sure whether criminal charges for not following employment law is appropriate.
The ‘P&O Procedure’ will now be getting looked at very closely by some now.
Whaddya mean - it's already policy ferchrissakes 🙁
law needs changing asap.
Not in the best interests of the current administration (well, their donors) so not gonna happen.
It was an independent regulatory authority that did the case handling?
How independent no one on here knows for sure but it's absolutely wrong in it's finding that the case could not be won in court.
I'm guessing because of maritime law of employment is different some how and that put a spanner in the works ?
It's a shitty way to treat people
I’m guessing because of maritime law of employment is different some how and that put a spanner in the works ?
As an ex-seafarer, my understanding was that if you are trading from a UK port, which they obviously were, then UK employment law covered you. Didn't matter what flag the ship was under.
If your ship was UK flagged then UK law applied.
Although it did get complicated as a lot of crew were employed by a overseas shell companies.
My last job as a crew member was nearly 20 years ago, UK flag, UK employer. So no problem.
The rules may of changed since then.
Entirely expected. The maritime element and port of registry of the ships involved basically meaning they could do whatever they liked (I suspect the crew were all under Cypriot or Jersey contracts already).
Was on Pride of Hull on Wednesday night. Very weirdly the officers now appear to be entirely European: Dutch Captain & Engineers, Spanish Purser. Aside from that, the ratings are all from the Philippines (to be expected, not sure this is was ever any different). Food was noticeably crapper. Same menu, just worse. Pride of Rotterdam on the way out showed no change, though we took a picnic so didn’t use the catering.
'don’t think they broke the law, you’d expect they checked it out pretty robustly first'
At the time I recall they did think they'd broken the law, but decided to do it anyway. Turns out they were correct.
Also demonstrates that Mick Lynch is absolutely correct
A civil investigation is still ongoing.
Does that mean there's still a chance of some fines? At least enough to make the whole exercise less profitable? (Never gonna happen).
Did P&O take any furlough Money? The biggest mistake the UK made was not attaching continued employment conditions for employers to furlough payments, other countries apparently made it contingent on not them making redundancies, We were less concerned about policing bastards who wanted to just hang on to a workforce for longer before sacking the lot... Airports and airlines are in a similar position from what I'm told, rehires are being offered less or being replaced with less experienced/qualified personnel...
Hooray for the Tories!
I don’t think they broke the law, you’d expect they checked it out pretty robustly first.
Well P&O's boss seemed very certain that they had broken the law when he was hauled before MPs. Quote:
“There’s absolutely no doubt we were required to consult with the unions. We chose not to do that.”
So why were P&O apparently so relaxed about breaking the law?
Well there might be a clue here:
"The changes that we do propose would leave British law the most restrictive on trade unions in the Western world." - Tony Blair 1997
UK laws covering trade unions and their members are the weakest of any country in the western world, so boasted a former prime minister.
I don't believe that any Tory government has increased the rights of trade unions and their members since then.
“There’s absolutely no doubt we were required to consult with the unions. We chose not to do that.”
Would it have made any difference? Consulting doesn't mean you have to agree, they can still sack the lot afterwards.
They cut out a load of strikes before sacking them all anyway.
AIUI they paid everyone their full notice period, so no one was owed anything they were entitled to.
I’m not sure I understand your post exactly, but I am 100% certain that the UK employment laws are far away from being the weakest in the western world. They’re not even the weakest in Europe. I used to manage several European offices. UK employment rights are certainly less stringent than france for example. But Switzerland seems to have less employee protection than the UK. And the USA is much, much, much weaker than the UK in terms of protecting employees.
We had an office in Malaysia, which out lived its purpose, but it was so expensive to sack staff there that we had to keep it open. Most people left and got better paying jobs elsewhere, but one guy just stayed. No pay rise for 10 years, but no real work either. Eventually we went bust and that forced the issue! It was cheaper to keep a foreign division going inc lawyer / accountant fees than to sack one staff member....
I’m not sure I understand your post exactly, but I am 100% certain that the UK employment laws are far away from being the weakest in the western world. They’re not even the weakest in Europe. I used to manage several European offices. UK employment rights are certainly less stringent than france for example. But Switzerland seems to have less employee protection than the UK. And the USA is okmuch, much, much weaker than the UK in terms of protecting employees.
Not necessarily my opinion, I was quoting a former UK prime minister who as a qualified barrister I would expect to understand such legal matters.
The claim did surprise me but Blair was adamant that this was the case.
Whatever the precise truth I have no doubt the reality is that the UK has extremely weak employment protection laws when compared to other comparable countries.
The whole ethos in the UK is that everything is stacked in the employers favour, which results in the cavalier attitude towards employment legislation and allows Tony Blair to comfortably play down UK employment/trade union rights.
In answer to the question why P&O so blatantly ignored UK employment legislation.