You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
One of the 'replacement' crews is presently on Five Live describing what happened yesterday.
Its absolutely unbelievable!
They were told they were crewing a boat, but had absolutely no idea what was going on. They rock up to the dock and the security guards all file on to escort all the existing crew off the boat and install the new one. They had no idea that that was the plan. The only people who knew were the security team.
He obviously didn't then go on to crew the boat, and pointed out what a crazy idea it would be to try and sail a boat with an entirely new crew who hadn't even set foot on it before
would have delivered on his promise to strengthen employment law and ban fire and rehire practices.
Because centuries of democracy tells us that once elected the government always makes good on its promises?
It's as relevant to what is as if Gavrilo Princip hadn't had a decent throwing arm.
Sure things would have been different but you can't in any objective way say how.
Employment lawyers seem to be saying that this may well be illegal. If so, presumably P&O know that, and have priced compromise agreements or tribunal claims into their decision.
Reports this morning are P&O are offering "enhanced" severance which would strongly suggest they know they shouldn't have done what they did and how they did it.
Redundancy notices are being issued, with the P&O apparently having recognised the unlawfulness of its actions with comments that enhanced compensation will be paid.
P&O’s offer of “enhanced” redundancy packages indicates that it may have “recognised the unlawfulness of its actions”, according to Tata.
Employment lawyers seem to be saying that this may well be illegal
It does all smack of someone in DPW just not understanding that you really just can't do this sort of shit in the UK, and makes me wonder if some (perhaps US where this sort of shit is legal) executive has just decided "**** it, this what I want, make it happen"
This is going to make a chapter in every business handbook titled "How to handle 800 redundancies really badly, while at the same time trash any reputation your business may have had"
kelvin - your point is?
But why only the UK staff?
See the above comments about the likely reaction from unions elsewhere, its not that employment law protected French or Dutch staff, its [probably] that DPW value their property significantly more than their staff.
(also French elections kick off in a few weeks so there would be a very very hard fast response from govt. you'd have to be a complete moron to think now would be a good time to poke that bear)
It does all smack of someone in DPW just not understanding that you really just can’t do this sort of shit in the UK, and makes me wonder if some (perhaps US where this sort of shit is legal) executive has just decided “**** it, this what I want, make it happen”
This is going to make a chapter in every business handbook titled “How to handle 800 redundancies really badly, while at the same time trash any reputation your business may have had”
Yeah, the hope here is that UK PLC make life as complicated for P&O in the future to put down a marker, as they've clearly focused on the UK element as they know how they'd have been treated if they'd done this in France or Holland.
Reality unfortunately will more than likely see this drag out a while, get into the mid section of the papers and allow those in power to avoid doing anything about it, DPW and all it's subsidiaries, links, etc will have ways into a lot of those in key positions in the UK, so will be more than happy to follow this approach.
But why only the UK staff?
Because they either thought that if we do this to the French there's a good chance they'll sink the ships, or it's just that some finance executive has put the 800 redundancies wholly in the UK business unit on a spreadsheet, sent the whole thing off in an email to be authorised and then idly wondered what he'll have for his tea.
For me probably the latter is more accurate given my experience of senior management practices around the world
I get the feeling there is a lot more to this story. Does anyone have a link to some details rather than just sack and rehire? Note I am not saying that it is a good practice but it is essential to see the path that has been trodden and general date of the situation.
I get the feeling there is a lot more to this story
or it’s just that some finance executive has put the 800 redundancies wholly in the UK business unit on a spreadsheet, sent the whole thing off in an email to be authorised and then idly wondered what he’ll have for his tea.
I'm get the feeling nick is right and there's much less to this story.
Because centuries of democracy tells us that once elected the government always makes good on its promises?
You doubt if Labour had won in 2019 things would have been very different? Strengthening employment law, giving more power to unions and banning fire and rehire was the top priority for an incoming Corbyn govt. You can delude yourself that it would have made no difference if it makes you feel better, but in reality what we saw yesterday was the direct result of the actions of all those who did their utmost to prevent a Corbyn govt. I hope they're proud of themselves.
I think this is very simple as well - DP in Dubai are busy doing some asset stripping and creative finance work and their attitude to employees will not be very good - simply an expense to be removed. The idea that employees are your best asset are just applicable to these companies
Assuming you've not won the lottery every week since its inception daz I'm saying I doubt your ability to knoe what the future looked like before it didn't.
their attitude to employees will not be very good
Listening to the accounts of people on Five Live at the moment. that would appear to be the understatement of the year.
People who'd been employed for 30 years were escorted off the ship by security staff like criminals. Staff who had cabins that they basically lived in for weeks at a time had all their possessions bundled into bin bags and thrown off the boat.
On what planet does any employer think that this is an acceptable way to treat your staff?
On what planet does any employer think that this is an acceptable way to treat your staff?
Regretfully the vast majority of the middle East, the Indian subcontinent, Africa, presumably the vat East.
I imagine a lot of the (v. wealthy) west thinks its OK, they just know they can't do it to be honest.
Assuming you’ve not won the lottery every week since its inception daz
Your ridiculous analogy only works if the lottery company announced in advance which 6 numbers they intended to choose. The more serious point is that 800 people, and surely many more over the next couple of years, are now out of a job thanks to idiots and a***holes in the labour party who put their prejudices and personal ambitions before the interests of UK workers.
Arent P&O owned by the IAE sovereign wealth fund
maybe they thought brexit would let them get away with this here but not in France or just that French more likely to strike/ stick up for workers
also
https://twitter.com/carltonreid/status/1504772078167339015
The more serious point is that 800 people, and surely many more over the next couple of years, are now out of a job
Well I can certainly agree with that bit
in reality what we saw yesterday was the direct result of the actions of all those who did their utmost to prevent a Corbyn govt.
I think the hysterical ranting directed at the wrong people earlier betrays a certain self-awareness of that. The dark art of deflection.
The lady doth protest too much, methinks
It might well be simple but with the limited information it's hard to tell.
It might well be simple but with the limited information it’s hard to tell.
Very true, but lacking any real info (and that is unlikely to change) the only thing I can really point you at is the old axiom "never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."
“This is going to make a chapter in every business handbook titled “How to handle 800 redundancies really badly, while at the same time trash any reputation your business may have had”
+1. The chapter conclusion is likely to end with a group action from former employees because you can’t make 800 roles redundant and then hire 800 new people to do exactly the same roles. It’s not a genuine redundancy and P&O will learn that the hard / expensive way*
One other point here is that for the 800 people who’ve lost their jobs with literally no notice the experience for many will be devastating. Anyone who has been through redundancy / loss of employment will know that it’s something that never really leaves you - more so if you experience it more than once. Even if they “win” in court many of those impacted will now spend the rest of their careers with the constant background worry of “will it happen again?”.
* caveat: if the crew are on employment contracts entered into under the law of Jersey this may not be correct. Likewise if they are on Maritime contracts, or maritime contracts entered into under Jersey Law, or maritime contracts tied to the Vessel - which is flagged to an EU member state.
Open seacocks, go home for tea. We really need to be more French in many ways.
Can I just ask though, where were the RMT when P&O decided to offer their employees off-shore contracts?
The lady doth protest too much, methinks
Well, quite. It's very illustrative that there's been no response to my point. It's got bollocks all to do with brexit or Corbyn, and everything to do with the tories being in power. I despair for all the people who are going to lose their jobs and suffer thanks to the petty and selfish actions of the labour right. They are going to have a lot of blood on their hands before they have the opportunity to fix the damage they caused. And even then I think we all know they won't fix it.
“never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.”
100% with you on that.
No response to your point? You are aware that your theory that everything is the fault of the 'labour right' and their grand conspiracy to undermine the anointed one is absolutely mental, right?
and everything to do with the tories being in power.
And yet every indication is its probably illegal and that if it isn't its because they've engaged in some significant chicanery to ensure the contracts don't fall under UK jurisdiction where (despite the colour of govt we have) you can't legally do these things.
It's got bollocks all to do with who is in power here and everything to do with the belief that people are of less value than profit and the global system which allows companies and individuals to act according to that belief.
We really need to be more French in many ways.
It would require electing a government which was committed to abandoning neo-liberalism and anti-trade unionism.
Tony Blair proudly boasted that under his premiership the UK would still have the most anti-trade union laws in the Western world. EU or no EU. He was probably right.
"The changes that we do propose would leave British law the most restrictive on trade unions in the Western world." - Tony Blair
And yet every indication is its probably illegal
Well if it's illegal we can look forward to P&O being prosecuted and the 800 people getting their jobs back or being compensated accordingly. It also means it's got bugger all to do with brexit or Corbyn. I presume also we'll see the tory govt suspending P&O's licence to operate pending the outcome of legal action?
I presume also we’ll see the tory govt suspending P&O’s licence to operate pending the outcome of legal action?
And Air freight the food that P&O bring into the UK here using Boris' wallpaper fund? I appreciate the current lot are a pretty odious bunch but I can't see even then starving the voter base to make a point.
I presume also we’ll see the tory govt suspending P&O’s licence to operate pending the outcome of legal action?
Mate... DPW, P&O's parent company are instrumental in the establishment of the Tory's post-Brexit obsession of freeports. The government may wring their hands but they won't do a damn thing with regards to any sanctions on them. I'm pretty certain that there are also plenty of Tory Brexiteers who see this kind of thing as their preferred approach to workers rights, and the whole reason for leaving the EU
It also takes some serious mental gymnastics to conclude, given this, that this is nothing to do with Brexit. Of course it is!
[Edit] deleted [/edit]
Sorry I shouldn't be engaging on this, we all agree on the only part that's actually relevant to the thread or important in any way which is
The more serious point is that 800 people, and surely many more over the next couple of years, are now out of a job
The government may wring their hands but they won’t do a damn thing with regards to any sanctions on them.
Well that's my point. Someone up there was saying it's nothing to do with the tories when it's 100% to do with the tories being in power. And who do we have to thank for that? The labour right and that Lib Dem woman who's name I've already forgot.
I'm trying to imagine the recruiters for the crewing agency. "Yes we would like to offer you a job - on even worse terms than the guys who all got fired yesterday"
@dangeourbrain - You may want to have a read of this. It gives a pretty clear direction the architects of Brexit had for workers rights in this country once we are 'free of the EU' and its what we're seeing in action with P&O yesterday
Whether its presently legal or not isn't really the point. The point is that P&O clearly see the Brexity UK government as fellow travellers. I'm pretty sure that this feeling is privately reciprocated, no matter their public pronouncements on the issue. This is the future of employment in the UK if this lot have their way, and they are now no longer 'constrained' by the EU
I’m trying to imagine the recruiters for the crewing agency. “Yes we would like to offer you a job – on even worse terms than the guys who all got fired yesterday”
Regretfully there are plenty of people in the UK for whom that's a better offer than the status quo, there are quite literally billions worldwide.
Well if it’s illegal we can look forward to P&O being prosecuted and the 800 people getting their jobs back or being compensated accordingly.
Nobody has suggested anything was criminal have they? So nobody will be prosecuted. Employment tribunal could force them to be reinstated though which would be amusing - they'd have lost the reputation, lost the revenue for however long they take to change staff, probably have to pay the crewing agency compensation for cancelling the contract, and be worse off with a less motivated workforce and upset customers.
Well if it’s illegal we can look forward to P&O being prosecuted and the 800 people getting their jobs back or being compensated accordingly.
Remember that with our employer biased law that means a long legal fight (tribunal backlog is measured in years) and at best you are likely to get paid your statutory notice + 3 months pay and to get that usually have to show that you exhausted company internal grievance procedures first and if you've been there less than 2 years you're probably only 'entitled' to be paid your notice pay.
In the meantime some other capitalist offshore money laundering focused company will probably use your need for a job to pay your rent to undercut some others who are currently in dispute over pay and conditions (see my way earlier post about the Svitzer tug boat crews and Lerwick ports).
If I thought the government would cancel their contracts then there might be some justice but I very much doubt it as half the current lot have their eyes too focused on the cash they might get not their constituents. The right wing nutter MP for Dover's complaints are like the farmer saying they didn't understand that the butcher was going to slaughter their animals for meat (spoiler the commons report shows that she didn't even get the number correct in the commons yesterday, or only selectively quoted the Dover employees to make it look less bad).
Regretfully there are plenty of people in the UK for whom that’s a better offer than the status quo, there are quite literally billions worldwide.
There are not billions who are qualified as ships officers/crew. I'm not sure if crew operating Scotland-NI require the right to work in the UK (same question may apply on international routes if they don't live aboard, but I can imagine it may be different). Passengers will expect that the crew in customer facing roles speak English (on routes to France I presume some speak French etc too). Even if you don't need right to work in the UK I assume that most get off the boat each night so will be living in SW Scotland or NI when off duty - which automatically means your cost of living expectations are based on UK costs not "back home". I'm sure they will fill the roles, but I suspect it will be harder than they thought when their sales guy thought he'd landed deal of the century. And if they are treated crap and any good, they'll leave soon enough - churn is expensive.
All this talk of reputational damage and restitution according to law is fantasy.
The fines they'll pay for abusing employment laws will be a pittance.
There will be loads of folk willing to accept the shittier contracts.
The British public don't care who drives the boats their wine arrives on, or carries their car to the summer sun.
People deluded if they think this has anything to do with Brexit. Happened many times in manufacturing, in a less brazen fashion, pre Brexit.
It’s deregulation and it is happening globally.
People have a hard time realising that overseas CO’s / stakeholders work to different playbooks (especially ME / Asia). This will be a first push of many to see what they can get away with in the EU / UK. Not much risk to them if they fail, pay a fine, meh, they have plenty of money.
All the French have going for them is a talent for protest.
I’m really hoping we see reports of disabled ferries in Dover harbour next week when they try and resume services. Passwords changed on critical log-ins like navigation systems, the odd electronic control card missing, hydraulic systems topped up with water/sand, superglue in locks and keys chucked in the harbour. I’m sure there are many creative ways to really **** up a cross channel ferry.
Lets be brutally honest here, unless it affects you directly as someone who is caught up in it, or their family, this time next week it will be old news and will be forgotten by the general public.
Easter holidays coming up soon, I bet any "solidarity with the workers" will dissolve once the rivals firms boats are filled and there is no other choice left.
And no , i'm not trolling,
There are not billions who are qualified as ships officers/crew
Sorry yes, blt of a broad statement for the specific case at hand but I'm still not convinced they'll struggle to crew the boats.
I assume that most get off the boat each night so will be living in SW Scotland or NI when off duty
If I were to guess I'd expect new contracts to be much more aligned with global commercial shipping and the associated pay and living [on board] standards, but that would be an absolute guess.
Passengers will expect that the crew in customer facing roles speak English (on routes to France I presume some speak French etc too).
For a £10 reduction in fare I suspect most wouldn't care if 95% of the on board staff didn't speak at all.
surely the net number of people needed to man their boats hasn't changed, they've just found some people who are willing to get paid less. So whilst 800 people are out of work, another 800 suddenly have jobs? or more likely i guess, a bunch of those 800 will now sign up to lower paid contracts with the new company at a lower rate of pay.
I think that the transport unions sometimes shoot themselves in the foot. They're very effective at negociating pay rises (by having a strong hold over the qualified labour force), however that introduces more incentive for companies to do stuff like this, as otehr people people are willing to drive boats etc for less money. I guess its the same with train driver salaries etc..
All this talk of reputational damage and restitution according to law is fantasy.
The fines they’ll pay for abusing employment laws will be a pittance.
Once again - its not a criminal matter, they won't pay any fines.
@sillysilly - there will be a Brexit contribution although I'm not sure Brexit made it possible - but Brexit means a lot of Irish freight now goes direct to continent rather than via the UK; and of course the complications in shipping stuff to from EU which may mean its not worth the hassle - so that will be part of the economic situation that P&O found themselves in.
@revs1972 - 100%. if treating staff and customers like shit was something that affected people's holiday buying decisions Ryanair wouldn't have a business. My brother was tweeting away last night how he'd never get on a P&O ferry every again. I can't really any time he's ever got on a ferry in the first place!
The more serious point is that 800 people, and surely many more over the next couple of years, are now out of a job thanks to idiots and a***holes in the labour party who put their prejudices and personal ambitions before the interests of UK workers.
So nothing whatsoever to do with all the anti-worker legislation implemented by various Tory administration but actually the fault of some bloke that never got elected?
Never mind, pretty sure there'll be a fair few of the 800 who voted Tory, so at least they got what they voted for.
Once again – its not a criminal matter, they won’t pay any fines.
Daft question, but there's requirement to inform the secretary of state before you remove over 100 people. Is that not a statutory requirement so subject to enforcement by not-a-tribunal?
So nothing whatsoever to do with all the anti-worker legislation implemented by various Tory administration
Which legislation? Given there has been a labour govt that could have changed that legislation if it predated 97.
The current lot binned the planned changes to prevent fire and hire but that's not the same as implementing or creating new.
People deluded if they think this has anything to do with Brexit.
Wrong I’d say.
Brexit has reduced GB—EU trade
Brexit has re-routed Eire-EU trade to avoid GB
Brexit has reduced GB-NI trade
Brexit exacerbated GB—EU C-19 travel restrictions
All perhaps marginal but your statement doesn’t stand up as written.
Statutory consultation period for more than 100 redundancies used to be 90 days. It was cut to 45 days by David Cameron and his bleating Lib Dem cronies who helped screw down workers rights.
I'm sure the Lib Dems will bleat that they softened the proposal but I seem to remember that they help the Business Secretary post at the time and it's Ed Davey's mugshot on the 2011 document describing the consultation on changes. One second thoughts stuff the Tories we know they're almost pantomime villain bad the Lib Dems reduced workers rights about 10 years ago!
All perhaps marginal but your statement doesn’t stand up as written.
What doesn't stand up is the claim PO were able to sack 800 people without any notice because of brexit.
Nor am I aware that PO have claimed that their callous action is in any way connected to brexit. But well done for listing all the excuses that you think a company, which is ultimately owned by the dictator of a country with no democratic institutions and no tolerance of dissent, could use.
Statutory consultation period for more than 100 redundancies used to be 90 days...
Fair point, that's one.
Not of course that they've given the 45 days in this instance either mind
There's nothing illegal about sacking people on the spot as long as they pay them thier notice period up front.
It's basically garden leave.
It fricking sucks but as long as they do the legal minimum, businesses do that all the time. Makes the shareholders happy.
Well they'd already ditched the only service I used so I hope they go bust.
Happens in IT all the time.
I struggle with long sentences but I am sure there will be a solid rescue bid from Seaborne Freight any day now 😉
If you can stomach Kevin Spacey, a film called 'margin call' is well worth a watch..
It's about the 2008 financial crash but it illustrates how senior managers of huge companies operate.
He obviously didn’t then go on to crew the boat, and pointed out what a crazy idea it would be to try and sail a boat with an entirely new crew who hadn’t even set foot on it before
This is rather scary. To try to drive a boat and manage it with a crew who have not had proper induction is kind of worrying....
While I am disappointed for the 800 who have lost jobs and now need to fight for some rights, they and their union will be fighting that one.
And to summarise: the crew may have been on dodgy non-UK contracts, nothing of note has changed in employment law (yet) as a consequence of Brexshit, and large employers regularly shaft over employees for a few quid on share price next year...
Nobody has suggested anything was criminal have they? So nobody will be prosecuted
It has been suggested that P&O directors could face prosecution. Apparently it is a criminal offence not to follow redundancy consultation law.
Former company directors in two separate organisations have been charged with criminal offences relating to their failure to follow redundancy consultation rules.
Failure to do so is a criminal offence and the employer will be liable on summary conviction to a fine. Since 12 March 2015, the fine is unlimited (before that date the maximum fine was £5,000).
I'm not buying the Brexit argument; how come the number of trucks through Dover has been similar over the last few years?
Just seems like a bad business decision to me. Re-hiring 800 staff might save a bit in the short-term and give you more flexibility, but it won't change the marketplace for cross channel ferry services.
Why not differentiate yourself from DFDS/Irish ferries et al rather than slash costs. It would encourage repeat business and build your brand.
Even truck drivers appreciate good service and value for money.
how come the number of trucks through Dover has been similar over the last few years?
It hasn't, from a peak in 2017 it's been declining:
https://www.doverport.co.uk/about/performance/
the RMT told their members to vote for brexit as it would protect UK maritime jobs from foreigners. :/
the RMT told their members to vote for brexit as it would protect UK maritime jobs from foreigners. :/
Have you got a link? If that is what the RMT told their members it will be in writing somewhere.
I attended a pre-referendum public debate where one of the speakers was from the RMT executive committee, he made no such claim during the whole debate.
I'm guessing it's something that you chose to make up?
Edit : I assume that you added the link afterwards as it wasn't obvious when I wrote my post. Nothing in that link provides evidence that the RMT told their members to vote for brexit as it would protect UK maritime jobs from foreigners.
First paragraph in Klunk's link seems to explicitly state RMT will be advising members to vote leave?
What am I missing?
What am I missing?
The bit that says "the RMT told their members to vote for brexit as it would protect UK maritime jobs from foreigners."
Edit : Many RMT members are actually "foreigners". It is not a "British only" trade union.
ernie - RMT advised their members...
https://www.rmt.org.uk/news/rmt-sets-out-six-key-reasons-for-leaving-the-eu/
Leave the EU to end attacks on seafarers and the offshore workers
The EU has promoted undercutting and social dumping leading to the decimation of UK seafarers. The same is now happening in the offshore sector. EU directives also require the tendering our public ferry services.
Seems clear to me from Klunk's link. "end attacks' is the same as "protect". Whichever way you word it the RMT were useful idiots to the Brexiters and Conservatives in the Brexit debate.
Edit, I added brixiters because the Conservatives only became Brexiters after the referendum and in subsequent election campaigns
It doesn't matter how many times you post the link it still doesn't say that the RMT told their members to vote for brexit as it would protect UK maritime jobs from foreigners.
It did Ernie, did, didn't, did didn't, didn't.
Just let people read it and make up their own minds eh.
useful idiots to the Conservatives in the Brexit debate.
Keep that nonsense for the Brexit thread.
Ernie's mad debating skilz at work once again.
The news reports suggest that most of the staff made redundant were earning £20-£30 an hour plus on costs - with the more senior roles obviously earning much more - in the range of £100-£150 an hour plus on costs.
The new crew - employed on maritime contracts will be paid £2-3 an hour - which is a pittance but unfortunately in line with other roles that are vessel based.
P&O seem to have reduced the wage bill by > 90% and are probably saving 40% on top of that in on costs as well. All of which probably gives them close to the £100m saving they need to achieve in order to avoid making further losses on that business unit.
And before we get too exercised about this - pretty much all cruise ship workers are employed the same way and there will be a fair few singletrackers who’ve travelled that way with little or no thought for the crew.
ernie - the RMT advised their members to vote for brexit; they did not, in the linked article, say that would protect maritime jobs from foreigners.
It's possible that some of their members and officers held/expressed that view privately.
The RMT document states '... undercutting and social dumping' without explaining what they mean; those words could easily be read to support klunk's comment.
Part of a wider trend it would appear.
@edukator I said 'similar' not the same. It's declined by a few hundred thousand, but not dropped off massively like passenger numbers have due to CV19. My point is that trucks are still moving to/from the UK and EU mainland, regardless of Brexit
P&O seem to have reduced the wage bill by > 90%
I think it was widely assumed that P&O did it to save on the wages bill, I can't see a justification because other employers are also known to pay pisspoor wages.
£100m divided by 800 is £125,000.
That's average annual salary, per person.
Or £60 per hour each, assuming 40hrs/week.
No way all 800 staff were getting half that, or it costs £30 to keep them onboard. As if!