P and O

[torque2me]

Originally Posted by macafee2

Is there justification to sack 800 to save 2,200?
The pay on P&O cruise ships for the foreign workers is (was) when I asked a worker mind blowingly poor. I raised it on a P&O? forum and got shot down in flames by other members saying it is none of my business


macafee2

I believe P&O Cruises and P&O Ferries are separate companies (owners).

Certainly it is not good practice just to "sack" personnel but the "enhanced" payment for redundancy package might cover the normal "negotiation" term (forget the time line). I can't see how P&O will save enough money to be still be competitive as basically they will only save pension contributions and perhaps NI.

All I can say, and will do myself, is steer well clear of P&O.

Kev

[wraymond]

Just a teaspoonful of reality. This has nowt to do with either UK law nor any other entity that has anything to do with UK responsibility. The only law applying is the registration of the vessel – even when docked – it is still under the jurisdiction of the registering country unless certain crimes warrant investigation by police or border force personnel.

Nor does it have any connection to the EU so far as we are concerned. To somehow, even as a mocking joke, introduce a slant on ‘Brexit’ is fatuous. There are much bigger fish to fry than the nonsense of allying any events to the ‘B’ word.

The only law involved is that which applies to the international registration of the vessel. UK employment law is adequate, indeed a model, of fairness and equality. It might not suit everyone's opinion but it is settled.

[MSS]

Originally Posted by wraymond

Just a teaspoonful of reality. This has nowt to do with either UK law nor any other entity that has anything to do with UK responsibility. The only law applying is the registration of the vessel – even when docked – it is still under the jurisdiction of the registering country unless certain crimes warrant investigation by police or border force personnel....

This I believe to be absolutely incorrect.

Under UK law workers' rights are based on 'the jurisdiction from which they work', which in this case is the UK. It is of course possible that every employment lawyer has misunderstood UK law!

[clf]

Originally Posted by MSS

This I believe to be absolutely incorrect.

Under UK law workers rights are based on 'the juristiction from which they work', which in this case is the UK. It is of course possible that every employment lawyer has misunderstood UK law!

This is how I understood it, (based upon my limited experience of 2 non marine based redundancies). The international registration of the vessel refers to its (the operator) obligations regarding the vessel itself (taxes paid on its revenue being one I believe) and not its crew. The obligations to the crew I believe is based upon where they are personally based, the taxes that they pay and to whom. However, NI employment law is slightly different though to English law - one difference that pops to mind, is the lieu of notice payment should you be made redundant. This is paid in full automatically, with and by the same govt. fund used to pay the redundancy. Whereas in England, I believe, any lieu of notice payment or compensation, is paid from remaining funds of a defunct company. IE that employee becomes a prime creditor - one of the first to be paid, and has to wait for the payment to be released by the liquidator.

I found it strange that the company can make a post redundant whilst refilling it with alternative staff. However, if I recall, a 'reconfiguration' or 'realignment' of a post (its responsibilities and duties, ie changing its terms and conditions, normally more responsibilities with less pay) was enough to allow a company to do this, whilst a company still trades. But only if it was offered to existing staff first. The unions should have been informed of this for negotiation and consideration. However, this may not be required if the company is based elsewhere?

Having agency staff, they are employed on temporary contracts by the agency, and not (in this case) P and O. They then are obligated to the agency, who can withdraw the staff to work elsewhere, or more commonly, when the term of employment comes to an end, the agency staff are then offered employment elsewhere.

[edwardmk]

Employment law and all HR legal issues are so complex, our humble dental surgery has a contract with HR lawyers. We pay a monthly fee to a law company. As long as we run all our issues by them before doing anything, we're insured against losses if we're taken to an industrial tribunal or other court, (as long as we do things the way we've been instructed). I know a guy wearing himself out running his business who needs to hire some help. He refuses to consider hiring anyone as he's too scared of making a mistake and being financially punished. A bit extreme, but I'm fairly confident fear of legal issues is a big disincentive to many small business owners. Not impressed by the management of P&O nevertheless.

[wraymond]

The real management of the company is via Dubai. How many tools are in their box of spanners does anyone think? Naivete springs eternal.

[Phil th Barrow]

Try employing any one in Austria..... Now that is a mine feild.

[stevestrat]

RMT union is claiming the new Indian workers on non UK registered P&O vessels in Dover are being paid $2.38 (£1.81) an hour! Being foreign registered they do not have to abide by the minimum wage. P&O are saying the figure is "inaccurate" but would not comment on what they are being paid.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-60821266

[MSS]

Ref posts 12, 13, 14, 16.....it seems P&O have come to the same conclusion as my post 13!

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-60862933

We shall never be traveling with P&O Ferries again.

[macafee2]

Originally Posted by MSS

Ref posts 12, 13, 14, 16.....it seems P&O have come to the same conclusion as my post 13!

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-60862933

We shall never be traveling with P&O Ferries again.

whilst I understand your sentiment, how does that help the decent people left at P&O?
I feel you are in between a rock and a hard place, you want to support those sacked but in doing so, risk those still employed

macafee2