Brian
Eating fat, staying slim
Stuart, The odds on this from a tory govt are very low. Unfortunately, many people dish out to others what they themselves deserve.
P&O Ferries Scandal
- Thread starter gavreid
- Start date
Stuart Frazer
pfm Member
I agree, Brian. We should takeaway their free-trade port status at London Gateway too. We just need to strike-back at them.
Bob McC
Living the life of Riley
It appears that Johnson’s claim today that P&O broke the law is in fact wrong.
The section of the law he referenced was changed by Grayling.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-60849957
The section of the law he referenced was changed by Grayling.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-60849957
kensalriser
pfm Member
Surprised to hear the PM is not well briefed.
lagavullin10y
pfm Member
He is well briefed but cannot not lie.
Sue Pertwee-Tyr
Accuphase all the way down
He is briefed, but doesn’t pay attention, preferring to busk it.
TheDecameron
Unicorns fart glitter.
Enfield boy
pfm Member
Thick skinned, thick headed and thick as thieves.
Copperjacket
pfm Member
P&O boss Peter Hebblethwaite asked if he is a 'shameless criminal:
https://www.bbc.com/news/av/uk-politics-60862883
https://www.bbc.com/news/av/uk-politics-60862883
Tony L
Administrator
Sky News currently framing questions to the head of the Nautilus union suggesting that The Minister Currently Known As Grant Shapps may have known about this since Nov last year after a meeting in Dubai.
PS Shapps is a person of zero honesty or integrity IMHO, so there is no way of getting to the truth of any allegation. He is a serial liar just like Johnson.
PS Shapps is a person of zero honesty or integrity IMHO, so there is no way of getting to the truth of any allegation. He is a serial liar just like Johnson.
kensalriser
pfm Member
Investment from abroad aka selling off British assets and infrastructure to foreign interests.
Not sure how UK employment law works, but to be honest the defense here sounds a little bit like me trying to justify theft or VAT fraud because "I couldn't really afford to buy inventory and if I didn't do it then I would have had to close my shop".
palindrome
Thru a hedge, backwards and forwards.
@CarrotMan
Actually, I'd suggest it was more like the thief justyfying his theft by declaring he doesn't live in this country so has not done anything wrong and, as such, can't be prosecuted.
John
Barrymagrec
pfm Member
Worked for Edward Colston.
Nick_G
pfm Member
P&O Ferries boss admits firm broke law by sacking staff without consultation (Guardian)
'P&O Ferries broke the law by choosing to sack 800 workers without consultation because “no union could accept our proposals”, the firm’s boss has admitted.
Peter Hebblethwaite told a Commons hearing on Thursday into last week’s firings that the firm was halving its costs under a “new operating model”, which meant international seafarers would be paid less than minimum wage'
'P&O Ferries broke the law by choosing to sack 800 workers without consultation because “no union could accept our proposals”, the firm’s boss has admitted.
Peter Hebblethwaite told a Commons hearing on Thursday into last week’s firings that the firm was halving its costs under a “new operating model”, which meant international seafarers would be paid less than minimum wage'
messengerman
pfm Member
Late to this one but yup.
I think there is confusion about "breaking" the law. This is not a criminal thing. The sackings were evidently unlawful (the process was not the process legally prescribed) but that doesn't mean that the workers are not sacked nor does it mean they will be re-instated. Nor does it mean directors will be fined or imprisoned or debarred. Instead it means that the courts will (if asked) order that compensation is paid to cover the wages those workers would've earned over the time it would've taken for the employer to follow a lawful process. ie however long it would've taken to warn, consult and consider alternatives to redundancy. So maybe something like a months pay. Probably not more than two. There are no hard and fast guidelines. Unless the effected workers are pregnant in which case the compensation awarded can (and will) be a lot more.
P&O may have figured that this is cheaper than following lawful prescribed practice or perhaps (and I've experienced this) the entitled foreign owners simply had no patience with European style employment law and insisted local management ignore it. Or both those things.
Either way breaking the law should never be cheaper than following it and while we can rightly criticise management the government also need to look seriously at reforming the penalty arrangements for breaches.
Is this new? Certainly never used to be expressed like this. Typically payouts for unlawful dismissal (process fail) cover only wages that would've accrued over the course of a lawful process (so weeks rather than months). Unfair dismissal claims (and redundancy pay) are capped at (roughly) 1-1.5 weeks pay for every complete year you've worked there (depending on age) . Only the first £544 in weekly pay counts. And only the first 20 years of service. So if you're paid more or worked longer than that it is ignored in the calculation. Regardless the total is never going to be anywhere near a years pay. Max possible is about £16k but only if you earn at least £25k, are near retirement age when sacked and worked there for 20 years. Unless proscribed discrimination is at play in which case claims can be unlimited.
The rules for ships might be more lax (I don't know).
Regardless disposing of (non-pregnant) people in the UK is far too cheap whether or not you do it legally.