P&O Ferries Scandal

[Monitor Gold 10]

I've had enough of all the handwringing about this. I get the impression that a number of people who are commenting- and I don't mean just here- are not working in roles seen or described as "Low" or "Semi Skilled".

What is often referred to as the "Race to the Bottom" has been going on for some considerable time; it seems largely ignored as the industries affected are not seen as glamorous...

I doubt this will stop here.

Please remember that Employment Law has not yet been diluted...

I cannot help but wonder if prejudice(s) related to the outdated class system in the UK is part of a wider culture that leads to this sort of decision being made and considered acceptable; this will have been discussed extensively- at Director Level-before action was taken...

Mentioning the Class System may be uncomfortable for some- if so- please tell me what makes one who identifies as "Middle Class" superior to one considered "Working Class"?

I certainly feel that my role is considered dispensable. The fact that I have had to campaign for Facilities and Covid-19 Secure Measures speaks volumes... The fact that my colleagues and I have been spat on, beaten and verbally assaulted would appear to suggest that there are some deep seated problems...

I'm not saying that the EU is perfect; I can say that the response when asked what I do for a living is positive; I'm not seen as a loser; waster or someone that cannot do anything else. I also believe that in general, conditions and pay and Industrial Relations appear to be considerably better.

Recent Labour and Conservative governments are equally responsible as are those who just choose to let stuff go rather than respond.

As an aside, I worked in recruitment and training; new intakes were supposed to meet with TU Representatives prior to employment- so that they could learn about what a Trade Union does.

It was often delayed, so many did not get the opportunity to join. I did what could to the apparent chagrin of Management...

Think about that for a bit.

Today it is a Ferry Service. Tomorrow it will be a Supermarket Chain or some other industry considered stable.

I do not intend to cause offence. I will not apologise for the strong wording and difficult questions however.

 

[MikeMA]

It would have happened here, Brexit or not. The difference is not "in EU" vs "not in EU" but strength of TU representation in UK vs Europe.



No obvious evidence that DP World or Sultan Ahmed bin Sulayem has donated anything.
https://www.datasmoothie.com/@datasmoothie/who-funds-the-conservative-party/

Not directly related to the P&O Ferries issue, at least not as far as I can tell, but DP World are heavily involved in delivering the Tory post Brexit Freeport programme, which wouldn't be happening in the EU. They are making many £millions out of the UK tax payer.

 

[Spraggons Den]

WTF. I think what they have done is illegal - you can only make someone redundant if their role no longer exists which is not the case here as contractor staff are now doing the exact same jobs. Also firms intending to enact a programme of redundancies are supposed to engage in a HR1 process which starts with a period of consultation with the unions and the workers. I'd rather swim to France than use these pigs.

 

[ks.234]

Not sure how P&O have got away with this. The Law is unambiguous; a company making 100 or more employees redundant must consult with staff at least 45 days before the first redundancy takes place
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1992/52/section/188

I hear various MPs calling out P&O, but why is the government not taking them to court for breaking UK legislation?

And as other people have pointed out, why is our government doing business with a Company such as DP World, who break UK legislation?

 

[Sue Pertwee-Tyr]

Not sure how P&O have got away with this. The Law is unambiguous; a company making 100 or more employees redundant must consult with staff at least 45 days before the first redundancy takes place
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1992/52/section/188

I hear various MPs calling out P&O, but why is the government not taking them to court for breaking UK legislation?

From what I read upthread, the penalties for not complying are trivial (£5000 fine). If so, they’ll just factor it in as a cost of doing business.

 

[ciderglider]

Not sure how P&O have got away with this. The Law is unambiguous; a company making 100 or more employees redundant must consult with staff at least 45 days before the first redundancy takes place
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1992/52/section/188

The same thoughts occurred to me. A lawyer on ITV news just now suggested that P&O will be fined, but won't be forced to undo their actions.

 

[ks.234]

From what I read upthread, the penalties for not complying are trivial (£5000 fine). If so, they’ll just factor it in as a cost of doing business.

Not read that, if so, our legislation is not worth the paper it’s written on

 

[Spraggons Den]

P&O must have some kind of government approved licence to operate in a maritime environment - why not threaten its removal?

 

[Sue Pertwee-Tyr]

Not read that, if so, our legislation is not worth the paper it’s written on

Exactly. I find it hard to believe it is the case, but if it's correct it's not even a deterrent for a small business, let alone a multinational.

 

[Sue Pertwee-Tyr]

P&O must have some kind of government approved licence to operate in a maritime environment - why not threaten its removal?

It does seem to me that this behaviour is strongly suggestive that P&O, and its parent company DP, wouldn't pass a reasonably strict 'fit and proper person' test, if something like that was required.

I certainly hope this calls into question DP's participation in the freeport schemes.

 

[ks.234]

As pointed out by someone else upthread, (@Cav ?) P&O must also have consulted the Secretary of State 45 days ago.

Have we heard from Mims Davies yet?

PS. Mims Davies has always voted for more restrictive regulation of trade union activity.

 

[gavreid]

Not read that, if so, our legislation is not worth the paper it’s written on

Never has been. People have a misplaced belief in the strength of the law when it comes to employment. P&O will take the slap on the wrist and won't be forced to re-engage the workers and they'll be others queuing up to follow suit if they get away with it.

This will take occupations, a willingness to break the law and strong pickets at the docks to turn around. Now where's Charmer Starmer...

 

[ks.234]

Exactly. I find it hard to believe it is the case, but if it's correct it's not even a deterrent for a small business, let alone a multinational.

If I have read the legislation correctly, employed can apply for a “protective award” which would pay them their wages for a period of up to 90 days. Getting that award will of course be a different matter.

 

[cooky1257]

Same scum who own Man City.
They have Gov by the balls, you could see their main concern was the 10 day suspension of services, they are ‘ partners’ in Tory Freeport plans and we’ve just been kissing their arses for more oil. The country is shot to shit,.

 

[ks.234]

Never has been. People have a misplaced belief in the strength of the law when it comes to employment. P&O will take the slap on the wrist and won't be forced to re-engage the workers.

This will take occupations and strong pickets at the docks to turn around.

Yes, this is very true. I know from my own experience as a caseworker that even if you point out to an employer that they’re breaking the law, the response is a self assured smirk that says ‘yeah, but what you going to do about it?’, because the truth is that Trade Unions are so restricted now that they can be in trouble for maladministration of members money if the take a case to court and lose. Trade unions have to be pretty certain of winning a case before they are willing to go to court

 

[ks.234]

Same scum who own Man City.

Sanction the bastards, take away all their trophies, all Man City fans are…etc etc

 

[gavreid]

Yes, this is very true. I know from my own experience as a caseworker that even if you point out to an employer that they’re breaking the law, the response is a self assured smirk that says ‘yeah, but what you going to do about it?’, because the truth is that Trade Unions are so restricted now that they can be in trouble for maladministration of members money if the take a case to court and lose. Trade unions have to be pretty certain of winning a case before they are willing to go to court

Congratulations! I was a case worker for years too it's a very tough role.

 

[Cav]

As pointed out by someone else upthread, (@Cav ?) P&O must also have consulted the Secretary of State 45 days ago.

Have we heard from Mims Davies yet?

PS. Mims Davies has always voted for more restrictive regulation of trade union activity.

It was not me, but the guidance is here: Making staff redundant: Redundancy consultations - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)

Wonder how P&O will manage 800 unfair dismissal claims...

 

[ks.234]

We have a Secretary of State for Unemployment who by law should’ve been consulted about these redundancies 45 days ago, but she has been silent.

Why is she not being asked if she was consulted, and what she is doing about it?

What is the point of a Secretary of State who cannot uphold the law?

 

[Sue Pertwee-Tyr]

If the government has failed to protect workers by weakening protections (unions, feeble employment law, etc) then perhaps people have to take matters upon themselves. Boycotts of companies, boycotts of sister companies or businesses in the same ownership, that sort of thing. Our economic power as consumers is perhaps the only effective weapon we have left. What we need is for somebody like Led By Donkeys, or GLP, or similar, to start compiling lists of who owns what, and put the squeeze on. Last time I looked, it wasn't illegal to decide not to spend money, even under the new anti-protest legislation.