National News P&O ferries

Apparently P&O are owned by a Saudi company.
Hopefully our PM’s hands aren’t on this! 😕
 
Given that replacement crews were already on the quayside, I think this pre-dates Boris' trip by several months.
 
I'm sure with redundancy it means the jobs no longer exist? There will be a legal expert on here who will know more.

The fact they cancelled their sailings today to announce this is pretty terrible too. Probably screwed up a few travel plans so they can save a few quid.
 
Probably decided that the payout to the dismissed staff will be less than the consequences of not doing it.

Employers are legally required to consult workers during a statutory notice period before making them redundant no matter who they are, so those 800 people will have stonewall unfair dismissal claim IMHO.

I also recall any employer dismissing more than 100 people has to give the Government 45 days notice, remember that from our Estates & Facilities TUPE farce.
 
I'm pretty sure you don't make an individual redundant you make the post, that is no longer required, redundant. There has been no suggestion that any of posts are no longer required so the term redundant shouldn't be being used. P&O will have to pay them off handsomely if they don't want industrial tribunals awarding large sum to the poor folk who are now out of work.
 
Last edited:
QR said:
I'm pretty sure you don't make an individual redundant you make the post, that no longer required, redundant. There has been no suggestion that any of posts are no longer required so the term redundant shouldn't be being used. P&O will have to pay them off handsomely if they don't want industrial tribunals awarding large sum to the poor folk who are now out of work.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, the sums involved for unfair dismissal are no longer as large as they were.
Maximum award is £544 a week then length of employment and other factors click in, then there is the cap of £90k or 52 weeks salary whichever is lower.
Then there is the Tribunal Basic Award on top of the above which is around £16k.

Absolutely appalling action by P&O - hope the repercussions are long and painful.
 
Essexyellows said:
Probably decided that the payout to the dismissed staff will be less than the consequences of not doing it.

Employers are legally required to consult workers during a statutory notice period before making them redundant no matter who they are, so those 800 people will have stonewall unfair dismissal claim IMHO.

I also recall any employer dismissing more than 100 people has to give the Government 45 days notice, remember that from our Estates & Facilities TUPE farce.
Click to expand...
There's no requirement to tell the Government, but they have to have a 45 day consultation period with representatives of those being made redundant.

Another company on the boycott list - not that it will make any difference to them
 
P&O ferries took serious money off our gov/ taxpayers in the form of furlough payments during the pandemic

I read somewhere earlier (cant find it now!) That P&O ferries shareholders have shared something like £280m in recent years, apparently? ...... wish i could find the link as I may be mis remembering on this point

P&O ferries havent dismissed their french (and other EU countries) based crews - they are covered by EU employment rights- ONLY 800 British (English!) crew members have been subjected to disgraceful industrial relations by the UAE owned P&O ferries management

Im admittedly being overly cynical in wondering if our glorious pm has had a hand in this while visiting Saudi and UAE?
 
stokeu said:
There's no requirement to tell the Government, but they have to have a 45 day consultation period with representatives of those being made redundant.

Another company on the boycott list - not that it will make any difference to them
Click to expand...
We’ll see, a lot of the population are taking more ethical stances these days and social media campaigns can be powerful things - just look at the amount of businesses U-turning over staying in Russia over the past week.
 
stokeu said:
There's no requirement to tell the Government, but they have to have a 45 day consultation period with representatives of those being made redundant.

Another company on the boycott list - not that it will make any difference to them
Click to expand...
To quote the official guidance to employers:
It is a criminal offence not to notify the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills of proposed redundancies.
This must be done:
● at least 30 days before the first dismissal takes effect where the employer proposes to dismiss 20-99 employees at one establishment within 90 days or less
● at least 45 days before the first dismissal takes effect where the employer proposes to dismiss 100 or more employees at one establishment within 90 days or less
 
Under the Employment Rights Act 1996, redundancy arises when employees are dismissed because:
●● the employer has ceased, or intends to cease, to carry on the business for the purposes of which the employee was so employed; or
●● the employer has ceased, or intends to cease, to carry on the business in the place where the employee was so employed; or
●● the requirements of the business for employees to carry out work of a particular kind has ceased or diminished or are expected to cease or diminish; or
●● the requirements of the business for the employees to carry out work of a particular kind, in the place where they were so employed, has ceased or diminished or are expected to cease or diminish.
 
OUFCGav said:
To quote the official guidance to employers:
It is a criminal offence not to notify the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills of proposed redundancies.
This must be done:
● at least 30 days before the first dismissal takes effect where the employer proposes to dismiss 20-99 employees at one establishment within 90 days or less
● at least 45 days before the first dismissal takes effect where the employer proposes to dismiss 100 or more employees at one establishment within 90 days or less
Click to expand...
So either they've committed an offence or the Government knew 45 days ago (or quite possibly the Government knew AND they've committed an offence):unsure:
 
OUFCGav said:
Under the Employment Rights Act 1996, redundancy arises when employees are dismissed because:
●● the employer has ceased, or intends to cease, to carry on the business for the purposes of which the employee was so employed; or
●● the employer has ceased, or intends to cease, to carry on the business in the place where the employee was so employed; or
●● the requirements of the business for employees to carry out work of a particular kind has ceased or diminished or are expected to cease or diminish; or
●● the requirements of the business for the employees to carry out work of a particular kind, in the place where they were so employed, has ceased or diminished or are expected to cease or diminish.
Click to expand...
So unless P&O are intending to cease or diminish their UK ferry operations, then they're in breach of employment law too...

Which can't be the case if they've just replaced them with agency workers. And fair play to the chap interviewed last night who was one of the agency workers bussed in to Hull. When he realised what was going he he got off the bus, got on the train and went home👏
 
OUFCGav said:
Under the Employment Rights Act 1996, redundancy arises when employees are dismissed because:
●● the employer has ceased, or intends to cease, to carry on the business for the purposes of which the employee was so employed; or
●● the employer has ceased, or intends to cease, to carry on the business in the place where the employee was so employed; or
●● the requirements of the business for employees to carry out work of a particular kind has ceased or diminished or are expected to cease or diminish; or
●● the requirements of the business for the employees to carry out work of a particular kind, in the place where they were so employed, has ceased or diminished or are expected to cease or diminish.
Click to expand...
None of those are the case here though, are they - the work will still exist, but will apparently be done by contract or agency staff. I believe it used to be unlawful to make people redundant in those circumstances but is now allowed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom