P&O Ferries suspend all ship movements

[John52]

CurtainRaiser - 2022-04-01 11:01 AM

Where does the "support from the EU" come into this?

 

Good Question

I look forward to Grumblin changing the subject (lol)

[CurtainRaiser]

Gremlin - 2022-04-01 1:18 PM

 

As regards specific EU help, I forgot to add that the EU allowed Ireland to provide State Aid to help the redundant mariners. There is a good article on the Special EU State Aid exemption in the Irish Independent 23 November 2005

 

The Scheme was supposed to level the playing field so that employers did not have to pay out more to employ Irish workers - but the bosses just used the funds to get rid of them instead and employed cheap agency labour anyway.

 

 

So the EU made specific changes to SUPPORT the workers and the Irish government used its sovereignty to allow the company to use it in a different way.

[CurtainRaiser]

Freedom of movement and residence for persons in the EU is the cornerstone of Union citizenship and countries accepted this as a benefit of membership. Indeed it is thing that I and a lot of others regret losing the most.

[CurtainRaiser]

Gremlin - 2022-04-01 3:30 PM

 

CurtainRaiser - 2022-04-01 2:41 PM

 

Freedom of movement and residence for persons in the EU is the cornerstone of Union citizenship and countries accepted this as a benefit of membership. Indeed it is thing that I and a lot of others regret losing the most.

 

Somehow that does not surprise me. Classic “I’m all right Jack” attitude. What the Irish Ferries employee’s regret most, I suspect, is losing their jobs.

 

But that won’t worry you one jot will it. You’re not bothered about others at all.

 

You kind of missed the point but then you generally do.

 

So you voted against Brexit but never agreed with FOM? Did you not say previously that you "selfishly voted to remain to enjoy your FOM"?

[CurtainRaiser]

Irish Mariners didn't lose their jobs as identified in my original link.

 

EU employment law actually strengthened workers rights with TUPE legislation etc. As did the Irish government's involvement.

 

Anyway you have contradicted yourself so many times in this thread that I can't keep track of which argument you are trying to make so there is little point continuing, you are like the worst pub bore and best avoided.

[Guest pelmetman]

CurtainRaiser - 2022-04-01 6:09 PM

 

Irish Mariners didn't lose their jobs as identified in my original link.

 

EU employment law actually strengthened workers rights with TUPE legislation etc. As did the Irish government's involvement.

 

Anyway you have contradicted yourself so many times in this thread that I can't keep track of which argument you are trying to make so there is little point continuing, you are like the worst pub bore and best avoided.

 

Said the forum Bore when caught spreading FAKE news (lol) (lol) (lol) ..........

[CurtainRaiser]

pelmetman - 2022-04-01 6:34 PM

 

CurtainRaiser - 2022-04-01 6:09 PM

 

Irish Mariners didn't lose their jobs as identified in my original link.

 

EU employment law actually strengthened workers rights with TUPE legislation etc. As did the Irish government's involvement.

 

Anyway you have contradicted yourself so many times in this thread that I can't keep track of which argument you are trying to make so there is little point continuing, you are like the worst pub bore and best avoided.

 

Said the forum Bore when caught spreading FAKE news (lol) (lol) (lol) ..........

 

So go Devid what is fake?

[Guest pelmetman]

CurtainRaiser - 2022-04-01 6:38 PM

 

pelmetman - 2022-04-01 6:34 PM

 

CurtainRaiser - 2022-04-01 6:09 PM

 

Irish Mariners didn't lose their jobs as identified in my original link.

 

EU employment law actually strengthened workers rights with TUPE legislation etc. As did the Irish government's involvement.

 

Anyway you have contradicted yourself so many times in this thread that I can't keep track of which argument you are trying to make so there is little point continuing, you are like the worst pub bore and best avoided.

 

Said the forum Bore when caught spreading FAKE news (lol) (lol) (lol) ..........

 

So go Devid what is fake?

 

"Irish Mariners didn't lose their jobs as identified in my original link."

 

Worra Muppet (lol) (lol) (lol) ..........

[Bulletguy]

I'm reposting the following relevant reports I posted over a week back which have got blindsided in taking this thread down a warren of rabbit holes.

 

 

P&O Ferries sackings: Change in law signed off by Chris Grayling meant P&O didn't need to tell govt, maritime lawyer says

 

A change in the law signed off by former Conservative minister Chris Grayling cleared the way for P&O Ferries to legally sack 800 staff last week without telling the government, a leading maritime lawyer has told Sky News.

 

Legislation to protect employees in the UK was amended by Mr Grayling in 2018 so that the secretary of state does not have to be notified of mass redundancies on ships registered overseas.

 

Kevin Barnett, head of employment at marine law specialists Lester Aldridge LLP, told Sky News that Mr Grayling's amendment removed the need to notify the government.

 

"The amendment states the notification must be made to the competent authority of the state where the ship is registered, instead of the secretary of state," he said.

 

He said Mr Kwarteng's insistence that he should have been notified of the sackings in advance is "incorrect."

 

https://news.sky.com/story/p-o-ferries-sackings-change-in-law-signed-of-by-chris-grayling-meant-p-o-didnt-need-to-tell-govt-maritime-lawyer-says-12572920

 

 

P&O Ferries owner to benefit from at least £50m of UK Freeport scheme

 

The Dubai-based owner of P&O Ferries is expected to benefit from at least £50m of UK taxpayer support as part of the government’s freeport programme championed by the chancellor, Rishi Sunak.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2022/mar/21/po-ferries-owner-to-benefit-from-at-least-50m-of-uk-freeport-scheme

 

 

Why did P&O ferries axe UK jobs but keep its French workers?

 

French workers enjoy greater protection than their British colleagues thanks to the Code du Travail (labour code).

 

The Code du Travail is an enormous doorstep of a document that covers everything from eating lunch at your desk to having sex with a stranger on a business trip – and how bosses can get rid of their workers.

 

https://www.thelocal.fr/20220318/why-did-po-ferries-axe-uk-jobs-but-keep-its-french-workers/

 

 

It doesn't take much to connect the dots regarding the above reports but to bring the matter up to date and show the nonsense from Kwarteng and Shapps was nothing other than flimflam all along, not to mention the empty "threats" made by Johnson the circus clown who only last week table thumped as he told parliament: “We will take them to court, we will defend the rights of British workers … P&O plainly aren’t going to get away with it.”

 

Yesterday the union said;

 

“P&O has gotten away with it. There’s no fine, there’s no legal action, there’s only words and hot air.”

 

Questions are also being asked as to why the Foreign Office made a £548m investment in DP World ports in Africa using aid money.

[Brian Kirby]

This may interest: https://tinyurl.com/yddybxhn

 

It is a Personnel Today interview with Tim Tyndall, a partner at Keystone Law, a legal practice specialising in employment law.

 

Make sure to follow the link to the "Seafarers (Transnational Information and Consultation, Collective Redundancies and Insolvency Miscellaneous Amendments) Regulations 2018", and have a read of the Regulation (which is quite brief , albeit with somewhat tortured language).

 

Look at how selective the amendment is in the way it snips away specific aspects of employment protection from seafarers such as those employed on P&O ferries. Note also the date of the regulation, two years after the Brexit vote. Note also that this is the Regulation introduced by Chris Grayling as Transport Sec.

 

Now try to imagine what inspired Chris Grayling to wake up one morning consumed by the necessity to introduce that surgical set of amendments which, four years later, enabled P&O to sack 800 of its seafarers more or less without penalty.

 

One might almost imagine that someone from P&O might have been whispering in Grayling's ear. It is clear this episode had been well planned in advance - if only from the very speedy arrival of the new crews following the announcement of the redundancies.

 

But could it really have been planned that far in advance? Should there now be some examination of who was lobbying Grayling? It does look like a truly miraculous coincidence, don't you think?

[Bulletguy]

Gremlin - 2022-04-01 7:55 PM

 

Brian Kirby - 2022-04-01 7:10 PM

 

This may interest: https://tinyurl.com/yddybxhn

 

It is a Personnel Today interview with Tim Tyndall, a partner at Keystone Law, a legal practice specialising in employment law.

 

Make sure to follow the link to the "Seafarers (Transnational Information and Consultation, Collective Redundancies and Insolvency Miscellaneous Amendments) Regulations 2018", and have a read of the Regulation (which is quite brief , albeit with somewhat tortured language).

 

Look at how selective the amendment is in the way it snips away specific aspects of employment protection from seafarers such as those employed on P&O ferries. Note also the date of the regulation, two years after the Brexit vote. Note also that this is the Regulation introduced by Chris Grayling as Transport Sec.

 

Now try to imagine what inspired Chris Grayling to wake up one morning consumed by the necessity to introduce that surgical set of amendments which, four years later, enabled P&O to sack 800 of its seafarers more or less without penalty.

 

One might almost imagine that someone from P&O might have been whispering in Grayling's ear. It is clear this episode had been well planned in advance - if only from the very speedy arrival of the new crews following the announcement of the redundancies.

 

But could it really have been planned that far in advance? Should there now be some examination of who was lobbying Grayling? It does look like a truly miraculous coincidence, don't you think?

 

Grayling can hardly tie shoe laces let alone think as far ahead as you suggest. As for those around him - maybe.

 

But the precursor to what P&O did was set out in 2005 with the Irish Ferries dispute.

 

That set up Irish Ferries business model on a cheaper agency labour model and as I previously set out - this enabled Irish Ferries to undercut P&O, Stena and DFDS by a considerable margin.

 

Grayling may have had a role in setting up such a c0ck up - after all it is what he is good at/ best known for - but the precursor is the expansion of the EU in 2004 and the EU’s FOM that set this ball rolling back in 2005.

Legislation to protect employees in the UK was amended by Chris Grayling in 2018 who was then Secretary of State for Transport. So there is no "may" about it at all. He headed the dept and it would have been signed off by him. I posted this information over a week ago and again today.

 

Forget Irish Ferries and the other flimflam you trot out, thats just deflectionary BS. P&O fired 800 British employees because 1) UK government dismantled legal protection in 2018 and 2) the trade union had no clout.

 

The very reason they didn't fire any of their French employees was because they couldn't because their government enshrined in law, solid protection for employees.

[John52]

Gremlin - 2022-04-01 7:55 PM

Grayling can hardly tie shoe laces let alone think as far ahead as you suggest. As for those around him - maybe..

 

Like those who hired him part time for £100k a year?

Why would anyone pay Failing Grayling that much money *-)

[Bulletguy]

Gremlin - 2022-04-01 10:31 PM

 

Bulletguy - 2022-04-01 9:17 PM

 

Gremlin - 2022-04-01 7:55 PM

 

Brian Kirby - 2022-04-01 7:10 PM

 

This may interest: https://tinyurl.com/yddybxhn

 

It is a Personnel Today interview with Tim Tyndall, a partner at Keystone Law, a legal practice specialising in employment law.

 

Make sure to follow the link to the "Seafarers (Transnational Information and Consultation, Collective Redundancies and Insolvency Miscellaneous Amendments) Regulations 2018", and have a read of the Regulation (which is quite brief , albeit with somewhat tortured language).

 

Look at how selective the amendment is in the way it snips away specific aspects of employment protection from seafarers such as those employed on P&O ferries. Note also the date of the regulation, two years after the Brexit vote. Note also that this is the Regulation introduced by Chris Grayling as Transport Sec.

 

Now try to imagine what inspired Chris Grayling to wake up one morning consumed by the necessity to introduce that surgical set of amendments which, four years later, enabled P&O to sack 800 of its seafarers more or less without penalty.

 

One might almost imagine that someone from P&O might have been whispering in Grayling's ear. It is clear this episode had been well planned in advance - if only from the very speedy arrival of the new crews following the announcement of the redundancies.

 

But could it really have been planned that far in advance? Should there now be some examination of who was lobbying Grayling? It does look like a truly miraculous coincidence, don't you think?

 

Grayling can hardly tie shoe laces let alone think as far ahead as you suggest. As for those around him - maybe.

 

But the precursor to what P&O did was set out in 2005 with the Irish Ferries dispute.

 

That set up Irish Ferries business model on a cheaper agency labour model and as I previously set out - this enabled Irish Ferries to undercut P&O, Stena and DFDS by a considerable margin.

 

Grayling may have had a role in setting up such a c0ck up - after all it is what he is good at/ best known for - but the precursor is the expansion of the EU in 2004 and the EU’s FOM that set this ball rolling back in 2005.

Legislation to protect employees in the UK was amended by Chris Grayling in 2018 who was then Secretary of State for Transport. So there is no "may" about it at all. He headed the dept and it would have been signed off by him. I posted this information over a week ago and again today.

 

Forget Irish Ferries and the other flimflam you trot out, thats just deflectionary BS. P&O fired 800 British employees because 1) UK government dismantled legal protection in 2018 and 2) the trade union had no clout.

 

The very reason they didn't fire any of their French employees was because they couldn't because their government enshrined in law, solid protection for employees.

 

This price cutting is possible only because back in 2005 the Irish Ferries were able to fire 543 Irish mariners exactly as P&O did and replace them with cheaper agency staff.

It was described as "something for all parties - employer, unions, government and, indeed, the dispute-resolution institutions themselves - in the proposals drawn up by the LRC, following the prior intervention of the NIB, which set the parameters for the settlement.

 

The parties involved were Irish Ferries (the employer), employees, SIPTU and the Seamen’s Union of Ireland (SUI) (the other union representing members in Irish Ferries), and the Labour Relations Commission https://www.workplacerelations.ie/en/ who brokered the deal after intervention from the National Implementation Body, a high-level Irish industrial relations 'trouble-shooting' body.

 

The lower wage levels do not apply to existing employees, only new entrants to Irish Ferries who were paid the Irish national minimum.

 

Naturally they are free to apply to any companies offering a higher rate of pay which after at least three years experience (for a Bosun), they could do so.

 

I must admit to being surprised at such a high rate of pay back in 2005 for Bosuns at 42,000 per year. Fully qualified industrial electricians at my workplace earned nowhere near that amount.

 

From your post;

 

“For a family in a car travelling Dover to Calais return in April P&O was last night offering £175 compared to DFDS’s £172 and Irish Ferries £135.

 

To make comparisons we need to use the same dates and time parameters for each company otherwise it's a meaningless statement. I always did cross comparisons hence the reason I found DFDS always won out over P&O. However I preferred using Dunkerque to Calais so I stayed with DFDS regardless.