P&O Ferries - mass redundancies without consultation

[LNW-GW Joint]

Did they offer that deal originally? I had the impression it was only offered once they discovered the legally dubious nature of what they had done.

I think the enhanced redundancy terms were in the original letter from the CEO to the affected crew, in lieu of consultation
To get it they also have to sign up before a deadline (March 31) and to non-disclosure agreements.

It looks like P&O Ferries can only be prosecuted under Cypriot (or other flag state) law, not by the UK.
The affected crew can also take legal action in the flag state.

As reported, Shapps wants UK minimum wages paid while ships are in UK waters and ports.
That's only half-way to what the unions want and would be very difficult to administer.
It would also impact other ferry operators, including foreign ships in UK waters/ports - also cruise ships based or calling at UK ports.
The unions also want existing terms and conditions honoured, whatever they are, presumably being better than minimum wage.

And Radio 4 just reported that 430 crew have already signed up to the severance offer.

 

[Wolfie]

More problems for P&O. So sad, NOT.... Methinks HMG are determined to make an example of them....

Sky News: Another P&O ferry 'Pride of Kent' being detained after failing inspection.

Another P&O ferry 'Pride of Kent' being detained after failing inspection

The Maritime and Coastguard Agency takes action against a second ship while a replacement crewmember on a P&O Ferries vessel tells Sky News there is an atmosphere of "panic" aboard.

news.sky.com

 

[Gloster]

I am afraid that I do not share the optimism that HMG are determined to make an example of P&O. There is lots of huffing and puffing at the moment, and various vague threats, but nothing much is likely to happen in the short term. But it makes them look as though they care for blue-collar workers, rather than big business, and distracts from their poor (read: abysmal) performance as regards a number of other current matters of concern. In a month or two it will be largely forgotten and the government can go back to falling over backwards to help large companies do what they want.

 

[BayPaul]

Given how railway staff are highly paid for the sort of jobs they do, whereas ferry staff very low paid, I think they need better unions

That aside, I wonder what the effect on ferries of railway levels of pay would be? Captain only operation* and a lot of automation, I guess? You can only "staff high" in the way ships do if people are cheap.

* Not really, but far fewer crew.

Railway unions work because there is no choice for the employer but to employ union staff. One of the main reasons for the decline in numbers of British Seafarers is union activity in past decades, ship owners just move flags, or go bust when outcompeted by other companies. This is effectively the final play of this trend. Minimum wage legislation really won't help the unions, it'll still be much cheaper to employ non-union seafarers at UK minimum wages than pay RMT rates.

The Nautilus union, which is for officers is much more successful in retaining jobs, largely because it is very non-militant. As a result there is a high demand for UK officers, who are paid very good wages.

Captain only operation is allowed... If carrying up to 12 passengers on vessels less than 24 metres long on inland waterways. Anything else requires a full crew determined by the safe manning document for each ship. Typically for a large ship this would include a Captain, Chief Officer, 2nd officer, Chief Engineer, 2nd Engineer, 3rd engineer, Electrician, Cook and around 6 Able Seamen and a similar number of engineer ratings. A passenger ship would need a larger crew, mainly determined by the emergency response organisation - command and control tam, at least two fire teams, passenger muster teams, medical team, survival craft prep teams etc. There also need to be adequate numbers of qualified people to man the survival craft - typically 5 for a lifeboat and 1 for a raft, plus crew to launch it. On a typical large ferry that probably adds up to 80 people.

I would also be concerned about the fire risk that piling all that flammable stuff up on the car deck might pose.

The car deck is designed for flamable stuff (cars, lorries, hazardous goods etc). It is surrounded by fireproof bulkheads and fitted with goid detection and a very efficient drencher system. Not ideal, but really not a major concern.

 

[philthetube]

It looks like P&O Ferries can only be prosecuted under Cypriot (or other flag state) law, not by the UK.
The affected crew can also take legal action in the flag state.

As reported, Shapps wants UK minimum wages paid while ships are in UK waters and ports.
That's only half-way to what the unions want and would be very difficult to administer.
It would also impact other ferry operators, including foreign ships in UK waters/ports - also cruise ships based or calling at UK ports.
The unions also want existing terms and conditions honoured, whatever they are, presumably being better than minimum wage.

And Radio 4 just reported that 430 crew have already signed up to the severance offer.

I don't think it would be that difficult, ferries operating in the uk should pay the average minimum wage of the two countries they serve, we are only talking Ireland France and Spain so should be possible.
This would level the playing field between operators.

Cruise ships would be more difficult, but that boat has already sailed, no pun intended.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

A Guardian report suggests the UK minimum wage legislation for seafarers has been on the statute book for some time, but ferries were specifically exempted.

P&O Ferries is not the first in UK waters to hire low-cost workers

The government has long turned a blind eye to widespread pay abuses by operators working out of UK ports

www.theguardian.com

Tackling minimum pay, the one unequivocal, clear promise of action by Shapps, has actually been welcomed by P&O Ferries to “level the playing field”. The RMT backs enforcement, but points out it is irrelevant to the immediate crisis: “We don’t want the P&O staff who were on far more than minimum wage to come back with a 60% pay cut,” a spokesperson says.
Moreover, it is a curious hill for Shapps to now plant a flag: minimum wage legislation was extended in October 2020 to most seafarers working in UK waters, regardless of where a ship was registered. But ferries were not included.
Tim Tyndall, employment partner at Keystone Law, says: “The framework of the law is already in place. But while this has been referred to as a ‘loophole’ in the legislation, it is not a loophole at all,” Tyndall says. “The exclusion of employees on ferry services was quite deliberate.”

 

[Typhoon]

A Guardian report suggests the UK minimum wage legislation for seafarers has been on the statute book for some time, but ferries were specifically exempted.

Interesting, particularly the opinion of the lawyer. Shapps will talk tough until the matter goes away but do nothing (or next to nothing). On whose watch was the legislation changed (and the exclusion happened), I wonder? (rhetorical question)

I'd be interested to know this squares with Johnson's mission for a "High-wage, high-skill economy", except to get people from overseas to do the work if they can possibly wangle it.

 

[Grumpy Git]

I'd be interested to know this squares with Johnson's mission for a "High-wage, high-skill economy",......

Another rhetorical question.

BJ is the master of talking the talk but never walking the walk.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

The 9 actions promised by Grant Shapps in the Commons today will not alter the outcome at P&O Ferries.
Legislation will take time to enact, and asking port authorities to police the wage policies of ferry operators will not be easy.
Minimum wage corridors with EU partners might work, but will also take time to agree.
Meanwhile, Irish Ferries and now P&O Ferries will continue with their low-cost model.

 

[JamesT]

Interesting, particularly the opinion of the lawyer. Shapps will talk tough until the matter goes away but do nothing (or next to nothing). On whose watch was the legislation changed (and the exclusion happened), I wonder? (rhetorical question)

I'd be interested to know this squares with Johnson's mission for a "High-wage, high-skill economy", except to get people from overseas to do the work if they can possibly wangle it.

My understanding is that the minimum wage didn't apply to seafarers at all before the 2020 changes.

Though the government webpage on this seems a little inconsistent: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/minimum-wage-seafarers-and-other-people-working-at-sea

Exemptions: Innocent passage and transit passage
Vessels entering UK territorial waters as part of an international voyage, are considered to be under innocent passage, and are not affected by UK minimum wage legislation.

Examples include:

a ship sailing from one international port to another that happened to pass through UK territorial waters
ferry services operating between the UK and mainland Europe (including the Republic of Ireland)
vessels calling at a British port as part of a longer international, multi-port voyage

But later on it gives this example:

Example 4: Ship is registered outside the UK. Seafarer is ordinarily resident in the UK and majority of work is performed within the UK.

A seafarer is employed on a ferry company operating between Port A in Great Britain and Port B in France.

The ship that the worker is working on is NOT flagged to the UK
the majority of the employment is performed within the UK
the worker will be classed as ‘ordinarily working’ in the UK and is entitled to NMW for all work performed

 

[Typhoon]

My understanding is that the minimum wage didn't apply to seafarers at all before the 2020 changes.

Though the government webpage on this seems a little inconsistent: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/minimum-wage-seafarers-and-other-people-working-at-sea

But later on it gives this example:

So I understand. However, the mission is for a 'High Wage' economy, which would be (much) higher than the minimum wage. The P & O seafarers were almost certainly on a decent wage until a couple of weeks ago, partly because of the nature of the work. I was just pointing out that yet again an ambition just consists of warm words.

 

[Gloster]

According to the BBC News website the one member of staff who did not accept the redundancy settlement is suing P&O for £76 million for unfair dismissal, racial discrimination and harassment. The money would be used to create a trust to campaign for better wages and terms and conditions for seafarers, and to outlaw ‘hire and fire’ for seafarers and more widely. Good luck to him, but I reckon the government will find a way to push it aside until it is forgotten.

(As an aside: what will be the attitude of those who normally become outraged every time they hear of a claim for racial discrimination be now that a white man is claiming to be discriminated against.)

 

[GusB]

According to the BBC News website the one member of staff who did not accept the redundancy settlement is suing P&O for £76 million for unfair dismissal, racial discrimination and harassment. The money would be used to create a trust to campaign for better wages and terms and conditions for seafarers, and to outlaw ‘hire and fire’ for seafarers and more widely. Good luck to him, but I reckon the government will find a way to push it aside until it is forgotten.

(As an aside: what will be the attitude of those who normally become outraged every time they hear of a claim for racial discrimination be now that a white man is claiming to be discriminated against.)

Link here:

Ex-P&O Ferries chef sues for unfair dismissal

John Lansdown is the only seafarer out of the 800 sacked at short notice to take P&O to a tribunal.

www.bbc.co.uk

A former P&O Ferries chef is suing the company and its chief executive, claiming unfair dismissal, racial discrimination and harassment.
John Lansdown is the only seafarer to take legal action after 800 staff were sacked without notice last month.
In his tribunal claim he accuses P&O of treating him unfavourably as he is British and eligible for minimum wage.
P&O Ferries said job cuts were "categorically not based on race or the nationality of the staff involved".
The company "needed fundamental change to make it viable - we knew this decision was the only way to save the business", P&O said in a statement.
Mr Lansdown is seeking financial compensation as well as exemplary damages of up to £76m to "deter" P&O Ferries or its parent company DP World from acting the same way in future.
He would use the money to create a new trust to campaign for improved wages and terms and conditions for seafarers and to outlaw "fire and hire" practices in the industry and more widely in the UK, according to his claim.
Mr Lansdown, 39, told the BBC he wanted to get "justice" for all his former colleagues who felt they had "no choice" but to settle their cases.
"This is not just about me," he said. "799 of my seafaring family have lost their livelihoods, their way of life, their homes for half the year and it's about the bigger picture." ...

I did wonder if the one person who refused the P&O settlement would prefer to have their day in court rather than just accepting a payment to go away and shut up.

I admire him for standing up to the corporate bully, but I have my doubts as to whether he'll be successful. I wish him the best of luck, though.

 

[Typhoon]

According to the BBC News website the one member of staff who did not accept the redundancy settlement is suing P&O for £76 million for unfair dismissal, racial discrimination and harassment. The money would be used to create a trust to campaign for better wages and terms and conditions for seafarers, and to outlaw ‘hire and fire’ for seafarers and more widely. Good luck to him, but I reckon the government will find a way to push it aside until it is forgotten.

(As an aside: what will be the attitude of those who normally become outraged every time they hear of a claim for racial discrimination be now that a white man is claiming to be discriminated against.)

There was an interview with him on BBC local news (for Kent), seemed a genuine bloke (see #403 for link) He's worked for them for 23 years, so he's got a lot to lose.

Simon Calder is also reporting that:

Ahead of one of the busiest weekends of the year, DFDS Ferries has warned thousands of passengers booked with P&O Ferries that it will have no space for them on Friday, Saturday or Sunday.

This is hardly going to do P & Os reputation any good (what there is left of it) if potential passengers can't get to their accommodation. I don't suppose insurers will pay up. Might damage DFDS as well.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/travel/ne...sedgntp&cvid=1cedebbdc6f04c228c0c632ea4cad0be

 

[zwk500]

This is hardly going to do P & Os reputation any good (what there is left of it) if potential passengers can't get to their accommodation. I don't suppose insurers will pay up. Might damage DFDS as well.

I doubt DFDS will suffer too much reputation damage, it's not like they've scalped P&O customers or refused to put services on with ships sitting idle. Fundamentally they've only got so many ships and it was never going to be enough to replace the required capacity of the P&O fleet.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

I doubt DFDS will suffer too much reputation damage, it's not like they've scalped P&O customers or refused to put services on with ships sitting idle. Fundamentally they've only got so many ships and it was never going to be enough to replace the required capacity of the P&O fleet.

There's a few ferries sitting around that they could hire for extra capacity, and there's also 800 experienced crew immediately available who could operate them as well....

 

[zwk500]

There's a few ferries sitting around that they could hire for extra capacity, and there's also 800 experienced crew immediately available who could operate them as well....

I have a feeling there may be a little bit more paperwork in it than that, not least because P&O are hardly likely to agree to loan their ships out to DFDS.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

I have a feeling there may be a little bit more paperwork in it than that, not least because P&O are hardly likely to agree to loan their ships out to DFDS.

It was slightly tongue in cheek, but they could be ordered to if things got bad enough couldn't they?

 

[Typhoon]

I doubt DFDS will suffer too much reputation damage, it's not like they've scalped P&O customers or refused to put services on with ships sitting idle. Fundamentally they've only got so many ships and it was never going to be enough to replace the required capacity of the P&O fleet.

I suppose it is whether passengers see "Please arrive at the port as booked and we will arrange to get you away on an alternative carrier as quickly as possible" as an indication that a deal has been struck and that they will sail within hours. If they turn up and find there are no spaces for some time so they have been inconvenienced on their holiday/ break, their number one target will be P&O; however they have been told to report to the DFDS booths so the staff there may well get flak (are there any P&O staff there) and, at that moment, it is also DFDS that have let them down.
Incidentally, I have considerable sympathy for customer services staff trying to sort this mess out. They will be earning every penny.

(The advice has changed now but too late for many ...)

It was slightly tongue in cheek, but they could be ordered to if things got bad enough couldn't they?

If only Chris Grayling was still Transport Secretary, he knows where the Magic Ferry Tree is.
(The serious response is 'Not this government', they will hoping it all blows over.)

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I somehow doubt that the P&O Ferries 800 made redundant were all white and British, or that their new agency only recruits the opposite.
Free movement up to 2020 meant that employees could be from anywhere in the EU (and probably beyond), like, say, agricultural workers or HGV drivers.

P&O actually have 2 ferries operating, the Norbank (on Liverpool-Dublin) and Pride of Rotterdam (on Hull-Rotterdam).
I suspect these ships are not on "Jersey" contracts - maybe they have Irish/Dutch crews respectively.
You'd also expect some French crew on the Calais run.

Edit: P&O Ferries says they expect to resume Dover-Calais "next week", with 2 ships.

 

[chiltern trev]

According to this article

P&O Ferries Faces Government Action with Services Still Suspended - niferry.co.uk

Two weeks on after sacking almost 800 staff, many P&O Ferries services remain suspended with no firm return date.

www.niferry.co.uk

Norbank is Dutch and Philippines crew.

 

[Baxenden Bank]

It was slightly tongue in cheek, but they could be ordered to if things got bad enough couldn't they?

As it is the 40th anniversary of the Falklands War: I recall that we commandeered ships of various types from the merchant fleet then - liners as troop carriers, Atlantic Conveyor and so on.

 

[Bald Rick]

As it is the 40th anniversary of the Falklands War: I recall that we commandeered ships of various types from the merchant fleet then - liners as troop carriers, Atlantic Conveyor and so on.

at something rather longer than a day’s notice. For example, Argentina invaded the Falklands on 2 April, QE2 sailed only 40 days later on May 12th.

 

[yorksrob]

I think we need to see P&O nationalised, as the owners clearly aren't fit and proper people to run it. It's questionable whether such strategically important transport links as the cross channel ferries ought to be allowed to fall into foreign ownership at all.

 

[zwk500]

I think we need to see P&O nationalised, as the owners clearly aren't fit and proper people to run it. It's questionable whether such strategically important transport links as the cross channel ferries ought to be allowed to fall into foreign ownership at all.

What makes you think the DfT are competent safeguards? Even if there was a 'British Ferries' or whatever, it would report to the DfT in the same way GBR will. Also, should all cross-channel ferries be only British-owned, all 50/50 with France/Belgium/Netherlands or some all-British and some all-French?

 

[yorksrob]

What makes you think the DfT are competent safeguards? Even if there was a 'British Ferries' or whatever, it would report to the DfT in the same way GBR will. Also, should all cross-channel ferries be only British-owned, all 50/50 with France/Belgium/Netherlands or some all-British and some all-French?

I would suggest part ownership between the nation's (along the lines of the original ownership of Eurostar) and if France and Belgium declined, Of go down the "each country having the option to own it's own ferries" route, beginning with the UK nationalising P&O.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I think we need to see P&O nationalised, as the owners clearly aren't fit and proper people to run it. It's questionable whether such strategically important transport links as the cross channel ferries ought to be allowed to fall into foreign ownership at all.

The channel is however half French so you can't have a UK monopoly on those routes.
All international routes are competitive (air, sea, rail) with government (UK/FR) regulation but not ownership, at least not since Sealink days.
Only Cairnryan-Larne is a UK domestic operation under full UK control.
Stena, DFDS and Irish Ferries are "foreign" of course, and would object to a state-funded competitor.
Stena is Swedish but has largely British crews on UK routes.
You might disqualify P&O Ferries on a number of grounds, but the routes would have to be offered to other (international) bidders.

 

[yorksrob]

The channel is however half French so you can't have a UK monopoly on those routes.
All international routes are competitive (air, sea, rail) with government (UK/FR) regulation but not ownership, at least not since Sealink days.
Only Cairnryan-Larne is a UK domestic operation under full UK control.
Stena, DFDS and Irish Ferries are "foreign" of course, and would object to a state-funded competitor.
Stena is Swedish but has largely British crews on UK routes.
You might disqualify P&O Ferries on a number of grounds, but the routes would have to be offered to other (international) bidders.

I think we could do with having a Sealink type operation.

 

[43055]

Looking at the Marine Traffic map the European Causeway is currently on it's way from Larne to Cairaryan so it looks like this route has restarted. The Pride of Hull has also moved from Hull to Rotterdam.

The Stena Nordica continues to help on the Belfast - Cairaryan route and things may get slightly better at Dover as Irish Ferries third vessel the Isle of Inisheer is on its way to Calais after refit so will probably be in service soon.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I think the Cairnryan route is only accepting freight for the next few days.
The suggestion is that from April 14 (Thursday) all routes will be operating at least some services.