P&O sack/make redundant 800 staff on the spot

Stig said:

valleynick66 said:

lancashire lad said:

Having spent my entire career either working on ships or ashore for shipping companies I can assure you that Joel is mostly correct. These low wages are acceptable for a number of 3rd world countries. The shipping industry is a worldwide industry and the employment contracts are dependent on where the ship is registered and is the reason that the British merchant navy is now almost non existent. P&O does not have to abide by ITF/ILO wage scales and could pay less if their ships stayed away from Western Europe and Australia where the local unions will boycott the ships. It is a cut throat business and remember that 90% of trade comes to this country by ship and no-one gives a damn about the crew conditions, I could go on but I won't.

Surely there is a but here. 

I mean the salary / hourly rate may be awful but must be offset in some other way - accommodation / food / drink etc. 

not for one moment condoning the figure but presume it’s worth more than the headline suggests.  What I can’t see is how that works at all for UK or Europe based contract staff. 

It remains an appalling figure but I struggle to see it’s the real or entire figure if they hope to have any staff at all. 

Or am I missing something?

I think your scepticism is more to do with wishful thinking than it not being a realistic scenario. It was reported at the weekend that such wages were regularly accepted by international staff of cruise ships. They took the jobs in hope of a) getting a bigger name on their cv and perhaps some technical training, thereby hoping to command higher wages in their own countries at a later date and b) supplementing their wages through tips. It would seem as though it would be tougher to earn tips on a ferry than on a cruise liner, so it'd not going to be easy.

It's also worth remembering that P&O is owned by the Dubai Royal Family. That's the same Dubai that was largely built using cheap Indian labour that was largely considered as dispensable. There's something else that ought to be boycotted.  

I think I am right that the headline figure is partially mitigated.   But no way is it acceptable. 

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/change-in-law-signed-off-by-chris-grayling-meant-pando-could-sack-staff-without-telling-govt-maritime-lawyer-says/ar-AAVnNod?ocid=mailsignout&li=BBoPWjQ

Someone was saying people are too quick to blame the government.....

lonman said:

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/change-in-law-signed-off-by-chris-grayling-meant-pando-could-sack-staff-without-telling-govt-maritime-lawyer-says/ar-AAVnNod?ocid=mailsignout&li=BBoPWjQ

Someone was saying people are too quick to blame the government.....

I am sure they will be quickly on the thread apologising for their hasty and erroneous conclusion...   

Now that we are 'free' to make our own laws, why can't we make it the law that any shipping company operating out of UK ports, complies with our own employment laws and must pay the minimum wage. 

ME14addick said:

Now that we are 'free' to make our own laws, why can't we make it the law that any shipping company operating out of UK ports, complies with our own employment laws and must pay the minimum wage. 

if a worker lives in a 3rd world country with 3rd world cost of living why should he/she be paid at UK rates and subject to UK laws, if you do that then it is unlikely that the shipping companies employing 3rd world crews will trade to the UK.

If you do enact such a law why not go further and have all goods imported to UK must be made by workers on UK rates and subject to laws.

lonman said:

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/change-in-law-signed-off-by-chris-grayling-meant-pando-could-sack-staff-without-telling-govt-maritime-lawyer-says/ar-AAVnNod?ocid=mailsignout&li=BBoPWjQ

Someone was saying people are too quick to blame the government.....

Was Grayling the guy who gave a ferry contract to a company with no ferries?

ME14addick said:

lancashire lad said:

ME14addick said:

Now that we are 'free' to make our own laws, why can't we make it the law that any shipping company operating out of UK ports, complies with our own employment laws and must pay the minimum wage. 

if a worker lives in a 3rd world country with 3rd world cost of living why should he/she be paid at UK rates and subject to UK laws, if you do that then it is unlikely that the shipping companies employing 3rd world crews will trade to the UK.

If you do enact such a law why not go further and have all goods imported to UK must be made by workers on UK rates and subject to laws.

Do the agency ferry workers come ashore or do they stay on the ships all the time? If they do come ashore when off duty, they will be subject to the same costs as everyone else in the UK or France.

the seafarers live on the ship where all their food and other living paraphernalia is provided by the ship, when the ship is in port and if they are off duty they are allowed ashore if the ship is cleared by quarantine and immigration services, in the case of a cross channel ferry the time in port is very limited and it is unlikely that a worker will get further than the dock gate before they are due back to the ferry.

Seafarers are among the most put upon workforce in the world and have been for many many years, it will not change and the majority of western world citizens don't care as long as their new 65' TV arrives from China on time.

RedArmySE7 said:

se9addick said:

lonman said:

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/change-in-law-signed-off-by-chris-grayling-meant-pando-could-sack-staff-without-telling-govt-maritime-lawyer-says/ar-AAVnNod?ocid=mailsignout&li=BBoPWjQ

Someone was saying people are too quick to blame the government.....

Was Grayling the guy who gave a ferry contract to a company with no ferries?

Yep.

Failing Grayling.

You're so entrenched, how can you possibly say that's his fault

ME14addick said:

lancashire lad said:

ME14addick said:

lancashire lad said:

ME14addick said:

Now that we are 'free' to make our own laws, why can't we make it the law that any shipping company operating out of UK ports, complies with our own employment laws and must pay the minimum wage. 

if a worker lives in a 3rd world country with 3rd world cost of living why should he/she be paid at UK rates and subject to UK laws, if you do that then it is unlikely that the shipping companies employing 3rd world crews will trade to the UK.

If you do enact such a law why not go further and have all goods imported to UK must be made by workers on UK rates and subject to laws.

Do the agency ferry workers come ashore or do they stay on the ships all the time? If they do come ashore when off duty, they will be subject to the same costs as everyone else in the UK or France.

the seafarers live on the ship where all their food and other living paraphernalia is provided by the ship, when the ship is in port and if they are off duty they are allowed ashore if the ship is cleared by quarantine and immigration services, in the case of a cross channel ferry the time in port is very limited and it is unlikely that a worker will get further than the dock gate before they are due back to the ferry.

Seafarers are among the most put upon workforce in the world and have been for many many years, it will not change and the majority of western world citizens don't care as long as their new 65' TV arrives from China on time.

Wouldn't most of the workers made redundant, live in around Dover or the other ports from which P & O Ferries sail?

But isn't the point they are being replaced by overseas staff? Those that were previously employed were on better terms.

Rob7Lee said:

Henry Irving said:

https://twitter.com/paul__johnson/status/1504490098854961155?s=20&t=wZAYXt0lQGc3upoMqGpQYA

Whilst I'm not excusing their behaviour at al I think the fact the parent company made a profit is irrelevant to whether 'P&O Ferries' is a going concern/runs at a loss.

The question more so is why do they run at a loss, I've never quite understood service type companies doing so, either they are doing something wrong (if competitors are able to do so) or they need to put their prices up.

i used to work for P&O in the eighties. The ferries always struggled to operate at a profit and the duty free business was the only reason it was worth operating at all, plus the brand exposure.  P&O bought out Townsend Thorensen but that didn't go well, although the way management dealt with the Herald of Free Enterprise disaster having only owned it for a few months, shouldering full responsibility and acting with obvious compassion can be contrasted with today's owners.

P&O subsequently formed a joint venture with Stena.  So even with a near monopoly of the channel ferry route P&O couldn't make it viable, then the channel tunnel hit the final nail in the coffin.  So the ferries business has always been a loss leader justified only by the brand image and prestige of operating an iconic ferry route.  

The ferries business was sold off by P&O to Dubai World in 2006 and assume it continued to be a loss leader. Unfortunately, its only value, the traditional P&O brand image has now been trashed.  I'd echo the damage this could have on P&O Cruises brand which also long ago left the original P&O group.

JamesSeed said:

Chippycafc said:

JamesSeed said:

Chippycafc said:

Huskaris said:

JamesSeed said:

Amazing how people’s loyalties are so entrenched that they can’t even call this out as a bad thing. Sad really. 

I think the people with entrenched loyalties might be the same dozen or so who manage to turn literally any issue happening in the UK into a Brexit/Tory issue. It's boring.

Haven't seen anyone saying this isn't a bad thing by the way, but feel free to quote the posts that do :-)

Well said, they have their own section to bore the pants of each other and come out with a load of old crap, but hey ho self indulgence must be spread elsewhere.

It’s a shame you guys don’t read others’ posts before posting. A reasonable debate, with reasonable people, and you come up with something like that. 

Or are you just on the wind up? 

No wind up  nearly every post gets turned into Brexit or Tory bashing  by the same people. Like little JOBs who just talk shite as their sore losers who make up stories to pretend their angry. Makes them get through the day i guess.

And I do read other posts, but only those that talk sense and dont have a political angle. I skip through the usual suspects and ignore them unless it's their comical rantings on the Brexit thread.

But the sensible ones are getting few and far between as I know they get bored of it also.

So you don’t read the posts of people who don’t share your politics. In other words your mind is firmly closed to all arguments. That’s a shame, and it makes it hard to take your posts seriously. 

Chippycafc said:

JamesSeed said:

Chippycafc said:

Huskaris said:

JamesSeed said:

Amazing how people’s loyalties are so entrenched that they can’t even call this out as a bad thing. Sad really. 

I think the people with entrenched loyalties might be the same dozen or so who manage to turn literally any issue happening in the UK into a Brexit/Tory issue. It's boring.

Haven't seen anyone saying this isn't a bad thing by the way, but feel free to quote the posts that do :-)

Well said, they have their own section to bore the pants of each other and come out with a load of old crap, but hey ho self indulgence must be spread elsewhere.

It’s a shame you guys don’t read others’ posts before posting. A reasonable debate, with reasonable people, and you come up with something like that. 

Or are you just on the wind up? 

No wind up  nearly every post gets turned into Brexit or Tory bashing  by the same people. Like little JOBs who just talk shite as their sore losers who make up stories to pretend their angry. Makes them get through the day i guess.

And I do read other posts, but only those that talk sense and dont have a political angle. I skip through the usual suspects and ignore them unless it's their comical rantings on the Brexit thread.

But the sensible ones are getting few and far between as I know they get bored of it also.

So you don’t read the posts of people who don’t share your politics. In other words your mind is firmly closed to all arguments. That’s a shame, and it makes it hard to take your posts seriously. 

I clearly stated i do read other people's posts but only the sensible ones. Would you like me to repeat it for the third time. I assume the above has been said of you and you are just repeating it, happens a lot here.

cafcfan said:

RedArmySE7 said:

se9addick said:

lonman said:

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/change-in-law-signed-off-by-chris-grayling-meant-pando-could-sack-staff-without-telling-govt-maritime-lawyer-says/ar-AAVnNod?ocid=mailsignout&li=BBoPWjQ

Someone was saying people are too quick to blame the government.....

Was Grayling the guy who gave a ferry contract to a company with no ferries?

Yep.

Failing Grayling.

Indeed. Let's be clear, Grayling is utterly clueless.  Nothing he has done, ever, has been intentional. He makes Boris look smart.

Fortunately he has disappeared into the background.

lancashire lad said:

ME14addick said:

lancashire lad said:

ME14addick said:

Now that we are 'free' to make our own laws, why can't we make it the law that any shipping company operating out of UK ports, complies with our own employment laws and must pay the minimum wage. 

if a worker lives in a 3rd world country with 3rd world cost of living why should he/she be paid at UK rates and subject to UK laws, if you do that then it is unlikely that the shipping companies employing 3rd world crews will trade to the UK.

If you do enact such a law why not go further and have all goods imported to UK must be made by workers on UK rates and subject to laws.

Do the agency ferry workers come ashore or do they stay on the ships all the time? If they do come ashore when off duty, they will be subject to the same costs as everyone else in the UK or France.

the seafarers live on the ship where all their food and other living paraphernalia is provided by the ship, when the ship is in port and if they are off duty they are allowed ashore if the ship is cleared by quarantine and immigration services, in the case of a cross channel ferry the time in port is very limited and it is unlikely that a worker will get further than the dock gate before they are due back to the ferry.

Seafarers are among the most put upon workforce in the world and have been for many many years, it will not change and the majority of western world citizens don't care as long as their new 65' TV arrives from China on time.

And the ones that do will be called ‘woke virtual signallers’. 

JamesSeed said:

Chippycafc said:

JamesSeed said:

Chippycafc said:

JamesSeed said:

Chippycafc said:

Huskaris said:

JamesSeed said:

Amazing how people’s loyalties are so entrenched that they can’t even call this out as a bad thing. Sad really. 

I think the people with entrenched loyalties might be the same dozen or so who manage to turn literally any issue happening in the UK into a Brexit/Tory issue. It's boring.

Haven't seen anyone saying this isn't a bad thing by the way, but feel free to quote the posts that do :-)

Well said, they have their own section to bore the pants of each other and come out with a load of old crap, but hey ho self indulgence must be spread elsewhere.

It’s a shame you guys don’t read others’ posts before posting. A reasonable debate, with reasonable people, and you come up with something like that. 

Or are you just on the wind up? 

No wind up  nearly every post gets turned into Brexit or Tory bashing  by the same people. Like little JOBs who just talk shite as their sore losers who make up stories to pretend their angry. Makes them get through the day i guess.

And I do read other posts, but only those that talk sense and dont have a political angle. I skip through the usual suspects and ignore them unless it's their comical rantings on the Brexit thread.

But the sensible ones are getting few and far between as I know they get bored of it also.

So you don’t read the posts of people who don’t share your politics. In other words your mind is firmly closed to all arguments. That’s a shame, and it makes it hard to take your posts seriously. 

Chippycafc said:

JamesSeed said:

Chippycafc said:

Huskaris said:

JamesSeed said:

Amazing how people’s loyalties are so entrenched that they can’t even call this out as a bad thing. Sad really. 

I think the people with entrenched loyalties might be the same dozen or so who manage to turn literally any issue happening in the UK into a Brexit/Tory issue. It's boring.

Haven't seen anyone saying this isn't a bad thing by the way, but feel free to quote the posts that do :-)

Well said, they have their own section to bore the pants of each other and come out with a load of old crap, but hey ho self indulgence must be spread elsewhere.

It’s a shame you guys don’t read others’ posts before posting. A reasonable debate, with reasonable people, and you come up with something like that. 

Or are you just on the wind up? 

No wind up  nearly every post gets turned into Brexit or Tory bashing  by the same people. Like little JOBs who just talk shite as their sore losers who make up stories to pretend their angry. Makes them get through the day i guess.

And I do read other posts, but only those that talk sense and dont have a political angle. I skip through the usual suspects and ignore them unless it's their comical rantings on the Brexit thread.

But the sensible ones are getting few and far between as I know they get bored of it also.

So you don’t read the posts of people who don’t share your politics. In other words your mind is firmly closed to all arguments. That’s a shame, and it makes it hard to take your posts seriously. 

I clearly stated i do read other people's posts but only the sensible ones. Would you like me to repeat it for the third time. I assume the above has been said of you and you are just repeating it, happens a lot here.

So you don’t read all the posts, which is what I meant. You’re selective. How can you decide if a post is sensible or not if you won’t read the ones you think you might not agree with?
I bet you won’t listen to ‘little JoB’ because you don’t enjoy reasoned argument. 

From past history i look whose writing and scroll down as others i am sure do to me. For the first time in over 3 years i had the misfortune to listen to JOBs ranting this week as i was building a new shed and couldn't be arsed to switch over after Nick Ferrari had finished. 

He must have mentioned Brexit 30 times in the two hours i was listening, and this was on the subject matter of Zaghari Ratcliffe, he doesn't have reasoned argument he is a one eyed jack that plays to his followers who lap it up, anyone who rings up against his view just gets talked over and put down. Your little ditty above certainly fits the bill where he is concerned, and his followers.