P&O Ferries - major announcement today. All ships in port

[cakeorwine]

Gosh. I wonder what's going on

www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-60779001

@SpikeySmooth

Natalie Elphicke has no shame. Trying to get on the bandwagon with the demo in Dover until a union member called her out for voting FOR fire and rehire. She left with a face like a bag of spanners, the hypocrite.

Can't link the video, but it's on bbc news.

She did not vote for hire and rehire. Contrary to some press reports, there has been no bill proposing to ban the practice. The private members bill in question merely required employers with 50 or more employees to consult before firing 15 or more employees, although, unlike redundancy legislation, it did not specify any timescale for the consultation. It also required the employer to notify the government if it intended to sack more than 50 workers. In relation to what is going on at P&O, it offered workers no additional protection at all.

P&O will save its parent company DP World an estimated £9 million by using cheaper agency staff. DP world spends £140 million a year on golf sponsorship.

The P&O pensions fund has a £140 million deficit which DP World refuse to contribute to.

twitter.com/CraigMurrayOrg/status/1504554521007112193

@prh47bridge Not so, MPs were asked to vote on whether MPs could have a vote on the Gardiner bill, she voted that there could be no further vote, then the Govt talked out the bill, one minister talked for 40mins....

Govt asked ACAS to issue further guidance to employers.....

To hear the anger from ministers now, you'd think they'd all been in opposition for the last 12 years.

[quote Alexandra2001]@prh47bridge Not so, MPs were asked to vote on whether MPs could have a vote on the Gardiner bill, she voted that there could be no further vote, then the Govt talked out the bill, one minister talked for 40mins....

Govt asked ACAS to issue further guidance to employers.....

To hear the anger from ministers now, you'd think they'd all been in opposition for the last 12 years.[/quote]
The point I'm making is that the bill in question did not propose to ban the practice of firing and rehiring. So Natalie Elphicke did not vote for firing and rehiring. There was no opportunity to vote either for or against the practice. She voted against introducing an additional consultation requirement, as that was all the bill in question did. For something on the scale that P&O are undertaking, the bill would have had no effect whatsoever as its consultation requirements were less onerous than those required for large scale redundancies.

The government blocked the proposed law to curb businesses' ability to lay staff off and take them back on different - often worse - pay and terms

Fire-and-rehire: Government blocks law to curb the practice
www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-58997916

The Conservatives have consistently blocked legislation on workers' rights and consistently fought to water down EU directives on workers' rights.

@JackieWeaver101

The government blocked the proposed law to curb businesses' ability to lay staff off and take them back on different - often worse - pay and terms

Fire-and-rehire: Government blocks law to curb the practice
www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-58997916

The Conservatives have consistently blocked legislation on workers' rights and consistently fought to water down EU directives on workers' rights.

Except the bill in question did not curb business' ability to lay staff off and take them back on different terms. It was represented that way in the press but that is not what it actually did.

What you can take from the above is that Elphicke wasn't doing anything to promote ordinary workers rights.

I imagine if the govt were, as they now say, so truly appalled by fire/rehire, they would have proposed amendments to the private members bill. Or even introduced their own bill. Instead , they completely blocked what was proposed.

The ability to fire/ re-hire, and deregulation generally, is exactly what many tories want. See also: Brexit.

Or for a 'flexible workforce' read grinding insecurity for many.

I'm late to the thread but wonder how can they bring Lithuanian or Phillipino staff as it would break immigration laws or do they never leave the ships?

@TebayOrNotTebay

I imagine if the govt were, as they now say, so truly appalled by fire/rehire, they would have proposed amendments to the private members bill. Or even introduced their own bill. Instead , they completely blocked what was proposed.

The ability to fire/ re-hire, and deregulation generally, is exactly what many tories want. See also: Brexit.

Only have to read "Britannia unchained" (written by now leading tory ministers, just a few years ago) to see why they wanted Brexit and how they see workers rights.

The righteous anger expressed by ministers & Bojo is quite frankly sickening, they couldn't give a xxxx what happens to UK workers, so long as they are not seen to be responsible.

It's interesting how its only the British workers who have been fired over zoom, without any consultation. The French workers are perfectly safe. They were probably too scared to take on the French unions. I read that the new agency staff they have engaged are being paid about £2.60 an hour! Oh even better the new staff are not licensed, which is illegal under maritime law. So they can't resume services until they are. Let us not forget that the Britsh tax payers bailed them out during covid and that's the thanks we get. P&O are an absolute disgrace. And the way they have behaved is illegal.

@Bubbles90 Difficult to run a ferry service if french trawlers stop it docking. Or if the Board members get picketed when they go skiing.

Or if the French government give the parent company a car parking with an election coming up.

Power isn't manifested by protests, rather by the other party being too scared of acting against someone's interests.

It's why I'm surprised at the % of fishing workers and farmers who voted for Brexit and who are now beginning to see the consequences. The UK government screws farmers over and nothing happens. Unlike other stakeholders, farmers don't have influence over the Conservatives compared with a century ago. The French government allow the EU to consider eroding CAP and tractors blockade Paris and fires get set near the Palais. IMO, the best commercial choice for farmers would have been keeping tied to CAP and the influence of French farmers rather than living with the changes from the single payment and buccaneering deals like there is with Australia and will be with the USA. Fishing workers seemed to have realised it's not optimal to have more control over parts of the sea if you can't sell the proceeds.

I hope the P and O workers get something like justice but it won't be achieved by protests against P and O Ferries.

Brittany Ferries all the way !!!!!

How low must your standards be, to try and defend such a hateful figure as Elphicke?

Just seen that the Department of Transport were informed of P&O's plans in advance. 😮

It's why I'm surprised at the % of fishing workers and farmers who voted for Brexit and who are now beginning to see the consequences

Just another illustration as to how a lot of people didn't understand what they were voting for and yet we put the decision in their hands.

@LizDoingTheCanCan

How low must your standards be, to try and defend such a hateful figure as Elphicke?

If that is aimed at me, I am not defending her, simply pointing out that Barry Gardiner's bill would not have stopped hire and fire. In the context of P&O Ferries, it would have made no difference at all.

I hope they go out of business - despicable behaviour.

Elphicke in tone deaf shocker - she has form for that. The best bit was where she claimed to be “here for the people of Dover” and some bloke shouted “no you aren’t, you’re here for PR”

P&O said they are not going bust but want to restructure their business. I think they said they had lost £200M in the last 2 years.
I think that they 'welcomed' their newly sacked staff with masked paramilitaries as the ships docked. Terrible way to sack people I think.
I think P&O will rubbish their reputation in the industry as a result.
On the other hand, they are apparently giving generous severance packages, and knowing the way things work, may well reemploy some of their sacked staff, possibly on some sort of contract or agency basis.

@daimbarsatemydogsbone

Elphicke in tone deaf shocker - she has form for that. The best bit was where she claimed to be “here for the people of Dover” and some bloke shouted “no you aren’t, you’re here for PR”

That was good! For me the best bit was her joining in the shouting of Shame on you, before she realised they were shouting it at her.

Watching bbc news, a P&O official(v high-up) has admitted they consciously broke employment law by not confering with unions, they said it was done because it would have bee pointless because the unions would not have agreed!

@Atourwitsend

Watching bbc news, a P&O official(v high-up) has admitted they consciously broke employment law by not confering with unions, they said it was done because it would have bee pointless because the unions would not have agreed!

I just saw that. Really weird argument!

@Atourwitsend

Watching bbc news, a P&O official(v high-up) has admitted they consciously broke employment law by not confering with unions, they said it was done because it would have bee pointless because the unions would not have agreed!

It is their CEO.

Whether they thought the unions would agree is irrelevant. They had to consult. Even if the outcome was the same, it would have been better from a PR perspective. However, the size of the redundancy payments they are making may mean that employees are not entitled to any compensation for this failure.