P & O Ferries

beachBOYken said:
Why couldn't P&O offer the staff they just sacked the lower wage package they just gave to all the new cheaper paid staff they hired. Not all would have taken the pay cut, but im sure some would have.
Click to expand...

P&O claims that they've been trying to negotiate with the Unions for the last two years without any progress / movement. The company is making losses of £100million per year, I guess this is the result of stubborn Unions and unprofitable companies. If I recall correctly, P&O said that the workers could apply for their old jobs with the new contractor / supplier.

I suspect this was the only way that P&O could reduce their operating costs, however it is a crappy move on their part. Although the alternative is that the company folds.
 
Mercenary Keyboard Warrior said:
Yeah its pretty much practice now when you offer enhanced redundancy its conditional on signing a contract / NDA (hybrid compared to what we would historically think) that specifically excludes comments on details of the agreement and also later suing the company for failure to follow unemployment law or unfair dismissal etc
As such you need to see a solicitor (company will pay something like £350) so that your solicitor can advise whether you should or shouldn't sign.

I tend to find myself thinking its a good thing generally. I would much rather walk out with an enhanced package, cut my losses and accept it than fighting and losing anyway, walking out with more money will always be better than statutory.
Click to expand...
Well, it sucks, but realistically I doubt they are going to be getting their jobs back, so the 'sensible' course of action would probably be to take the money and move on. P & O has rightly suffered huge reputational damage though.
 
peige said:
Take the enhanced whatever and walk away. The prolonging of holding onto a job like this will do none of them any good. If they by some chance manage to force P&O backwards then the whole business will sink (pun intended)

I've watched enough companies go through this kind of thing to know its never good to hang about, months of soulless worry and still the same end. Take the money and find something better.
Click to expand...
Sadly this is what I would do too.

Take the money.

Walk off the job immediately, with no handover to anyone, because the termination was "with immediate effect". Literally walk out without completing anything, advising anyone of the progres of any tasks in progress, just place essential keys etc on a nearby table without advising anyone where they were. Don't be malicious but as you're not employed at that exact moment then down tools and walk out. No need to make the incoming crews job easier as you're no longer being employed or paid to do that.

Immediately look for something else (get ahead of everyone else in the same situation who may be too shocked to act).

Discuss possible legal action with a solicitor - probably not possible but worth asking.
 
doodah said:
A likely timeline of how they're going to explain possible knowledge of it beforehand (supposedly - with more than 100 employees - 45 days notice should be given).
Also wasn't aware the RMT backed Brexit, serving their members with great advice then. Why would they believe the Tories promise of protecting British jobs?
Click to expand...
Genuine question but how did Brexit make the P&O situation possible or more likely?
 
Hades said:
Genuine question but how did Brexit make the P&O situation possible or more likely?
Click to expand...
In this instance, I would imagine it's more complicated than just Brexit. My last sentence related to their RMT General Secretary saying in an interview 'after they got us into Brexit, it would secure British jobs for British workers'. Almost forgetting the fact they supported it.
Edit - a deregulated Britain is what the Tories want, and Brexit was one way to achieve that.
 
doodah said:
A likely timeline of how they're going to explain possible knowledge of it beforehand (supposedly - with more than 100 employees - 45 days notice should be given).
Also wasn't aware the RMT backed Brexit, serving their members with great advice then. Why would they believe the Tories promise of protecting British jobs?
Click to expand...

6) The notice was on display in the basement, with no lights, in a locked filing cabinet in the toilet with a sign saying beware of the leopard?

I'm hoping the government does a crackdown on the fire and rehire process as well as this situation, but won't hold my breath at any rate.
 
Didn't take long for this to turn into Tory and Brexit nonsense :rolleyes:. Somebody knew the night before, off to the gallows with them!
 
Their Secretary General made a specific reference to those very two things today. The night before isn't an issue as nothing could be done, 45 days might change things but unsure about whose law it falls under as someone pointed out a few posts above.
 
Hades said:
Employment law in Jersey is different to English employment law. So it's possible the notice period may not be relevant?
Click to expand...

As they are seafarers, they would be subject to Maritime Labour Convention which is very different to anything a landlubber like the majority of us would have.


As for training of the new crew, they would have to have all the required certification for seafarers and in order for the vessel to operate, they have to demonstrate they know what they are doing via drills otherwise the vessel operating certificates could be pulled and the vessels possibly detained.
 
ci_newman said:
The company is making losses of £100million per year, I guess this is the result of stubborn Unions and unprofitable companies.
Click to expand...

Is that £100 million loss after the reported £270 million they paid to shareholders? Because if it isn't, then I'm not sure the unions are the thing making them unprofitable.
 
bazzabear said:
Is that £100 million loss after the reported £270 million they paid to shareholders? Because if it isn't, then I'm not sure the unions are the thing making them unprofitable.
Click to expand...

muon said:
I mean you need to learn some accounting basics.
Click to expand...
I thought companies get to set their dividend amount? If P&O was struggling that badly then they could, and should, have removed their dividend until the situation recovered. It's almost as if they engineered the loss by using the dividend to increase or support the shareprice, while giving them an excuse to make long term staff cost cuts.
 
Hades said:
I thought companies get to set their dividend amount? If P&O was struggling that badly then they could, and should, have removed their dividend until the situation recovered. It's almost as if they engineered the loss by using the dividend to increase or support the shareprice, while giving them an excuse to make long term staff cost cuts.
Click to expand...

Profit and loss is based off income and costs. Dividends are just payments from company assets and has no effect on profit and loss.

If I owned P&O and I could either plough the £270m into the company (from DP World) for it to dry up in 2.7 years, money I wouldn't get back, or keep the £270m and try and get the company to stop making losses by reducing costs, what do you think I will do?

I'm not sure why people expect private investors to do this. If you had DP World shares, say via your pension pot, would you be asking them to likely burn £270m by investing it into P&O without reducing costs and the business to continue losing £100m a year.
 
bazzabear said:
Is that £100 million loss after the reported £270 million they paid to shareholders? Because if it isn't, then I'm not sure the unions are the thing making them unprofitable.
Click to expand...

P&O reported revenue of £138mn for 2020, highly unlikely P&O paid diviends of £270million as well as that..

Hades said:
I thought companies get to set their dividend amount? If P&O was struggling that badly then they could, and should, have removed their dividend until the situation recovered. It's almost as if they engineered the loss by using the dividend to increase or support the shareprice, while giving them an excuse to make long term staff cost cuts.
Click to expand...

The parent company D.P paid dividends, not P&O
 
ci_newman said:
P&O reported revenue of £138mn for 2020, highly unlikely P&O paid diviends of £270million as well as that..



The parent company D.P paid dividends, not P&O
Click to expand...
Thanks, I hadn't appreciated it was the parent company paying the dividend.
 
Errrm how did the bus load of cheaper foreign workers pass our points system by the Home Office?

Edit - sorry Jersey, keep forgetting :o
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom