P&O Ferries - mass redundancies without consultation

[jfollows]

Guardian now reporting (https://www.theguardian.com/busines...d-o-ferries-a-new-low-for-shipping-says-union) that although

Boris Johnson’s official spokesperson had said on Thursday: “We weren’t given any notice to this.”

in fact

Sources at the DfT said it was made aware of the impending mass sackings and suspension of ferry services on Wednesday night.

which is still likely to have been much later than the legal requirement for notification.
Presumably it takes longer to get a message from DfT to Downing Street than it takes to get a message to DfT in the first place.

 

[RT4038]

which is still likely to have been much later than the legal requirement for notification.

Except that, according to post #226, these are International mariners on Jersey based contracts, which may mean the legal requirements are different. I would think it unlikely, although always possible, that P&O have got this wrong.

 

[jfollows]

Is the marketing email from Stena Line urging me to book a trip to Northern Island on one of its ferries which I received just now entirely a coincidence, I wonder?

 

[BayPaul]

So P&O have taken longer than others to adopt this method of working. This has preserved UK jobs longer than would otherwise have been the case, with P&O subsidising these jobs. Presumably Covid has acted as the catalyst for changing. I rather suspect that this has been a fairly long time in planning.

Yes, that is broadly true. There are several operators who have worked like this for a long time, and others who have made less-dramatic versions of the same changes. Brittany Ferries is the most traditional operator, which still very much has a 100% French crew, which is very unlikely to change. Others have varied arrangements. I believe Stena, which of course includes the old Sealink operation, crew their ships via a management company - Northern Marine - which is a part of the Stena group, so I would guess providing some of the benefits of outsourcing, but still keeping things in house.

I would imagine that, in time, once things get back to normal, and time heals wounds, there will be lots of UK seafarers on P&O again. British Officers and catering crew are not particularly expensive to employ, especially with lower travel costs, and employment via an agent is very common.

 

[43055]

Just shocking. Jeremy Vine was discussing P&O for the first half hour of his show at lunchtime and spoke to one of the agency crew which said that he was only told he was going to a 'new' ship for a 'new' company taking over the vessel so the first he knew about this would of been at the terminal. It was also mentioned that they didn't have enough replacement crew to sail. Part of one of the BBC articles also has some quotes from him.

P&O Ferries: 'We've been abandoned by the company', say sacked staff

The decision to immediately sack 800 staff at P&O Ferries sparks angry protests on ship and shore.

www.bbc.co.uk

Mark Canet-Baldwin from Hull says he was hired a week ago to work as onboard services manager on a new ship sailing in British waters, but the agency couldn't tell him anything about the ship.
He was put up in a hotel in Glasgow and then driven at 05:30 GMT to an undisclosed location, which turned out to be the P&O dock at Cairnryan.
Their bus stopped to pick up a security detail of a dozen guards, "all in black, big handcuffs on the back of them", Mark says.
When they arrived, some agency staff knew the P&O workers as former colleagues and got in touch.
"People on board were just devastated," Mark says. "It was just horrible, we were appalled, there was just a general feeling of uneasiness on the bus and we felt we were like traitors to the cause or something."
One sacked P&O staff member had just taken out a mortgage, he says, and they had all been expecting to arrive home for two weeks of leave, not redundancy.
"I've got kids and I started thinking about them. In this day and age you've got to have morals, you've got to have ethics," Mark says.
He says he took off his hard hat and overalls and, along with three others, got off the bus and went home.

 

[RT4038]

Yes, that is broadly true. There are several operators who have worked like this for a long time, and others who have made less-dramatic versions of the same changes. Brittany Ferries is the most traditional operator, which still very much has a 100% French crew, which is very unlikely to change. Others have varied arrangements. I believe Stena, which of course includes the old Sealink operation, crew their ships via a management company - Northern Marine - which is a part of the Stena group, so I would guess providing some of the benefits of outsourcing, but still keeping things in house.

I would imagine that, in time, once things get back to normal, and time heals wounds, there will be lots of UK seafarers on P&O again. British Officers and catering crew are not particularly expensive to employ, especially with lower travel costs, and employment via an agent is very common.

Whilst it may seem dramatic, it is difficult to see what else P&O could have done, without inviting sit-ins and sabotage. There is a history of such in previous disputes and this is mirrored in some of the comments upthread. Reducing manning costs by 50% implies pretty severe wage cuts and productivity increases (and presumably still a proportion of redundancies), and even if reluctantly agreed, a disgruntled workforce which will be difficult to manage.
If their competitor shipping lines are already operating such arrangements, it is quite understandable that P&O cannot sustain the legacy working arrangements/salaries. It cannot have come to the workforce as that much of a surprise, even though it will be a shock and upsetting. Full sympathy to the people directly affected - it is no consolation to them as individuals that this process has been taking place, in one way or another, in theirs and other industries for the last 60 or so years. We may share a crocodile tear, but are then happy to pay the low prices that such policies give us.

 

[ashkeba]

We may share a crocodile tear, but are then happy to pay the low prices that such policies give us.

Are we? Who was the last operator in the eastern Channel to include good staff treatment as a selling point to customers? I think it's been many years and the last one was flawed in other ways.

 

[Starmill]

Just because media are reporting that lawyers are circling doesn't necessarily mean that what P&O have done is illegal. The one thing I find odd is the use of the word redundancy in the zoom meeting announcement. As discussed earlier, it doesn't seem to make sense.

I would say that it was pretty unclear yesterday and is still pretty unclear today. The wording used by lawyers who've given quotes to the press in general is very careful - for example describing what P&O have done as "unusual" "rare" or criticising it as "bad practice". Only a small number have answered the real question and called it unlawful. And then they've done so in a pretty qualified way e.g. they've said that RMT believe it's unlawful, or that it's likely to be unlawful, or that P&O are offering enhanced redundancy over the contracted entitlement which may be because they're concerned it was unlawful - which is absolutely true but in the end it is what the Tribunal believes that matters.

I imagine it'll be many months or years before the Tribunal will give a judgement. How long do new cases filed today typically take to come to a hearing?

The only good thing about this horrible situation is that it has at least provoked condemnation of poor or potentially unlawful employment practices from Conservative Ministers. Now that doesn't happen too often so it's good to see!

From my perspective I really can't say whether it's unlawful or not. Only that it definitely should be!

 

[Cloud Strife]

There are a few ferries around that would be a decent fit for DFDS or Irish Ferries, but it would be a big challenge. DFDS could increase capacity by closing their Dunkirk route and concentrating on Calais, which would allow more round trips to operate. If P&O did go under, most likely they would sit and wait for the Spirit class to go up for sale - the oddities of the Dover ships work both ways - they would be awkward ships to sell off the route.

You can take the old Seafrance vessels and now DFDS as a perfect example of that. They were purpose-built for the route, and they didn't go anywhere despite two changes of operator.

I could conceivably see Tallink taking the vessels if it came down to it. They have the experience with Helsinki-Tallinn to operate a similar route, they have the finances (although how Tallink came to dominate the Baltic Sea is a fun case study in itself), and most of all, they're very politically savvy. The only question is whether there's enough space on the Spirit vessels to rebuild them more in line with Tallink's philosophy of providing a shopping mall experience at sea.

The current model is the most efficient one that is adopted across the industry. Irish Ferries have their officers on for 2 weeks at a time, and crew for up to 2 months. I would imagine that P&O would do similar. That minimises travel cost, whilst not keeping the crew onboard for too long. The Dover straits are intense, and more than 2 weeks on, working 12 hours per day starts to get dangerous for officers, who also have lots of opportunities to go elsewhere if conditions aren't good enough.

Is there any reason why they couldn't go to a 3 watch system so they're only on duty for 8 hours a day? A 4 hour watch wouldn't be too demanding, as it wouldn't even be two full crossings.

Brittany Ferries is the most traditional operator, which still very much has a 100% French crew, which is very unlikely to change.

Brittany Ferries wouldn't change that as long as they aren't losing money. It's a huge part of their identity as a national (in the sense of Bretagne) company.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Are we? Who was the last operator in the eastern Channel to include good staff treatment as a selling point to customers? I think it's been many years and the last one was flawed in other ways.

With most customers (or rather the most lucrative ones) being freight, most companies would just go for the cheapest.

Brittany Ferries wouldn't change that as long as they aren't losing money. It's a huge part of their identity as a national (in the sense of Bretagne) company.

And their target market mostly is tourists, for whom the experience of it being "a floating bit of France" is quite important, not least because of the long journey time of their routes. That's not true of quick shuttles across the Dover Strait.

 

[ashkeba]

The only good thing about this horrible situation is that it has at least provoked condemnation of poor or potentially unlawful employment practices from Conservative Ministers. Now that doesn't happen too often so it's good to see!

From my perspective I really can't say whether it's unlawful or not. Only that it definitely should be!

Yet just last October Conservative MPs blocked attempts to outlaw it. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-58997916?

Condemnation now is cheap.

 

[Cloud Strife]

And their target market mostly is tourists, for whom the experience of it being "a floating bit of France" is quite important, not least because of the long journey time of their routes. That's not true of quick shuttles across the Dover Strait.

Yes, there's a huge difference. A floating shopping mall Tallink-style is tolerable for people on Dover-Calais, but it's a different story if it's a much longer part of your holiday.

I could conceivably see someone taking up P&O and starting another duty free-based pricewar, though. There's a lot of scope to reduce fares, especially if there's a quiet agreement with UK Customs not to enforce the limits too rigorously.

 

[jfollows]

Whilst it may seem dramatic, it is difficult to see what else P&O could have done, without inviting sit-ins and sabotage. There is a history of such in previous disputes and this is mirrored in some of the comments upthread. Reducing manning costs by 50% implies pretty severe wage cuts and productivity increases (and presumably still a proportion of redundancies), and even if reluctantly agreed, a disgruntled workforce which will be difficult to manage.
If their competitor shipping lines are already operating such arrangements, it is quite understandable that P&O cannot sustain the legacy working arrangements/salaries. It cannot have come to the workforce as that much of a surprise, even though it will be a shock and upsetting. Full sympathy to the people directly affected - it is no consolation to them as individuals that this process has been taking place, in one way or another, in theirs and other industries for the last 60 or so years. We may share a crocodile tear, but are then happy to pay the low prices that such policies give us.

Sorry, but I understand what you're saying, but I disagree with you.
If you value your workforce as your greatest asset, as P&O's parent company said, then you engage them, explain the situation, explain the constraints, explain the options, and look jointly for solutions.
This is what "management" are paid to do - to manage. It's why they get paid more than deck-hands.
Yes, it might lead to an impasse but at that point you have been seen to have acted properly and you have options you can then pursue.
The fact seems to be that they didn't want to do this, because it's hard. P&O management wanted a simple way out which involved the least amount of time and effort on their part. If their parent company's claims mean anything, there was no problem bankrolling P&O during the process, the end result of which would have been better for P&O management, other employees, and P&O customers.
What they've ended up doing is the worst possible outcome for all three.
So we come back to the theory that the desire is to take P&O Ferries out of existence instead.

 

[Starmill]

Yet just last October Conservative MPs blocked attempts to outlaw it. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-58997916?

Condemnation now is cheap.

Strictly this isn't fire and rehire, it's just dismissal which is either unfair or not. Such measures probably wouldn't have made any difference. Also, trying to prevent 'fire and rehire' in law is very far from straightforward, because ultimately it is not that difficult for a business to go for fire and replace instead, and there is no clear way of stopping them. But yes in general I quite agree with your sentiment.

 

[WelshBluebird]

Just because media are reporting that lawyers are circling doesn't necessarily mean that what P&O have done is illegal. The one thing I find odd is the use of the word redundancy in the zoom meeting announcement. As discussed earlier, it doesn't seem to make sense.

Its also entirely possible that the wording on the zoom call was just incorrect. It wouldn't be the first time someone has said something that is kind of what they meant but technically different on such a meeting!

If their competitor shipping lines are already operating such arrangements, it is quite understandable that P&O cannot sustain the legacy working arrangements/salaries

I'm not sure if I buy that. Just because a competitor has potentially lower wage costs it doesn't stand to reason P&O's current costs are not sustainable - it just means they have a larger cost base that they have to manage (and either raise prices accordingly or accept a lower profit margin). Has anyone actually managed to validate the loosing 100m a year claim yet?

 

[jfollows]

Has anyone actually managed to validate the loosing 100m a year claim yet?

Guardian today in #225

P&O Ferries is losing money – £105m in 2020, according to the accounts for the relevant local holding company – but DP World itself is one of the world’s biggest logistics firms and recorded top-line earnings of $3.8bn (£2.9bn) last year. It ought to be able to handle a £100m crisis in a minor subsidiary in a calm manner and without resorting to such extreme tactics. It may be correct that P&O doesn’t have much of a future without a major restructuring but, come on, you’re more likely to achieve your aim if you signal your plans in advance and negotiate.

 

[RT4038]

I'm not sure if I buy that. Just because a competitor has potentially lower wage costs it doesn't stand to reason P&O's current costs are not sustainable - it just means they have a larger cost base that they have to manage (and either raise prices accordingly or accept a lower profit margin). Has anyone actually managed to validate the loosing 100m a year claim yet?

Well yes, they may be able to sustain higher wage costs by having lower overhead costs (economies of scale), but I would suggest that this is unlikely to be sufficiently the case if they are looking to reduce wage costs by 50%. They have a larger cost base and they are managing it - down - by their action. It does stand to reason - if their prices are raised accordingly and they are above their competition then they will lose market share and be in a worse position. Why would they want to accept a lower profit margin - they are not a charity - their investors will take their money out and seek higher returns elsewhere.

 

[Starmill]

Guardian today in #225

I do like Nils Pratley.

 

[Djgr]

Whilst it may seem dramatic, it is difficult to see what else P&O could have done, without inviting sit-ins and sabotage. There is a history of such in previous disputes and this is mirrored in some of the comments upthread. Reducing manning costs by 50% implies pretty severe wage cuts and productivity increases (and presumably still a proportion of redundancies), and even if reluctantly agreed, a disgruntled workforce which will be difficult to manage.
If their competitor shipping lines are already operating such arrangements, it is quite understandable that P&O cannot sustain the legacy working arrangements/salaries. It cannot have come to the workforce as that much of a surprise, even though it will be a shock and upsetting. Full sympathy to the people directly affected - it is no consolation to them as individuals that this process has been taking place, in one way or another, in theirs and other industries for the last 60 or so years. We may share a crocodile tear, but are then happy to pay the low prices that such policies give us.

I guess most people have a big issue with companies (probably) acting illegally.

I try to be law abiding. Don't you?

 

[BayPaul]

You can take the old Seafrance vessels and now DFDS as a perfect example of that. They were purpose-built for the route, and they didn't go anywhere despite two changes of operator.

I could conceivably see Tallink taking the vessels if it came down to it. They have the experience with Helsinki-Tallinn to operate a similar route, they have the finances (although how Tallink came to dominate the Baltic Sea is a fun case study in itself), and most of all, they're very politically savvy. The only question is whether there's enough space on the Spirit vessels to rebuild them more in line with Tallink's philosophy of providing a shopping mall experience at sea.

Is there any reason why they couldn't go to a 3 watch system so they're only on duty for 8 hours a day? A 4 hour watch wouldn't be too demanding, as it wouldn't even be two full crossings.

Brittany Ferries wouldn't change that as long as they aren't losing money. It's a huge part of their identity as a national (in the sense of Bretagne) company.

Yes - Dover ships tend to stay as Dover ships. The old Pride of Dover and Calais also went straight to scrap after leaving the Dover Strait.

Tallink would be one option, Stena on the Fredrikshaven - Gothenburg route would be another, but both lines have ships planned / under construction, so no real reason to use a 10 year old one instead. The Prides are only fit for scrap really - 30 years is end of life for a ship on this route. Another big downside for Dover ships is their relatively low freight capacity, as they never have a lower hold. With a 3-4 hour route, loading a lower hold becomes viable.

A 3 watch system means a 50% increase in watchkeepers onboard (and cabins for them). It is much cheaper just to have shorter amounts of time onboard.

Brittany Ferries are also basically state owned, with large shares owned by various French local governments. That means that there is no chance of them changing, even if they were to start losing money. Over the last few years they have lost a lot, but they are fundamentally a good company, that will do well in future years. One big advantage they have is that they have consistently invested in high quality new ships. Once the last of the eflexers are delivered they will have 5 brand new ships, and potentially the whole fleet built since 2000, depending on what happens to Normandie and Barfleur.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

It’s not just the Dubai based ownership and management that have played dirty, it is lots of alternative crew members that came to UK, and boarded buses for the ports.

They obviously knew what they were training for, accepted being gagged to not spill beans in advance, and knew they were taking others jobs. Whilst some may have been desperate for work, it is a very cloak and dagger, cutthroat way of furthering your career.

If the Government wanted to do something it could ask customs and immigration to do 100% detailed checks which would make it very unpopular with users, Government officials doing partial or little checks is effectively accepting it.

Indeed. Not saying it's right, but there are people in places like Grimethorpe in South Yorkshire who are still shunned by the rest of the community for being "scabs" nearly 40 years ago. If you shaft (pun unintended) your fellow workers people have long memories.

 

[mmh]

Indeed. Not saying it's right, but there are people in places like Grimethorpe in South Yorkshire who are still shunned by the rest of the community for being "scabs" nearly 40 years ago. If you shaft (pun unintended) your fellow workers people have long memories.

Post #245 has a quote from someone who says they had no idea what the job they'd taken was until they got to the port.

 

[cjmillsnun]

With most customers (or rather the most lucrative ones) being freight, most companies would just go for the cheapest.



And their target market mostly is tourists, for whom the experience of it being "a floating bit of France" is quite important, not least because of the long journey time of their routes. That's not true of quick shuttles across the Dover Strait.

Not strictly true. Western channel routes would not be profitable without freight. BF also compete with tourist flights to France and Spain from the likes of Vueling, easyJet, WizzAir and Ryanair.

 

[BayPaul]

Yes, there's a huge difference. A floating shopping mall Tallink-style is tolerable for people on Dover-Calais, but it's a different story if it's a much longer part of your holiday.

I could conceivably see someone taking up P&O and starting another duty free-based pricewar, though. There's a lot of scope to reduce fares, especially if there's a quiet agreement with UK Customs not to enforce the limits too rigorously.

The days of duty free price wars probably aren't coming back. The money is in freight, which wouldn't be impacted. Carrying a few more or less motorists because of duty free special tickets isn't going to make a dent in profits or losses. If someone wants to take on P&O, they'll look at undercutting them on freight.

Indeed. Not saying it's right, but there are people in places like Grimethorpe in South Yorkshire who are still shunned by the rest of the community for being "scabs" nearly 40 years ago. If you shaft (pun unintended) your fellow workers people have long memories.

The global community of seafarers makes that less of an issue - when you live miles apart you are less likely to be shunned than in the same village.

 

[RT4038]

I guess most people have a big issue with companies (probably) acting illegally.

I try to be law abiding. Don't you?

If indeed they have acted illegally, which cannot be condoned. However, this may well be wishful thinking. There are also lots of people wishing that the laws of economics can be broken too!

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Post #245 has a quote from someone who says they had no idea what the job they'd taken was until they got to the port.

Yeah, I saw that after posting my reply to the earlier post. Credit to "Mark" for reacting with solidarity at some cost to himself.

The global community of seafarers makes that less of an issue - when you live miles apart you are less likely to be shunned than in the same village.

Is there not a similar level of solidarity as other industries though? Being blackballed by the entire community of seafarers sounds potentially worse than just having to move from Barnsley to Wigan.

 

[BayPaul]

Is there not a similar level of solidarity as other industries though? Being blackballed by the entire community of seafarers sounds potentially worse than just having to move from Barnsley to Wigan.

Not in my experience. To take the Irish Ferries example, a number of people previously employed at Irish Ferries ended up getting jobs back on their ships, employed by the agency and remained friends with people on both sides. Everyone knows that someone is going to have to crew the ships, so they are unlikely to have a particular issue with the crew that took over. Only die-hard union crew may have an issue, and that is a small, and rapidly reducing, part of the industry. I don't know what other lines still have RMT representation - obviously Calmac and Northlink, as well as the RFA and coastal shipping but P&O ferries may have been the last large international line. Their last few remaining members on P&O Cruises went back in around 2008. Nautilus (officer's union) is widespread, but isn't militant.

 

[jfollows]

I do like Nils Pratley.

He appears to talk a lot of common sense, from my perspective, I agree with you.

 

[thejuggler]

Failure to notify Government is a criminal offence.

Charging the directors and stripping them of the right to be directors for a few years may make them think if they are happy fronting a company who think criminal activity is perfectly reasonable.

 

[alex397]

Unbelievably, Natalie Elphicke MP attended the protests alongside unions at Dover today.

This is a woman who voted against ending ‘fire and rehire’, and her government wants to restrict protests and are not exactly fans of unions.

The nerve! Thankfully though it appears the lovely lady was heckled.