Tough Times Ahead!
 

Tip of the iceberg here I think (pardon the pun in advance):-

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

Not surprised that the crews are angry. I had a similar experience and it takes a lot of getting over. Not even a thank you from my old boss but at least it was face to face. I got it all in writing, an enhanced redundancy and a chance to slam the door on the way out but it still cut deep. :shrug:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...become-reality

Sounds like wrongful dismissal to me. Unless of course the existing (old) employees do not have the usual protective status. If so, they have already lost the battle. If the gangway is dropped they will be evicted and the boat re-staffed before sailing off into the wide blue.

The identities or origins of the supposed replacements seem undisclosed and therefore their status is unclear. Whatever, it's no way to behave. We are all in danger of becoming a pirate nation with no redress in law compared to whatever has gone before. The only rule is the old rules do not apply. Last ring of defence? HM Coastguard.

Once you've lost your job by this method it is impossible to recover your position. The demise of such a company can only be blamed on the management, who will do almost anything to preserve whatever assets they might be able to retain. Witness High Street closures of major stores. A collection of parentless chancers. Possibly.

A shameful and cowardly way to treat the staff!

I'm lost for words to be honest.

One can only hope that those who have lost their jobs are very quickly re employed and by companies that respect their workforce.

I seem to recall that if one was made redundant it was the role not the employee that was lost and an employer could not simply hire someone else on lesser terms. That was the case with my past employers, although I was never affected in such a way.

Trick is, if one is thinking of a ferry crossing run by P&O, then an alternative should be sort and the reason why be provided.

This stinks whatever though.

I agree wholeheartedly.



Also, does redundancy on a large scale not require formal consultations with employees and their representatives?

Depends on the country of origin. And is a movable feast.

I was replaced by a young lady, straight out of uni, employed in a position with a different name, doing my exact job, in the same place, with the same people! She lasted approximately six weeks before running home to mummy! I would not have gone back anyway! I've never set foot in the place since. I ended up having CBT which "saved me"! Happily retired now.:}

From my experience plenty of discussions occurred. Colleagues who matched the criteria left with most generous packages of redundancy terms. One chap reckoned it was like winning the lottery, wheelbarrows were not provided by the company though.

Part of the problem in the UK is we want a Rolls Royce but are only prepared to pay Dacia prices. Its been like that for as long as I can remember.

I see there are two threads on this sensitive subject, perhaps someone can merge them or whatever?

I fear the main reason this has been done in this way is where the control is coming from. Some regimes do not have the respect for employees, nor the priorities that might exist if that control was based in the United Kingdom.

Our employment laws are weak, this should be illegal. This is not part of the vision of Brexit, high skill, high wage economy, it’s the opposite. Government talk a good race, but rarely deliver, perhaps they should just blame the EU!

Quote:

Despite Boris Johnson’s assurances that Britain’s departure from the EU would be better for UK workers, there have been fears it would be seen by the government as an opportunity to erode workers’ rights in a bid to increase competitiveness.

However, the reality is that, so far at least, there has been no derogation from EU employment rights and the scope for any backsliding is limited. Contained within the trade and cooperation agreement with the EU, there is a non-regression clause, under which Britain agreed not to reduce employment rights below the standards existing on 31 December 2020 in a manner that would affect trade or investment. The EU could take retaliatory measures such as tariffs if trade or investment were affected and could also legally challenge the regression before a panel of experts.


Alas the UK has been haemorrhaging jobs for decades
irrespective of who was in power or what trade club we were in. Strange that over the years we, generally, just accepted the export of employment with hardly a murmur but of late?

Besides employment law is very complicated. I'm sure of one thing though; the lawyers will win.

Anyway this thread is likely to get very political, so no more from me

Got this email from P&O cruises. They must be quite scared to have put out such an email. Apart from this thread I did not know they were different

"As Britain’s favourite cruise line, your loyalty, advocacy and support has always meant the world to us. P&O Cruises has been part of Carnival Corporation & plc for over 20 years and has no connection to P&O Ferries. Our thoughts go out to all those affected by yesterday’s news. However, please be assured it’s business as usual on our cruises and our crew look forward to welcoming you on board soon."

macafee2

Good post, we never did take all of EU legislation as we opted out. Seem to remember a while ago was it Peugeot was contemplating redundancies in the UK as it was financially impossible to do the same to French workers.