Off Topic P&O

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Gone For A Walk said:
There's nothing to legally challenge with "the government's pledge".
The only thing to challenge / claim unfair is a lack of consultation. They'll likely win and p&o likely have factored in the cost (90 days pay I think,).
Btw, anyone shopping at Primark today, or driving an MG or ......?
Click to expand...

Nobody mentioned the Government’s pledge being legally binding. The challenge will be to show how the government actually stand on worker’s rights.

The big fines will potentially come for not completing a HR1 form. This is something they have no defence for not completing. The lack of consultation is another issue. The outcome of a tribunal may include rehiring.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AlRawdah and SW3 Chelsea Tiger
Gone For A Walk said:
There's nothing to legally challenge with "the government's pledge".
The only thing to challenge / claim unfair is a lack of consultation. They'll likely win and p&o likely have factored in the cost (90 days pay I think,).
Btw, anyone shopping at Primark today, or driving an MG or ......?
Click to expand...

We're talking about P&O, if you want to start a thread about Primark or MG to discuss them, maybe you should start a thread?
 
It looks like the cruise terminal could have a potential new home, albeit a bit further out than some wanted.
.
 
Sir Cheshire Ben said:
Nobody mentioned the Government’s pledge being legally binding. The challenge will be to show how the government actually stand on worker’s rights.

The big fines will potentially come for not completing a HR1 form. This is something they have no defence for not completing. The lack of consultation is another issue. The outcome of a tribunal may include rehiring.
Click to expand...

RH had a employment law specialist on this morning, I didn't catch the details, but they thought it unlikely that any legal action would be brought. Not even for unfair dismissal claims, as the way they're setting up the redundancy payments makes it unlikely that it would be viable for employees to bring them.
 
originallambrettaman said:
RH had a employment law specialist on this morning, I didn't catch the details, but they thought it unlikely that any legal action would be brought. Not even for unfair dismissal claims, as the way they're setting up the redundancy payments makes it unlikely that it would be viable for employees to bring them.
Click to expand...

I’ve just read that the government are investigating if they’ve done anything illegal.

You can appeal any redundancy based on whether the correct procedure was carried out.

Contracts should detail redundancy payments & policies should be in place that detail the company’s redundancy policy. This is the defining policy which will determine whether the correct procedure was followed.

ACAS will be busy over the coming months.
 
Gone For A Walk said:
Agree is awful news .... but Devils advocate. Lost £100 mill in a year. Already made big cuts. What else are they to do to avoid liquidation and loss of all remaining jobs ( direct and indirect)?
Click to expand...
They could have avoided spending £147m on a Golf Tournament for start.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dennisboothstash, Howden Tigress, taigers and 1 other person
Peter Hebblethwaite CEO of P+O ferries says he knew that they were duty bound to consult with the unions and workers before making 800 redundant but didn't. They decided to pay off the workers instead, which it looks like many have accepted.
 
A week after the event he starts off by making an apology to the workers, then goes on to say that the reason he didn't apologise earlier was because he has been busy meeting effected people 1 to 1.
 
balkan tiger said:
Peter Hebblethwaite CEO of P+O ferries says he knew that they were duty bound to consult with the unions and workers before making 800 redundant but didn't. They decided to pay off the workers instead, which it looks like many have accepted.
Click to expand...
The two things aren’t mutually exclusive though.
Nothing to stop them consulting with Unions and workers and still offering redundancy packages large enough to encourage people to accept them.
Difficult to figure out exactly what they thought they would achieve by the way they did it. Presumably just hoping they’d avoid the weeks of bad press during the consultation phase?
Turns out they misjudged that I’d say as the brand has been seriously Ratnered
CEO should fall on his sword if they really want to start being profitable. That way there’s a scapegoat at least while they try and rebuild the brand
 
dennisboothstash said:
The two things aren’t mutually exclusive though.
Nothing to stop them consulting with Unions and workers and still offering redundancy packages large enough to encourage people to accept them.
Difficult to figure out exactly what they thought they would achieve by the way they did it. Presumably just hoping they’d avoid the weeks of bad press during the consultation phase?
Turns out they misjudged that I’d say as the brand has been seriously Ratnered
CEO should fall on his sword if they really want to start being profitable. That way there’s a scapegoat at least while they try and rebuild the brand
Click to expand...

He also said that if they had gone down the consultation route it would have been never ending and that is why they did it the way they did. Clean break, new start with new low paid foreign workers ( who probably think that they have a great job and are being well paid ) and just pay off the sacked ones in lieu of notice.
 
balkan tiger said:
He also said that if they had gone down the consultation route it would have been never ending and that is why they did it the way they did. Clean break, new start with new low paid foreign workers ( who probably think that they have a great job and are being well paid ) and just pay off the sacked ones in lieu of notice.
Click to expand...
Yeah
He’s wrong though
Consultation has a fixed timescale. 45 days I think in this case. So it’s the exact opposite of never ending, as opposed to the never ending **** they’re getting as a result…and quite rightly
 
  • Like
Reactions: SW3 Chelsea Tiger
Company bins long-serving workers, hires scabs, scabs don’t know what the **** they’re doing, calamity ensues.

Tale as old as time. I hope P&O go bust.
 
dennisboothstash said:
Yeah
He’s wrong though
Consultation has a fixed timescale. 45 days I think in this case. So it’s the exact opposite of never ending, as opposed to the never ending **** they’re getting as a result…and quite rightly
Click to expand...

I think the reality is these weren’t redundancies. If they were there’d be no roles to fill.

The role becomes redundant, the employee has their contract terminated because of redundancy.

The employees were simply sacked, illegally. P&O know this & that’s why they’ve offered severance packages along with a hush clause in the severance contract.

A sad & despicable way to run a business & treat the people who work tirelessly to make sure the business has a chance of succeeding. If there was a failure in the business the axe should have been aimed at a lot higher level & not at the shop floor.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: PLT, GlassHalfHull, Kempton and 5 others
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back