P&O Ferries goes under (or not)

[courtg9000]

Strange way of doing things IMHO

[tazdevil]

Done a lot of Hull Rotterdam / Zeebrugge and the nice thing is the British staff. They certainly did their stuff in support of the Falklands conflict To simply sack them all and replace with cheap foreign labour is a travesty. Is this even possible WRT visas and employment legislation?

[WTFH]

Done a lot of Hull Rotterdam / Zeebrugge and the nice thing is the British staff. They certainly did their stuff in support of the Falklands conflict To simply sack them all and replace with cheap foreign labour is a travesty. Is this even possible WRT visas and employment legislation?

A few years ago it wasn't possible, but having fewer ferries crossing the channel takes back control.

[SueEllen]

Done a lot of Hull Rotterdam / Zeebrugge and the nice thing is the British staff. They certainly did their stuff in support of the Falklands conflict To simply sack them all and replace with cheap foreign labour is a travesty. Is this even possible WRT visas and employment legislation?

Fire and rehire is normal in the UK unfortunately.

[vetran]

A few years ago it wasn't possible, but having fewer ferries crossing the channel takes back control.

Do explain how it has anything to do with Brexit or are you making it up as usual?

Do you know how few ships are registered in the UK and how few actually have a predominantly British crew? This has been standard for decades. Sack the crew and hire from low cost countries is standard.

[vetran]

Not sure how successful redundancy and rehire will be in such a case? Its not like the job has ceased to exist.

I imagine a few lawyers will be rubbing their hands.

[SueEllen]

Not sure how successful redundancy and rehire will be in such a case? Its not like the job has ceased to exist.

I imagine a few lawyers will be rubbing their hands.

They haven't broken any laws and as they have got rid of the entire crew it's fair.

Most companies get rid of a few people and take the risk that they won't sue.

[vetran]

They haven't broken any laws and as they have got rid of the entire crew it's fair.

Most companies get rid of a few people and take the risk that they won't sue.

hmm

https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/wo...cy-is-genuine/

Signs it might not be a genuine redundancy


Sometimes an employer might say you’re being made redundant to hide the true reason for dismissing you.

Signs it might not be a genuine redundancy include:

• your employer has recently taken on other people doing similar work
• you have a bad relationship with your employer or other people at work
• you're singled out or treated differently from other people at work

Pretty sure a van full of Agency staff is a clue. The job is made redundant not you.

[SueEllen]

Listening to a load of ex-sea farers saying this is "fair" and has been standard practice for over the last decade.

https://www.davidsonmorris.com/fire-and-rehire/

Fire and rehire is not a new strategy and, provided it is handled correctly, it is not unlawful. However, in most cases, any change usually involves employees being worse off, which means that the process is fraught with risk and difficulty. Firing and rehiring is typically used by employers who wish to vary the terms of their employees’ contracts but could not do so by agreement. This practice is also known as dismissal and re-engagement.

[WTFH]

Oh, that part is interesting. The nominal reason they're giving is the 100m loss suffered in the last financial year (), but I wasn't aware of the sanctions angle...

It appears it's just a tenuous link to one of the board of Rosatom (Russian state nuclear energy company)