P&O Ferries sacks workers and docks ships

[andysays]

Talking to a seafarer friend, he was asking what the dockside workers are planning, is there any intention of refusing to handle the ferries? Do the dock workers load/unload the vehicles? Aren't the dock workers in the RMT?

Some are in UNITE - I went on a union reps course a year or so ago and a couple of the other reps were dock workers.

 

[hitmouse]

Talking to a seafarer friend, he was asking what the dockside workers are planning, is there any intention of refusing to handle the ferries? Do the dock workers load/unload the vehicles? Aren't the dock workers in the RMT?

Yeah, this is key I think, and as others, I think MickiQ pointed out, what the French and Irish workers on the other side do is as crucial.
Anyway, details of the Larne demo are now confirmed, in case we have any Larne urbs, and got official confirmation that the next Liverpool one's been moved to later in the day:

 

[Bingoman]

P&O execs are at the Transport select committee and are getting a grilling

 

[MickiQ]

Talking to a seafarer friend, he was asking what the dockside workers are planning, is there any intention of refusing to handle the ferries? Do the dock workers load/unload the vehicles? Aren't the dock workers in the RMT?

Problem with UK dock workers refusing to handle the ferries is that P&O or the Port authorities could go to court and asked for it to be declared as secondary action (which is illegal) and to seize the Union's assets if they refuse to comply.
If it's entirely spontaneous then the Union can of course say "Not Us Gov" but they would have to prove they really weren't involved.
French dock workers are a much better hope tbh, it's damn near impossible to sue French Unions for anything.

 

[Smokeandsteam]

Problem with UK dock workers refusing to handle the ferries is that P&O or the Port authorities could go to court and asked for it to be declared as secondary action (which is illegal) and to seize the Union's assets if they refuse to comply.
If it's entirely spontaneous then the Union can of course say "Not Us Gov" but they would have to prove they really weren't involved.
French dock workers are a much better hope tbh, it's damn near impossible to sue French Unions for anything.

It would, in the event that the union repudiated any action and claimed it was 'spontaneous' action, potentially expose dock workers to possible disciplinary/dismissal from their own employer for 'refusing to obey a reasonable management instruction'.

 

[MickiQ]

It would, in the event that the union repudiated any action and claimed it was 'spontaneous' action, potentially expose dock workers to possible disciplinary/dismissal from their own employer for 'refusing to obey a reasonable management instruction'.

Lose either way

 

[Serge Forward]

Problem with UK dock workers refusing to handle the ferries is that P&O or the Port authorities could go to court and asked for it to be declared as secondary action (which is illegal) and to seize the Union's assets if they refuse to comply.
If it's entirely spontaneous then the Union can of course say "Not Us Gov" but they would have to prove they really weren't involved.
French dock workers are a much better hope tbh, it's damn near impossible to sue French Unions for anything.

To stay right side of the law, the union has to repudiate the action (obviously on the understanding that members carry on). But it's still ludicrous. In a more ideal world, unions would have long ago taken actions to defy and break the anti union laws. I'm not hopeful though.

 

[The39thStep]

 

[hitmouse]

Problem with UK dock workers refusing to handle the ferries is that P&O or the Port authorities could go to court and asked for it to be declared as secondary action (which is illegal) and to seize the Union's assets if they refuse to comply.
If it's entirely spontaneous then the Union can of course say "Not Us Gov" but they would have to prove they really weren't involved.
French dock workers are a much better hope tbh, it's damn near impossible to sue French Unions for anything.

Fwiw, here's a story that quotes an RMT organiser as saying that French and Dutch dockers will be doing that:

P&O Ferries: French and Dutch dockers issue ‘scab’ warning over P&O replacement crews

French and Dutch dockers have told a union calling for the reinstatement of 800 sacked seafarers that they won’t handle ferries manned by “scab” crews.

www.yorkshirepost.co.uk

It would, in the event that the union repudiated any action and claimed it was 'spontaneous' action, potentially expose dock workers to possible disciplinary/dismissal from their own employer for 'refusing to obey a reasonable management instruction'.

Is there much potential for use of health & safety stuff here? I think I'm drawing on stuff I've heard about workers in other countries so probably a totally different set of employment law, but if there was a picket at the port/around the relevant ships, and the dockers said that they felt intimidated, had a genuine belief that the protesters might cause a risk to their safety, etc, would that give them protection from disciplinary action? Obviously the courts could ban the RMT from organising any such protests, but I would hope that there'd still be potential for autonomous informal groups that definitely don't have any links to the RMT to self-organise their own protests?

 

[sleaterkinney]

Astonishing stuff from the select committee, "we chose not to do it"

 

[SpookyFrank]

Astonishing stuff from the select committee, "we chose not to do it"

And when they're let off with a performative bollocking and a token fine, that will completely vindicate their decision not to bother with due process and will empower others to do likewise.

 

[The39thStep]

Astonishing stuff from the select committee, "we chose not to do it"

The need to implement new operating model is apparently the new Holy Grail

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

A full and frank admission that they have conspired to break the law, the one that is a criminal offence that allows for unlimited fine. Trying to cover up it with some £100k pay-outs and NDA's, take 'em and still testify, a settlement and/or NDA is no protection against criminal charges.

 

[Chz]

You know, I was joking when I said they'd blame it all on Chris Grayling.

P&O Ferries sackings: Change in law signed off by Chris Grayling meant P&O didn't need to tell govt, maritime lawyer says

While senior government officials have claimed that the sacking of 800 workers by P&O Ferries was illegal, a specialist in maritime law argues that is incorrect.

news.sky.com

Failure to provide the proper notification was one that had a theoretically unlimited fine. So that's out the window if the story is true.

Surely Grayling is just employed as a fall guy. No-one can be that shit at their job.

 

[hitmouse]

I still can't get used to seeing people talk about "maritime law" in an actual serious appropriate context. Although I suppose even FOTLers look like they're on solid legal ground compared to the "I know it's illegal and I decided to do it anyway" defence.
Anyway, can anyone who understands more about shipping than me confirm if this is accurate and how important it is if so?

 

[SpookyFrank]

Surely Grayling is just employed as a fall guy. No-one can be that shit at their job.

His job was to fuck things up and piss away public money. To be a one man crisis for crisis capitalism to grow fat on. I'd argue that he served with rare distinction in that capacity.

 

[Smokeandsteam]

Is there much potential for use of health & safety stuff here? I think I'm drawing on stuff I've heard about workers in other countries so probably a totally different set of employment law, but if there was a picket at the port/around the relevant ships, and the dockers said that they felt intimidated, had a genuine belief that the protesters might cause a risk to their safety, etc, would that give them protection from disciplinary action? Obviously the courts could ban the RMT from organising any such protests, but I would hope that there'd still be potential for autonomous informal groups that definitely don't have any links to the RMT to self-organise their own protests?

That’s a potentially really good idea. You’re talking about using Section 44 of the ERA which gives workers the right to remove themselves from a situation where they believe themselves to be ‘serious and imminent danger’. Given these ships are going to be crewed by agency workers I’d have thought this could be proven/defensible.

I also agree. Small groups and savvy stewards would be essential to making it work and stick in my view.

 

[Ming]

His job was to fuck things up and piss away public money. To be a one man crisis for crisis capitalism to grow fat on. I'd argue that he served with rare distinction in that capacity.

Totally. That is his job. He’s a disaster capitalist.

 

[hitmouse]

Glasgow demo on Monday morning, targeting the scab recruitment agency:

RMT calls demonstration at Clyde Marine Recruitment as union targets P&O supply chain

RMT calls demonstration at Clyde Marine Recruitment as union targets P&O supply chain

www.rmt.org.uk

 

[Pickman's model]

You know, I was joking when I said they'd blame it all on Chris Grayling.

P&O Ferries sackings: Change in law signed off by Chris Grayling meant P&O didn't need to tell govt, maritime lawyer says

While senior government officials have claimed that the sacking of 800 workers by P&O Ferries was illegal, a specialist in maritime law argues that is incorrect.

news.sky.com

Failure to provide the proper notification was one that had a theoretically unlimited fine. So that's out the window if the story is true.

Surely Grayling is just employed as a fall guy. No-one can be that shit at their job.

Have you heard of Boris Johnson?

 

[Winot]

Sorry, this may have been covered on the thread already, but how is this redundancy at all if they are bringing in other workers to fulfil the same roles?

 

[philosophical]

Sheesh.
Peter Hepplethwaite is like a non league team suddenly appearing in the quarter final of the cup of cuntishness.
The brazen nature of the ruling class is stripped bare, they don’t give a shit about hiding anything even.

 

[two sheds]

Have any of the interviewers asked him why he hasn't sacked himself and reapplied for his job at £3 an hour?

 

[teqniq]

Sheesh.
Peter Hepplethwaite is like a non league team suddenly appearing in the quarter final of the cup of cuntishness.
The brazen nature of the ruling class is stripped bare, they don’t give a shit about hiding anything even.

Just in case anyone has the stomach for it:

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

Have any of the interviewers asked him why he hasn't sacked himself and reapplied for his job at £3 an hour?

They kind of did, they asked if he would be able to maintain his lifestyle on this money. He refused to answer. They asked him if he was reducing his take, again he refused to answer.

 

[teuchter]

Asking questions like that is stupid and pointless. Everyone knows the answer. This kind of thing is never going to be prevented by the good will of management. It also seems quite delusional to me that the "reputation" of P&O is going to be damaged in a way that has any commercial impact.

These decisions are simply taken in an economic context. They would be taken by whoever was in control. If competitors can massively cut their wage bills, how can it be anything other than inevitable that these actions will be taken, unless the environment the companies work in is changed? If the environment is such that accepting some fines is cheaper than going through the proper process, why would anyone be surprised that that route is taken?

Something has to be done via legislation - or indeed by the unions using whatever economic power they have. Focusing on the morals or lifestyles of executives is dimwitted and a waste of time.

 

[hitmouse]

Today I have learned that while Peter Hebblethwaite is head of P&O Ferries, Peter Heppelthwaite is an actor who had bit parts in The Office, Black Books, One Foot in the Grave and Randall & Hopkirk (Deceased). As with P&O Cruises, I imagine he may be spending a lot of time this week making it very clear to people that he's nothing to do with the other one.

 

[Winot]

Asking questions like that is stupid and pointless. Everyone knows the answer. This kind of thing is never going to be prevented by the good will of management. It also seems quite delusional to me that the "reputation" of P&O is going to be damaged in a way that has any commercial impact.

These decisions are simply taken in an economic context. They would be taken by whoever was in control. If competitors can massively cut their wage bills, how can it be anything other than inevitable that these actions will be taken, unless the environment the companies work in is changed? If the environment is such that accepting some fines is cheaper than going through the proper process, why would anyone be surprised that that route is taken?

Something has to be done via legislation - or indeed by the unions using whatever economic power they have. Focusing on the morals or lifestyles of executives is dimwitted and a waste of time.

Broadly agree, although the lifestyle thing cuts through with voters and results in pressure on politicians to make the substantive changes that are necessary.

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

Asking questions like that is stupid and pointless. Everyone knows the answer. This kind of thing is never going to be prevented by the good will of management. It also seems quite delusional to me that the "reputation" of P&O is going to be damaged in a way that has any commercial impact.

These decisions are simply taken in an economic context. They would be taken by whoever was in control. If competitors can massively cut their wage bills, how can it be anything other than inevitable that these actions will be taken, unless the environment the companies work in is changed? If the environment is such that accepting some fines is cheaper than going through the proper process, why would anyone be surprised that that route is taken?

Something has to be done via legislation - or indeed by the unions using whatever economic power they have. Focusing on the morals or lifestyles of executives is dimwitted and a waste of time.

Sure, very much like Jimmy Carr's mea culpa



The legislators have yet again failed to properly legislate.

 

[NoXion]

Asking questions like that is stupid and pointless.

On the contrary, their refusal to answer tells us much. For one thing, it tells us that they can't even come up with excuses for their shitassery.

Everyone knows the answer.

Questions can also be asked as a means of rhetoric, not just the straightforward gathering of fact and opinion.

These decisions are simply taken in an economic context. They would be taken by whoever was in control. If competitors can massively cut their wage bills, how can it be anything other than inevitable that these actions will be taken, unless the environment the companies work in is changed? If the environment is such that accepting some fines is cheaper than going through the proper process, why would anyone be surprised that that route is taken?

Something has to be done via legislation - or indeed by the unions using whatever economic power they have.

I agree that legislation and/or union action is needed. But we also need to be asking awkward questions that put the suits on the spot. If they choose to ignore such questions, then people will notice that.

Focusing on the morals or lifestyles of executives is dimwitted and a waste of time.

I strongly disagree. Not everyone is a Mr Logic type, politics is as much about hearts as it is about minds.