Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <t17aam$gel$1@dont-email.me>, at 13:31:02 on Sun, 20 Mar
> 2022, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>> ColinR <rail@greystane.shetland.co.uk> wrote:
>>> On 20/03/2022 07:05, Recliner wrote:
>>>> <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
>>>>> On 19/03/2022 21:12, Bevan Price wrote:
>>>>>> On 19/03/2022 20:17, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>> In message <t15b0k$i1f$1@dont-email.me>, at 19:30:28 on Sat, 19 Mar
>>>>>>> 2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>>> On 19/03/2022 18:59, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>>> In message <t153ib$ktp$2@dont-email.me>, at 17:23:23 on Sat, 19 Mar
>>>>>>>>> 2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>> On 19/03/2022 16:33, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> In message <t14fiu$7lf$2@dont-email.me>, at 11:42:22 on Sat, 19
>>>>>>>>>>> Mar 2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 19/03/2022 10:40, Theo wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ColinR <rail@greystane.shetland.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Absolutely. P&O employ, at great cost, legions of legal staff
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and  they  will not have done this unless they had good reason
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to believe  that any  legal challenge would be defeated.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>  In corporate scandals passim, the lawyers may have advised that
>>>>>>>>>>>>> doing XYZ  would be illegal/unlawful/subject to legal challenge,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> and the CEO has  done  it anyway.  Sometimes the CEO has gone to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> jail, other times not.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> The most obvious charge here is that the company failed to give
>>>>>>>>>>>> the  government the required notice that it was making more than
>>>>>>>>>>>> 100  staff redundant and that failure is itself a criminal offence.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  Would that not apply only to companies registered in UK (rather
>>>>>>>>>>> than  trading in UK)?
>>>>>>>>>>>  Very simple metrics like who was the employer, and what country
>>>>>>>>>>> that  company was based in, are missing from the discussion.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> They are employed in the UK and that is what counts.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>  That's the classic oversimplification. Are they working in the UK -
>>>>>>>>> no  on ferries. Is the company who employs them based (whatever that
>>>>>>>>> means)  in the UK - nobody seems to know, or if they do they aren't
>>>>>>>>> saying.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Very essy for you to find out, I leave that as an exercise for the
>>>>>>>> student.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If it's that easy, and yet has evaded the UK press corps, do tell...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Could UK government make life less pleasant for non-UK members of the
>>>>>> replacement crews by refusing permission for them to disembark and enter
>>>>>> UK ??
>>>>>>
>>>>> The MCA have the ability to make things very difficult for P&O by
>>>>> detaining their vessels for minor infringements of the regulations. I
>>>>> suspect that P&O's vessels are going to be very closely inspected in in
>>>>> the medium term anyway.
>>>>
>>>> Yes:
>>>> Shapps said vessels would not be allowed to sail with inexperienced crews
>>>> and has ordered the Maritime and Coastguard Agency to inspect all vessels
>>>> before they return to service.
>>>
>>> However, the MCA would only be able to undertake "port state control"
>>> inspections as the vessels are not UK flagged. Accordingly any
>>> detentions etc would have to be made under international requirements,
>>> not UK requirements and they would have to justify those detentions.
>>
>> Do the new crew live on the ferries? Otherwise I don’t see how they
>> survive. According to today’s paper wages are around half (or even less)
>> than the previous. How can you live in the port towns on third world wages?
>
> Some reports claim that workers like these work three months straight -
> no days off and long hours too. So they don't really need a
> place-to-live. Just somewhere on the boat to sleep.

Do car ferries have crew sleeping quarters?

On 20/03/2022 13:31, Tweed wrote:
> ColinR <rail@greystane.shetland.co.uk> wrote:
>> On 20/03/2022 07:05, Recliner wrote:
>>> <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
>>>> On 19/03/2022 21:12, Bevan Price wrote:
>>>>> On 19/03/2022 20:17, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>> In message <t15b0k$i1f$1@dont-email.me>, at 19:30:28 on Sat, 19 Mar
>>>>>> 2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>> On 19/03/2022 18:59, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>> In message <t153ib$ktp$2@dont-email.me>, at 17:23:23 on Sat, 19 Mar
>>>>>>>> 2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>>>> On 19/03/2022 16:33, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> In message <t14fiu$7lf$2@dont-email.me>, at 11:42:22 on Sat, 19
>>>>>>>>>> Mar 2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 19/03/2022 10:40, Theo wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> ColinR <rail@greystane.shetland.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Absolutely. P&O employ, at great cost, legions of legal staff
>>>>>>>>>>>>> and  they  will not have done this unless they had good reason
>>>>>>>>>>>>> to believe  that any  legal challenge would be defeated.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>  In corporate scandals passim, the lawyers may have advised that
>>>>>>>>>>>> doing XYZ  would be illegal/unlawful/subject to legal challenge,
>>>>>>>>>>>> and the CEO has  done  it anyway.  Sometimes the CEO has gone to
>>>>>>>>>>>> jail, other times not.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The most obvious charge here is that the company failed to give
>>>>>>>>>>> the  government the required notice that it was making more than
>>>>>>>>>>> 100  staff redundant and that failure is itself a criminal offence.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  Would that not apply only to companies registered in UK (rather
>>>>>>>>>> than  trading in UK)?
>>>>>>>>>>  Very simple metrics like who was the employer, and what country
>>>>>>>>>> that  company was based in, are missing from the discussion.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> They are employed in the UK and that is what counts.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  That's the classic oversimplification. Are they working in the UK -
>>>>>>>> no  on ferries. Is the company who employs them based (whatever that
>>>>>>>> means)  in the UK - nobody seems to know, or if they do they aren't
>>>>>>>> saying.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Very essy for you to find out, I leave that as an exercise for the
>>>>>>> student.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If it's that easy, and yet has evaded the UK press corps, do tell...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Could UK government make life less pleasant for non-UK members of the
>>>>> replacement crews by refusing permission for them to disembark and enter
>>>>> UK ??
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> The MCA have the ability to make things very difficult for P&O by
>>>> detaining their vessels for minor infringements of the regulations. I
>>>> suspect that P&O's vessels are going to be very closely inspected in in
>>>> the medium term anyway.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Yes:
>>> Shapps said vessels would not be allowed to sail with inexperienced crews
>>> and has ordered the Maritime and Coastguard Agency to inspect all vessels
>>> before they return to service.
>>>
>>
>> However, the MCA would only be able to undertake "port state control"
>> inspections as the vessels are not UK flagged. Accordingly any
>> detentions etc would have to be made under international requirements,
>> not UK requirements and they would have to justify those detentions.
>>
>
> Do the new crew live on the ferries? Otherwise I don’t see how they
> survive. According to today’s paper wages are around half (or even less)
> than the previous. How can you live in the port towns on third world wages?
>

When I worked for P&O ferries there was a mix of day crew and "live
aboard" crewing at Dover. At Hull* it was all "live-aboard", as it was,
I believe, at Liverpool. Have no knowledge of Cainryan. Things may have
changed since then!

*and a significant number of the Hull crews were Filipino staff living
for their full contract on board (cannot recall if this was three or six
months).

--
Colin

In message <t17c0d$i1n$1@dont-email.me>, at 13:59:41 on Sun, 20 Mar
2022, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <t17aam$gel$1@dont-email.me>, at 13:31:02 on Sun, 20 Mar
>> 2022, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>> ColinR <rail@greystane.shetland.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> On 20/03/2022 07:05, Recliner wrote:
>>>>> <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> On 19/03/2022 21:12, Bevan Price wrote:
>>>>>>> On 19/03/2022 20:17, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>> In message <t15b0k$i1f$1@dont-email.me>, at 19:30:28 on Sat, 19 Mar
>>>>>>>> 2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>>>> On 19/03/2022 18:59, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> In message <t153ib$ktp$2@dont-email.me>, at 17:23:23 on Sat, 19 Mar
>>>>>>>>>> 2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 19/03/2022 16:33, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> In message <t14fiu$7lf$2@dont-email.me>, at 11:42:22 on Sat, 19
>>>>>>>>>>>> Mar 2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 19/03/2022 10:40, Theo wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ColinR <rail@greystane.shetland.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Absolutely. P&O employ, at great cost, legions of legal staff
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and  they  will not have done this unless they had good reason
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to believe  that any  legal challenge would be defeated.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  In corporate scandals passim, the lawyers may have advised that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> doing XYZ  would be illegal/unlawful/subject to legal challenge,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and the CEO has  done  it anyway.  Sometimes the CEO
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jail, other times not.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The most obvious charge here is that the company failed to give
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the  government the required notice that it was making more than
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 100  staff redundant and that failure is itself a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>offence.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>  Would that not apply only to companies registered in UK (rather
>>>>>>>>>>>> than  trading in UK)?
>>>>>>>>>>>>  Very simple metrics like who was the employer, and what country
>>>>>>>>>>>> that  company was based in, are missing from the discussion.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> They are employed in the UK and that is what counts.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  That's the classic oversimplification. Are they working in the UK -
>>>>>>>>>> no  on ferries. Is the company who employs them based (whatever that
>>>>>>>>>> means)  in the UK - nobody seems to know, or if they do they aren't
>>>>>>>>>> saying.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Very essy for you to find out, I leave that as an exercise for the
>>>>>>>>> student.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If it's that easy, and yet has evaded the UK press corps, do tell...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Could UK government make life less pleasant for non-UK members of the
>>>>>>> replacement crews by refusing permission for them to disembark and enter
>>>>>>> UK ??
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> The MCA have the ability to make things very difficult for P&O by
>>>>>> detaining their vessels for minor infringements of the regulations. I
>>>>>> suspect that P&O's vessels are going to be very closely inspected in in
>>>>>> the medium term anyway.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes:
>>>>> Shapps said vessels would not be allowed to sail with inexperienced crews
>>>>> and has ordered the Maritime and Coastguard Agency to inspect all vessels
>>>>> before they return to service.
>>>>
>>>> However, the MCA would only be able to undertake "port state control"
>>>> inspections as the vessels are not UK flagged. Accordingly any
>>>> detentions etc would have to be made under international requirements,
>>>> not UK requirements and they would have to justify those detentions.
>>>
>>> Do the new crew live on the ferries? Otherwise I don’t see how they
>>> survive. According to today’s paper wages are around half (or even less)
>>> than the previous. How can you live in the port towns on third world wages?
>>
>> Some reports claim that workers like these work three months straight -
>> no days off and long hours too. So they don't really need a
>> place-to-live. Just somewhere on the boat to sleep.
>
>Do car ferries have crew sleeping quarters?

For those reports to be true - yes. And many of the crew who are
complaining about being fired seem to be employed to feed the rest of
the crew. Sorry if that's a bit recursive.
--
Roland Perry

On 20/03/2022 15:28, Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <t17c0d$i1n$1@dont-email.me>, at 13:59:41 on Sun, 20 Mar
> 2022, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <t17aam$gel$1@dont-email.me>, at 13:31:02 on Sun, 20 Mar
>>> 2022, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>> ColinR <rail@greystane.shetland.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> On 20/03/2022 07:05, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>> <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 19/03/2022 21:12, Bevan Price wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 19/03/2022 20:17, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>>> In message <t15b0k$i1f$1@dont-email.me>, at 19:30:28 on Sat, 19
>>>>>>>>> Mar
>>>>>>>>> 2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>> On 19/03/2022 18:59, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> In message <t153ib$ktp$2@dont-email.me>, at 17:23:23 on Sat,
>>>>>>>>>>> 19 Mar
>>>>>>>>>>> 2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 19/03/2022 16:33, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> In message <t14fiu$7lf$2@dont-email.me>, at 11:42:22 on
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sat, 19
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mar 2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 19/03/2022 10:40, Theo wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ColinR <rail@greystane.shetland.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Absolutely. P&O employ, at great cost, legions of legal
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> staff
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and  they  will not have done this unless they had good
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reason
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to believe  that any  legal challenge would be defeated.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  In corporate scandals passim, the lawyers may have
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> advised that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> doing XYZ  would be illegal/unlawful/subject to legal
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> challenge,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and the CEO has  done  it anyway.  Sometimes the CEO
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jail, other times not.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The most obvious charge here is that the company failed to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> give
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the  government the required notice that it was making
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> more than
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 100  staff redundant and that failure is itself a offence.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>  Would that not apply only to companies registered in UK
>>>>>>>>>>>>> (rather
>>>>>>>>>>>>> than  trading in UK)?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>  Very simple metrics like who was the employer, and what
>>>>>>>>>>>>> country
>>>>>>>>>>>>> that  company was based in, are missing from the discussion.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> They are employed in the UK and that is what counts.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  That's the classic oversimplification. Are they working in
>>>>>>>>>>> the UK -
>>>>>>>>>>> no  on ferries. Is the company who employs them based
>>>>>>>>>>> (whatever that
>>>>>>>>>>> means)  in the UK - nobody seems to know, or if they do they
>>>>>>>>>>> aren't
>>>>>>>>>>> saying.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Very essy for you to find out, I leave that as an exercise for
>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> student.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> If it's that easy, and yet has evaded the UK press corps, do
>>>>>>>>> tell...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Could UK government make life less pleasant for non-UK members
>>>>>>>> of the
>>>>>>>> replacement crews by refusing permission for them to disembark
>>>>>>>> and enter
>>>>>>>> UK ??
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The MCA have the ability to make things very difficult for P&O by
>>>>>>> detaining their vessels for minor infringements of the
>>>>>>> regulations.  I
>>>>>>> suspect that P&O's vessels are going to be very closely inspected
>>>>>>> in in
>>>>>>> the medium term anyway.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes:
>>>>>> Shapps said vessels would not be allowed to sail with
>>>>>> inexperienced crews
>>>>>> and has ordered the Maritime and Coastguard Agency to inspect all
>>>>>> vessels
>>>>>> before they return to service.
>>>>>
>>>>> However, the MCA would only be able to undertake "port state control"
>>>>> inspections as the vessels are not UK flagged. Accordingly any
>>>>> detentions etc would have to be made under international requirements,
>>>>> not UK requirements and they would have to justify those detentions.
>>>>
>>>> Do the new crew live on the ferries? Otherwise I don’t see how they
>>>> survive. According to today’s paper wages are around half (or even
>>>> less)
>>>> than the previous. How can you live in the port towns on third world
>>>> wages?
>>>
>>> Some reports claim that workers like these work three months straight -
>>> no days off and long hours too. So they don't really need a
>>> place-to-live. Just somewhere on the boat to sleep.
>>
>> Do car ferries have crew sleeping quarters?
>
> For those reports to be true - yes. And many of the crew who are
> complaining about being fired seem to be employed to feed the rest of
> the crew. Sorry if that's a bit recursive.

That is a bit damning, and totally inaccurate! Whilst crew do get fed on
board, there are few, if any, hotel /galley etc staff who are dedicated
to crew meals etc. The majority are on board to service / feed the
passengers / lorry drivers etc.

--
Colin

On 20/03/2022 10:30, Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <t15h02$svf$2@dont-email.me>, at 21:12:36 on Sat, 19 Mar
> 2022, Bevan Price <bevanprice666@gmail.com> remarked:
>> On 19/03/2022 20:17, Roland Perry wrote:
>>> In message <t15b0k$i1f$1@dont-email.me>, at 19:30:28 on Sat, 19 Mar
>>> 2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>> On 19/03/2022 18:59, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>> In message <t153ib$ktp$2@dont-email.me>, at 17:23:23 on Sat, 19 Mar
>>>>> 2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>> On 19/03/2022 16:33, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>> In message <t14fiu$7lf$2@dont-email.me>, at 11:42:22 on Sat, 19
>>>>>>> Mar  2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>>> On 19/03/2022 10:40, Theo wrote:
>>>>>>>>> ColinR <rail@greystane.shetland.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Absolutely. P&O employ, at great cost, legions of legal staff
>>>>>>>>>> and  they  will not have done this unless they had good reason
>>>>>>>>>> to believe  that any  legal challenge would be defeated.
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>  In corporate scandals passim, the lawyers may have advised
>>>>>>>>> that  doing XYZ  would be illegal/unlawful/subject to legal
>>>>>>>>> challenge,  and the CEO has  done  it anyway.  Sometimes the
>>>>>>>>> CEO has gone to  jail, other times not.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The most obvious charge here is that the company failed to give
>>>>>>>> the  government the required notice that it was making more than
>>>>>>>> 100  staff redundant and that failure is itself a criminal offence.
>>>
>>>>>>>  Would that not apply only to companies registered in UK (rather
>>>>>>> than  trading in UK)?
>>>>>>>  Very simple metrics like who was the employer, and what country
>>>>>>> that  company was based in, are missing from the discussion.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> They are employed in the UK and that is what counts.
>>>
>>>>>  That's the classic oversimplification. Are they working in the UK
>>>>> -  no  on ferries. Is the company who employs them based (whatever
>>>>> that  means)  in the UK - nobody seems to know, or if they do they
>>>>> aren't  saying.
>>>>
>>>> Very essy for you to find out, I leave that as an exercise for the
>>>> student.
>
>>>  If it's that easy, and yet has evaded the UK press corps, do tell...
>>
>> Could UK government make life less pleasant for non-UK members of the
>> replacement crews by refusing permission for them to disembark and
>> enter UK ??
>
> What would be the legal basis for that?

No visas issued for them to live or work in UK ?

On 20/03/2022 13:45, Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <t1792t$lmd$1@dont-email.me>, at 13:09:49 on Sun, 20 Mar
> 2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>> On 20/03/2022 10:34, Roland Perry wrote:
>>> In message <t16n1g$rpv$1@dont-email.me>, at 08:01:52 on Sun, 20 Mar
>>> 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>  Talk is rife that P&O has registered its ferries offshore so they
>>>> do not  have to abide by UK employment laws. The Pride of Hull, for
>>>> example, is  registered at the port of Nassau in the Bahamas. The
>>>> Pride of Kent  switched  from the UK to Cyprus in 2019.
>>>> Verity Slater, partner at law firm Stephens Scown and an expert in
>>>> maritime  employment law, says this could be enough to avoid UK law.
>>>> If employees  decided to take legal action, the courts might have to
>>>> decide whether it  should be judged under English law or seafarer
>>>> legislation such as the  Maritime Labour Convention. The UK
>>>> Employment Rights Act, which protects  such rights as statutory
>>>> redundancy pay and minimum notice periods,  theoretically only
>>>> applies to British-registered ships belonging to a GB  port.
>
>>>  And that is perhaps why there's been no suggestion in the media
>>> (despite  armies of barrack-room lawyers on social media) that this
>>> activity by  P&O is unlawful.
>>
>> At least one government minister says it could be.
>
> All I've seen is one saying it might be illegal not to have given
> sufficient notice to the government, not that the firings were
> themselves illegal.

If you want to salami slice the offence.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On 20/03/2022 18:48, Bevan Price wrote:
> On 20/03/2022 10:30, Roland Perry wrote:
>> In message <t15h02$svf$2@dont-email.me>, at 21:12:36 on Sat, 19 Mar
>> 2022, Bevan Price <bevanprice666@gmail.com> remarked:
>>> On 19/03/2022 20:17, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>> In message <t15b0k$i1f$1@dont-email.me>, at 19:30:28 on Sat, 19 Mar
>>>> 2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>> On 19/03/2022 18:59, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>> In message <t153ib$ktp$2@dont-email.me>, at 17:23:23 on Sat, 19
>>>>>> Mar 2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>> On 19/03/2022 16:33, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>> In message <t14fiu$7lf$2@dont-email.me>, at 11:42:22 on Sat, 19
>>>>>>>> Mar  2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>>>> On 19/03/2022 10:40, Theo wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> ColinR <rail@greystane.shetland.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Absolutely. P&O employ, at great cost, legions of legal staff
>>>>>>>>>>> and  they  will not have done this unless they had good
>>>>>>>>>>> reason to believe  that any  legal challenge would be defeated.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  In corporate scandals passim, the lawyers may have advised
>>>>>>>>>> that  doing XYZ  would be illegal/unlawful/subject to legal
>>>>>>>>>> challenge,  and the CEO has  done  it anyway.  Sometimes the
>>>>>>>>>> CEO has gone to  jail, other times not.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The most obvious charge here is that the company failed to give
>>>>>>>>> the  government the required notice that it was making more
>>>>>>>>> than 100  staff redundant and that failure is itself a criminal
>>>>>>>>> offence.
>>>>
>>>>>>>>  Would that not apply only to companies registered in UK (rather
>>>>>>>> than  trading in UK)?
>>>>>>>>  Very simple metrics like who was the employer, and what country
>>>>>>>> that  company was based in, are missing from the discussion.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> They are employed in the UK and that is what counts.
>>>>
>>>>>>  That's the classic oversimplification. Are they working in the UK
>>>>>> -  no  on ferries. Is the company who employs them based (whatever
>>>>>> that  means)  in the UK - nobody seems to know, or if they do they
>>>>>> aren't  saying.
>>>>>
>>>>> Very essy for you to find out, I leave that as an exercise for the
>>>>> student.
>>
>>>>  If it's that easy, and yet has evaded the UK press corps, do tell...
>>>
>>> Could UK government make life less pleasant for non-UK members of the
>>> replacement crews by refusing permission for them to disembark and
>>> enter UK ??
>>
>> What would be the legal basis for that?
>
> No visas issued for them to live or work in UK ?
>

They would live on a Cypriot flagged vessel and, potentially, join in
France or Holland (OK, not possible for Cainryan).

--
Colin

On 20/03/2022 18:48, Bevan Price wrote:
> On 20/03/2022 10:30, Roland Perry wrote:
>> In message <t15h02$svf$2@dont-email.me>, at 21:12:36 on Sat, 19 Mar
>> 2022, Bevan Price <bevanprice666@gmail.com> remarked:

>>> Could UK government make life less pleasant for non-UK members of the
>>> replacement crews by refusing permission for them to disembark and
>>> enter UK ??
>>
>> What would be the legal basis for that?
>
> No visas issued for them to live or work in UK ?

Do sailors need one? I've a vague idea there might be special rules for
sailors going ashore.

--
Arthur Figgis

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <t1792t$lmd$1@dont-email.me>, at 13:09:49 on Sun, 20 Mar
> 2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>> On 20/03/2022 10:34, Roland Perry wrote:
>>> In message <t16n1g$rpv$1@dont-email.me>, at 08:01:52 on Sun, 20 Mar
>>> 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Talk is rife that P&O has registered its ferries offshore so they
>>>> do not have to abide by UK employment laws. The Pride of Hull, for
>>>> example, is registered at the port of Nassau in the Bahamas. The
>>>> Pride of Kent switched from the UK to Cyprus in 2019.
>>>> Verity Slater, partner at law firm Stephens Scown and an expert in
>>>> maritime employment law, says this could be enough to avoid UK law.
>>>> If employees decided to take legal action, the courts might have to
>>>> decide whether it should be judged under English law or seafarer
>>>> legislation such as the Maritime Labour Convention. The UK
>>>> Employment Rights Act, which protects such rights as statutory
>>>> redundancy pay and minimum notice periods, theoretically only
>>>> applies to British-registered ships belonging to a GB port.
>
>>> And that is perhaps why there's been no suggestion in the media
>>> (despite armies of barrack-room lawyers on social media) that this
>>> activity by P&O is unlawful.
>>
>> At least one government minister says it could be.
>
> All I've seen is one saying it might be illegal not to have given
> sufficient notice to the government, not that the firings were
> themselves illegal.

I wonder if the notice to the UK government is required if
foreign-registered, foreign-owned ships make their crew redundant?

In message <t18bp0$go4$1@dont-email.me>, at 23:01:52 on Sun, 20 Mar
2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <t1792t$lmd$1@dont-email.me>, at 13:09:49 on Sun, 20 Mar
>> 2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>> On 20/03/2022 10:34, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>> In message <t16n1g$rpv$1@dont-email.me>, at 08:01:52 on Sun, 20 Mar
>>>> 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Talk is rife that P&O has registered its ferries offshore so they
>>>>> do not have to abide by UK employment laws. The Pride of Hull, for
>>>>> example, is registered at the port of Nassau in the Bahamas. The
>>>>> Pride of Kent switched from the UK to Cyprus in 2019.
>>>>> Verity Slater, partner at law firm Stephens Scown and an expert in
>>>>> maritime employment law, says this could be enough to avoid UK law.
>>>>> If employees decided to take legal action, the courts might have to
>>>>> decide whether it should be judged under English law or seafarer
>>>>> legislation such as the Maritime Labour Convention. The UK
>>>>> Employment Rights Act, which protects such rights as statutory
>>>>> redundancy pay and minimum notice periods, theoretically only
>>>>> applies to British-registered ships belonging to a GB port.
>>
>>>> And that is perhaps why there's been no suggestion in the media
>>>> (despite armies of barrack-room lawyers on social media) that this
>>>> activity by P&O is unlawful.
>>>
>>> At least one government minister says it could be.
>>
>> All I've seen is one saying it might be illegal not to have given
>> sufficient notice to the government, not that the firings were
>> themselves illegal.
>
>I wonder if the notice to the UK government is required if
>foreign-registered, foreign-owned ships make their crew redundant?

That's one of the questions no-one seems to be able to answer. What if
there was a Philippines-registered ferry operating between Australia and
New Zealand, and *they* decided to make 800 staff redundant, would they
need to inform the UK government? Probably not.

What is it about P&O ferries which triggers the need. The best some MSM
can come up with is that they were paid £10m in furlough money. Of
course, unless there was a huge loophole in the furlough scheme, that
would indicate some UK-ness about their workforce.

But what if the furlough payments were for shore-based admin staff (who
are being retained), and not mariners (who are allegedly being laid off
in order to save enough money to keep the shore-based staff in a job)?
--
Roland Perry

In message <t17v30$dpn$3@dont-email.me>, at 19:25:20 on Sun, 20 Mar
2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>On 20/03/2022 13:45, Roland Perry wrote:
>> In message <t1792t$lmd$1@dont-email.me>, at 13:09:49 on Sun, 20 Mar
>>2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>> On 20/03/2022 10:34, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>> In message <t16n1g$rpv$1@dont-email.me>, at 08:01:52 on Sun, 20 Mar
>>>>2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>  Talk is rife that P&O has registered its ferries offshore so they
>>>>>do not  have to abide by UK employment laws. The Pride of Hull, for
>>>>>example, is  registered at the port of Nassau in the Bahamas. The
>>>>>Pride of Kent  switched  from the UK to Cyprus in 2019.
>>>>> Verity Slater, partner at law firm Stephens Scown and an expert in
>>>>>maritime  employment law, says this could be enough to avoid UK
>>>>>law. If employees  decided to take legal action, the courts might
>>>>>have to decide whether it  should be judged under English law or
>>>>>seafarer legislation such as the  Maritime Labour Convention. The
>>>>>UK Employment Rights Act, which protects  such rights as statutory
>>>>>redundancy pay and minimum notice periods,  theoretically only
>>>>>applies to British-registered ships belonging to a GB  port.
>>
>>>>  And that is perhaps why there's been no suggestion in the media
>>>>(despite  armies of barrack-room lawyers on social media) that this
>>>>activity by  P&O is unlawful.
>>>
>>> At least one government minister says it could be.

>> All I've seen is one saying it might be illegal not to have given
>>sufficient notice to the government, not that the firings were
>>themselves illegal.
>
>If you want to salami slice the offence.

The outrage is caused by the redundancy programme, but to deem it
"illegal" then it's inevitable it would be salami-sliced because more
than one law might apply to different aspects.

Thus not telling the government is one slice. Hypothetically refusing to
pay any compensation at all to the workers, or again hypothetically
confiscating their pension fund because it has some clause in about
needing 30yrs continuous service, would be different slices.
--
Roland Perry

In message <t17sta$qnv$1@dont-email.me>, at 18:48:10 on Sun, 20 Mar
2022, Bevan Price <bevanprice666@gmail.com> remarked:
>On 20/03/2022 10:30, Roland Perry wrote:
>> In message <t15h02$svf$2@dont-email.me>, at 21:12:36 on Sat, 19 Mar
>>2022, Bevan Price <bevanprice666@gmail.com> remarked:
>>> On 19/03/2022 20:17, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>> In message <t15b0k$i1f$1@dont-email.me>, at 19:30:28 on Sat, 19 Mar
>>>>2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>> On 19/03/2022 18:59, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>> In message <t153ib$ktp$2@dont-email.me>, at 17:23:23 on Sat, 19
>>>>>>Mar 2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>> On 19/03/2022 16:33, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>> In message <t14fiu$7lf$2@dont-email.me>, at 11:42:22 on Sat, 19
>>>>>>>>Mar  2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>>>> On 19/03/2022 10:40, Theo wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> ColinR <rail@greystane.shetland.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Absolutely. P&O employ, at great cost, legions of legal
>>>>>>>>>>>staff and  they  will not have done this unless they had
>>>>>>>>>>>good reason to believe  that any  legal challenge would be defeated.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  In corporate scandals passim, the lawyers may have advised
>>>>>>>>>>that  doing XYZ  would be illegal/unlawful/subject to legal
>>>>>>>>>>challenge,  and the CEO has  done  it anyway.  Sometimes the
>>>>>>>>>>CEO has gone to  jail, other times not.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The most obvious charge here is that the company failed to
>>>>>>>>>give the  government the required notice that it was making
>>>>>>>>>more than 100  staff redundant and that failure is itself a criminal offence.
>>>>
>>>>>>>>  Would that not apply only to companies registered in UK
>>>>>>>>(rather than  trading in UK)?
>>>>>>>>  Very simple metrics like who was the employer, and what
>>>>>>>>country that  company was based in, are missing from the discussion.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> They are employed in the UK and that is what counts.
>>>>
>>>>>>  That's the classic oversimplification. Are they working in the
>>>>>>UK -  no  on ferries. Is the company who employs them based
>>>>>>(whatever that  means)  in the UK - nobody seems to know, or if
>>>>>>they do they aren't  saying.
>>>>>
>>>>> Very essy for you to find out, I leave that as an exercise for the
>>>>>student.
>>
>>>>  If it's that easy, and yet has evaded the UK press corps, do
>>>>tell...
>>>
>>> Could UK government make life less pleasant for non-UK members of
>>>the replacement crews by refusing permission for them to disembark
>>>and enter UK ??

>> What would be the legal basis for that?
>
>No visas issued for them to live or work in UK ?

If they live on board, they maybe won't need to do either.

Incidentally, are the EU authorities also up in arms about the
situation; after all, one end of many of these ferry routes is in
*their territory*.
--
Roland Perry

In message <t17mgr$5i4$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:59:19 on Sun, 20 Mar
2022, ColinR <rail@greystane.shetland.co.uk> remarked:

>>> Do car ferries have crew sleeping quarters?

>> For those reports to be true - yes. And many of the crew who are
>>complaining about being fired seem to be employed to feed the rest of
>>the crew. Sorry if that's a bit recursive.
>
>That is a bit damning, and totally inaccurate!

It's the impression those crew gave.

>Whilst crew do get fed on board, there are few, if any, hotel /galley
>etc staff who are dedicated to crew meals etc. The majority are on
>board to service / feed the passengers / lorry drivers etc.

Would the crew take their meals in the public restaurants?
--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <t17mgr$5i4$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:59:19 on Sun, 20 Mar
> 2022, ColinR <rail@greystane.shetland.co.uk> remarked:
>
>>>> Do car ferries have crew sleeping quarters?
>
>>> For those reports to be true - yes. And many of the crew who are
>>> complaining about being fired seem to be employed to feed the rest of
>>> the crew. Sorry if that's a bit recursive.
>>
>> That is a bit damning, and totally inaccurate!
>
> It's the impression those crew gave.
>
>> Whilst crew do get fed on board, there are few, if any, hotel /galley
>> etc staff who are dedicated to crew meals etc. The majority are on
>> board to service / feed the passengers / lorry drivers etc.
>
> Would the crew take their meals in the public restaurants?

I very much doubt it. Ships have separate crew messrooms.

On cruise ships, they have completely separate galleys, providing different
menus (the Indian and Filipino crews have quite different tastes to western
cruse ship pax).

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <t17sta$qnv$1@dont-email.me>, at 18:48:10 on Sun, 20 Mar
> 2022, Bevan Price <bevanprice666@gmail.com> remarked:
>> On 20/03/2022 10:30, Roland Perry wrote:
>>> In message <t15h02$svf$2@dont-email.me>, at 21:12:36 on Sat, 19 Mar
>>> 2022, Bevan Price <bevanprice666@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>> On 19/03/2022 20:17, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>> In message <t15b0k$i1f$1@dont-email.me>, at 19:30:28 on Sat, 19 Mar
>>>>> 2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>> On 19/03/2022 18:59, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>> In message <t153ib$ktp$2@dont-email.me>, at 17:23:23 on Sat, 19
>>>>>>> Mar 2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>>> On 19/03/2022 16:33, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>>> In message <t14fiu$7lf$2@dont-email.me>, at 11:42:22 on Sat, 19
>>>>>>>>> Mar  2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>> On 19/03/2022 10:40, Theo wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> ColinR <rail@greystane.shetland.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Absolutely. P&O employ, at great cost, legions of legal
>>>>>>>>>>>> staff and  they  will not have done this unless they had
>>>>>>>>>>>> good reason to believe  that any  legal challenge would be defeated.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  In corporate scandals passim, the lawyers may have advised
>>>>>>>>>>> that  doing XYZ  would be illegal/unlawful/subject to legal
>>>>>>>>>>> challenge,  and the CEO has  done  it anyway.  Sometimes the
>>>>>>>>>>> CEO has gone to  jail, other times not.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The most obvious charge here is that the company failed to
>>>>>>>>>> give the  government the required notice that it was making
>>>>>>>>>> more than 100  staff redundant and that failure is itself a criminal offence.
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>  Would that not apply only to companies registered in UK
>>>>>>>>> (rather than  trading in UK)?
>>>>>>>>>  Very simple metrics like who was the employer, and what
>>>>>>>>> country that  company was based in, are missing from the discussion.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> They are employed in the UK and that is what counts.
>>>>>
>>>>>>>  That's the classic oversimplification. Are they working in the
>>>>>>> UK -  no  on ferries. Is the company who employs them based
>>>>>>> (whatever that  means)  in the UK - nobody seems to know, or if
>>>>>>> they do they aren't  saying.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Very essy for you to find out, I leave that as an exercise for the
>>>>>> student.
>>>
>>>>>  If it's that easy, and yet has evaded the UK press corps, do
>>>>> tell...
>>>>
>>>> Could UK government make life less pleasant for non-UK members of
>>>> the replacement crews by refusing permission for them to disembark
>>>> and enter UK ??
>
>>> What would be the legal basis for that?
>>
>> No visas issued for them to live or work in UK ?
>
> If they live on board, they maybe won't need to do either.
>
> Incidentally, are the EU authorities also up in arms about the
> situation; after all, one end of many of these ferry routes is in
> *their territory*.

It sounds like the affected crew members are mostly British, so probably
not.

On Sun, 20 Mar 2022 13:45:05 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
wrote:

>In message <t1792t$lmd$1@dont-email.me>, at 13:09:49 on Sun, 20 Mar
>2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>On 20/03/2022 10:34, Roland Perry wrote:
>>> In message <t16n1g$rpv$1@dont-email.me>, at 08:01:52 on Sun, 20 Mar
>>>2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Talk is rife that P&O has registered its ferries offshore so they
>>>>do not have to abide by UK employment laws. The Pride of Hull, for
>>>>example, is registered at the port of Nassau in the Bahamas. The
>>>>Pride of Kent switched from the UK to Cyprus in 2019.
>>>> Verity Slater, partner at law firm Stephens Scown and an expert in
>>>>maritime employment law, says this could be enough to avoid UK law.
>>>>If employees decided to take legal action, the courts might have to
>>>>decide whether it should be judged under English law or seafarer
>>>>legislation such as the Maritime Labour Convention. The UK
>>>>Employment Rights Act, which protects such rights as statutory
>>>>redundancy pay and minimum notice periods, theoretically only
>>>>applies to British-registered ships belonging to a GB port.
>
>>> And that is perhaps why there's been no suggestion in the media
>>>(despite armies of barrack-room lawyers on social media) that this
>>>activity by P&O is unlawful.
>>
>>At least one government minister says it could be.
>
>All I've seen is one saying it might be illegal not to have given
>sufficient notice to the government, not that the firings were
>themselves illegal.

Perhaps they are reluctant to comment on what is likely to become a
civil case in court. Not my field at all, but my general
understanding is that for a redundancy the job must have ceased to
exist and any replacement job has to be substantially different. If
redundancy does not apply, then I thought it was presumed to to be
unfair dismissal unless grounds for dismissal can be established.

Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
> On Sun, 20 Mar 2022 13:45:05 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
>> In message <t1792t$lmd$1@dont-email.me>, at 13:09:49 on Sun, 20 Mar
>> 2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>> On 20/03/2022 10:34, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>> In message <t16n1g$rpv$1@dont-email.me>, at 08:01:52 on Sun, 20 Mar
>>>> 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Talk is rife that P&O has registered its ferries offshore so they
>>>>> do not have to abide by UK employment laws. The Pride of Hull, for
>>>>> example, is registered at the port of Nassau in the Bahamas. The
>>>>> Pride of Kent switched from the UK to Cyprus in 2019.
>>>>> Verity Slater, partner at law firm Stephens Scown and an expert in
>>>>> maritime employment law, says this could be enough to avoid UK law.
>>>>> If employees decided to take legal action, the courts might have to
>>>>> decide whether it should be judged under English law or seafarer
>>>>> legislation such as the Maritime Labour Convention. The UK
>>>>> Employment Rights Act, which protects such rights as statutory
>>>>> redundancy pay and minimum notice periods, theoretically only
>>>>> applies to British-registered ships belonging to a GB port.
>>
>>>> And that is perhaps why there's been no suggestion in the media
>>>> (despite armies of barrack-room lawyers on social media) that this
>>>> activity by P&O is unlawful.
>>>
>>> At least one government minister says it could be.
>>
>> All I've seen is one saying it might be illegal not to have given
>> sufficient notice to the government, not that the firings were
>> themselves illegal.
>
> Perhaps they are reluctant to comment on what is likely to become a
> civil case in court. Not my field at all, but my general
> understanding is that for a redundancy the job must have ceased to
> exist and any replacement job has to be substantially different. If
> redundancy does not apply, then I thought it was presumed to to be
> unfair dismissal unless grounds for dismissal can be established.
>

Even if it's treated as unfair dismissal, the compensation isn't huge. The
company might be willing to pay it, rather than continuing with what was
claimed to be an unsustainable business.

<https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/work/problems-at-work/employment-tribunals1/employment-tribunals2/check-what-compensation-you-can-get-for-unfair-dismissal/>

In message <nngg3h53mctple1ed8ubhqs61aac5mrnhi@4ax.com>, at 09:22:21 on
Mon, 21 Mar 2022, Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> remarked:
>On Sun, 20 Mar 2022 13:45:05 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
>wrote:
>
>>In message <t1792t$lmd$1@dont-email.me>, at 13:09:49 on Sun, 20 Mar
>>2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>On 20/03/2022 10:34, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>> In message <t16n1g$rpv$1@dont-email.me>, at 08:01:52 on Sun, 20 Mar
>>>>2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Talk is rife that P&O has registered its ferries offshore so they
>>>>>do not have to abide by UK employment laws. The Pride of Hull, for
>>>>>example, is registered at the port of Nassau in the Bahamas. The
>>>>>Pride of Kent switched from the UK to Cyprus in 2019.
>>>>> Verity Slater, partner at law firm Stephens Scown and an expert in
>>>>>maritime employment law, says this could be enough to avoid UK law.
>>>>>If employees decided to take legal action, the courts might have to
>>>>>decide whether it should be judged under English law or seafarer
>>>>>legislation such as the Maritime Labour Convention. The UK
>>>>>Employment Rights Act, which protects such rights as statutory
>>>>>redundancy pay and minimum notice periods, theoretically only
>>>>>applies to British-registered ships belonging to a GB port.
>>
>>>> And that is perhaps why there's been no suggestion in the media
>>>>(despite armies of barrack-room lawyers on social media) that this
>>>>activity by P&O is unlawful.
>>>
>>>At least one government minister says it could be.
>>
>>All I've seen is one saying it might be illegal not to have given
>>sufficient notice to the government, not that the firings were
>>themselves illegal.
>
>Perhaps they are reluctant to comment on what is likely to become a
>civil case in court. Not my field at all, but my general
>understanding is that for a redundancy the job must have ceased to
>exist and any replacement job has to be substantially different. If
>redundancy does not apply, then I thought it was presumed to to be
>unfair dismissal unless grounds for dismissal can be established.

See the difference between "jobs", and "tasks".
--
Roland Perry

In message <t19fla$34r$1@dont-email.me>, at 09:14:18 on Mon, 21 Mar
2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <t17mgr$5i4$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:59:19 on Sun, 20 Mar
>> 2022, ColinR <rail@greystane.shetland.co.uk> remarked:
>>
>>>>> Do car ferries have crew sleeping quarters?
>>
>>>> For those reports to be true - yes. And many of the crew who are
>>>> complaining about being fired seem to be employed to feed the rest of
>>>> the crew. Sorry if that's a bit recursive.
>>>
>>> That is a bit damning, and totally inaccurate!
>>
>> It's the impression those crew gave.
>>
>>> Whilst crew do get fed on board, there are few, if any, hotel /galley
>>> etc staff who are dedicated to crew meals etc. The majority are on
>>> board to service / feed the passengers / lorry drivers etc.
>>
>> Would the crew take their meals in the public restaurants?
>
>I very much doubt it. Ships have separate crew messrooms.

And hence separate catering crew.

>On cruise ships, they have completely separate galleys, providing different
>menus (the Indian and Filipino crews have quite different tastes to western
>cruse ship pax).

Thanks, that's what I thought.
--
Roland Perry

On 21/03/2022 10:00, Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <t19fla$34r$1@dont-email.me>, at 09:14:18 on Mon, 21 Mar
> 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <t17mgr$5i4$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:59:19 on Sun, 20 Mar
>>> 2022, ColinR <rail@greystane.shetland.co.uk> remarked:
>>>
>>>>>> Do car ferries have crew sleeping quarters?
>>>
>>>>> For those reports to be true - yes. And many of the crew who are
>>>>> complaining about being fired seem to be employed to feed the rest of
>>>>> the crew. Sorry if that's a bit recursive.
>>>>
>>>> That is a bit damning, and totally inaccurate!
>>>
>>> It's the impression those crew gave.
>>>
>>>> Whilst crew do get fed on board, there are few, if any, hotel /galley
>>>> etc staff who are dedicated to crew meals etc. The majority are on
>>>> board to service / feed the passengers / lorry drivers etc.
>>>
>>> Would the crew take their meals in the public restaurants?
>>
>> I very much doubt it. Ships have separate crew messrooms.
>
> And hence separate catering crew.
>
>> On cruise ships, they have completely separate galleys, providing
>> different
>> menus (the Indian and Filipino crews have quite different tastes to
>> western
>> cruse ship pax).
>
> Thanks, that's what I thought.

I doubt that applies to short sea ferries with British crews.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> On 21/03/2022 10:00, Roland Perry wrote:
>> In message <t19fla$34r$1@dont-email.me>, at 09:14:18 on Mon, 21 Mar
>> 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <t17mgr$5i4$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:59:19 on Sun, 20 Mar
>>>> 2022, ColinR <rail@greystane.shetland.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>
>>>>>>> Do car ferries have crew sleeping quarters?
>>>>
>>>>>> For those reports to be true - yes. And many of the crew who are
>>>>>> complaining about being fired seem to be employed to feed the rest of
>>>>>> the crew. Sorry if that's a bit recursive.
>>>>>
>>>>> That is a bit damning, and totally inaccurate!
>>>>
>>>> It's the impression those crew gave.
>>>>
>>>>> Whilst crew do get fed on board, there are few, if any, hotel /galley
>>>>> etc staff who are dedicated to crew meals etc. The majority are on
>>>>> board to service / feed the passengers / lorry drivers etc.
>>>>
>>>> Would the crew take their meals in the public restaurants?
>>>
>>> I very much doubt it. Ships have separate crew messrooms.
>>
>> And hence separate catering crew.
>>
>>> On cruise ships, they have completely separate galleys, providing
>>> different
>>> menus (the Indian and Filipino crews have quite different tastes to
>>> western
>>> cruse ship pax).
>>
>> Thanks, that's what I thought.
>
> I doubt that applies to short sea ferries with British crews.
>

It might if they switch to foreign crews who reside on-board for weeks at a
time.

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <t19fla$34r$1@dont-email.me>, at 09:14:18 on Mon, 21 Mar
> 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <t17mgr$5i4$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:59:19 on Sun, 20 Mar
>>> 2022, ColinR <rail@greystane.shetland.co.uk> remarked:
>>>
>>>>>> Do car ferries have crew sleeping quarters?
>>>
>>>>> For those reports to be true - yes. And many of the crew who are
>>>>> complaining about being fired seem to be employed to feed the rest of
>>>>> the crew. Sorry if that's a bit recursive.
>>>>
>>>> That is a bit damning, and totally inaccurate!
>>>
>>> It's the impression those crew gave.
>>>
>>>> Whilst crew do get fed on board, there are few, if any, hotel /galley
>>>> etc staff who are dedicated to crew meals etc. The majority are on
>>>> board to service / feed the passengers / lorry drivers etc.
>>>
>>> Would the crew take their meals in the public restaurants?
>>
>> I very much doubt it. Ships have separate crew messrooms.
>
> And hence separate catering crew.
>

They might be back-to-back with the public catering areas and served by the
same crew.

Anna Noyd-Dryver

On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 07:39:53 +0000, Roland Perry wrote:

> The outrage is caused by the redundancy programme,

More by the brutality of the execution of the redundancies and by
the lack of consultation.

On 21/03/2022 10:29, Recliner wrote:
> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> On 21/03/2022 10:00, Roland Perry wrote:
>>> In message <t19fla$34r$1@dont-email.me>, at 09:14:18 on Mon, 21 Mar
>>> 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> In message <t17mgr$5i4$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:59:19 on Sun, 20 Mar
>>>>> 2022, ColinR <rail@greystane.shetland.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Do car ferries have crew sleeping quarters?
>>>>>
>>>>>>> For those reports to be true - yes. And many of the crew who are
>>>>>>> complaining about being fired seem to be employed to feed the rest of
>>>>>>> the crew. Sorry if that's a bit recursive.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That is a bit damning, and totally inaccurate!
>>>>>
>>>>> It's the impression those crew gave.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Whilst crew do get fed on board, there are few, if any, hotel /galley
>>>>>> etc staff who are dedicated to crew meals etc. The majority are on
>>>>>> board to service / feed the passengers / lorry drivers etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> Would the crew take their meals in the public restaurants?
>>>>
>>>> I very much doubt it. Ships have separate crew messrooms.
>>>
>>> And hence separate catering crew.
>>>
>>>> On cruise ships, they have completely separate galleys, providing
>>>> different
>>>> menus (the Indian and Filipino crews have quite different tastes to
>>>> western
>>>> cruse ship pax).
>>>
>>> Thanks, that's what I thought.
>>
>> I doubt that applies to short sea ferries with British crews.
>>
>
> It might if they switch to foreign crews who reside on-board for weeks at a
> time.
>

But it is not the current situation which is what Roland as talking about.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 11:33:16 -0000 (UTC), Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:

>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <t19fla$34r$1@dont-email.me>, at 09:14:18 on Mon, 21 Mar
>> 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <t17mgr$5i4$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:59:19 on Sun, 20 Mar
>>>> 2022, ColinR <rail@greystane.shetland.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>
>>>>>>> Do car ferries have crew sleeping quarters?
>>>>
>>>>>> For those reports to be true - yes. And many of the crew who are
>>>>>> complaining about being fired seem to be employed to feed the rest of
>>>>>> the crew. Sorry if that's a bit recursive.
>>>>>
>>>>> That is a bit damning, and totally inaccurate!
>>>>
>>>> It's the impression those crew gave.
>>>>
>>>>> Whilst crew do get fed on board, there are few, if any, hotel /galley
>>>>> etc staff who are dedicated to crew meals etc. The majority are on
>>>>> board to service / feed the passengers / lorry drivers etc.
>>>>
>>>> Would the crew take their meals in the public restaurants?
>>>
>>> I very much doubt it. Ships have separate crew messrooms.
>>
>> And hence separate catering crew.
>>
>
>They might be back-to-back with the public catering areas and served by the
>same crew.

Yes, with a British crew, that's the most likely situation.