P and O ferries in trouble.

[Stumuz2]

Stopped reading the article when it mentioned Lionel Barber.

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/ ... rber-tweet

He got the Légion d’Honneur from the worm Macron for his biased anti Brexit reporting in the Daily remain (FT).

If we ever have another world war, he is the first person I would intern as an enemy spy.

[BritDownUnder]

Seems like the boats are registered overseas and under whatever law of the flag of convenience they can hire who they please. Seems like the names of the ships are about the only thing British about them. Sounds like a done deal. The company lost 100 million pounds apparently and they probably want a way to stem the losses. Interestingly in Australia you get four weeks severance pay plus one additional week for every year of service. Gagging orders are not considered. One old bugger at our company who had been there 40 years got nearly two years pay and then retired.

Of course the great British public could always boycott them and take their holidays at home in Yorkshire, Lake District or Cornwall. As that actor of yesteryear, Robert Morley, said in an interview when asked about going abroad. "Why travel overseas anyway? People who don't speak English are not worth speaking to."

[Stumuz2]

Also there is the argument, you won't hear it from the bandwagon politicians, that certain seafarers don't get full employment rights, because they pay no UK tax. Doesn't apply to all seafarers, depends how long they are in the UK for.

https://taxaid.org.uk/guides/informatio ... -on-a-ship

[Mark]

Also there is the argument, you won't hear it from the bandwagon politicians, that certain seafarers don't get full employment rights, because they pay no UK tax. Doesn't apply to all seafarers, depends how long they are in the UK for.

https://taxaid.org.uk/guides/informatio ... -on-a-ship

I'm confused Stumuz.
When pushed, you said you don't think what P&O did was OK.
But everything you post seems to try and justify/support P&O's actions...?
Don't tell us - it's really down to those damn elephants again....

[Stumuz2]

Also there is the argument, you won't hear it from the bandwagon politicians, that certain seafarers don't get full employment rights, because they pay no UK tax. Doesn't apply to all seafarers, depends how long they are in the UK for.

https://taxaid.org.uk/guides/informatio ... -on-a-ship

I'm confused Stumuz.
When pushed, you said you don't think what P&O did was OK.
But everything you post seems to try and justify/support P&O's actions...?
Don't tell us - it's really down to those damn elephants again....

Simple question.
Should you get full employment rights if you don't pay UK tax and NI?

[Default0ptions]

>>Simple question.
Should you get full employment rights if you don't pay UK tax and NI?

If you think there’s a simple answer it just shows you don’t understand the question.

[Stumuz2]

>>Simple question.
Should you get full employment rights if you don't pay UK tax and NI?

If you think there’s a simple answer it just shows you don’t understand the question.

Obfuscation.

So, should you get full employment rights if you don't pay UK tax and NI?

[kenneal - lagger]

The problem for seafarers is that they don't work in any one country they do most of their work on the high seas belonging to no country. OK they do work in Britain while their ship is in British waters so do they come under UK legislation for that time and under Dutch legislation if the ship docks in Holland? If they come under the legislation of the country of their birth or hiring that will mean that the owners will only hire in countries with little of no protections which is effectively what is happening here.

Where ferries work between two or three countries, as is the case with these ships, there could be a case for legislating that those ships should have crews from the countries that they call at and be subject to their own country's taxation and benefits. But then there are some woke people who will say that that is racial prejudice!

[BritDownUnder]

One wonders if there will be reruns of the TV series "Triangle" to explain the tax implications of it all.

[Default0ptions]

>>Simple question.
Should you get full employment rights if you don't pay UK tax and NI?

If you think there’s a simple answer it just shows you don’t understand the question.

Obfuscation.

So, should you get full employment rights if you don't pay UK tax and NI?

Employment rights? It’s been a while since you had to work, hasn’t it!

But okay - should an employer ever be allowed to deny employment rights to their workers?

We used to call that slavery.

[Stumuz2]

Employment rights? It’s been a while since you had to work, hasn’t it!

But okay - should an employer ever be allowed to deny employment rights to their workers?

We used to call that slavery.

The harder you try to obfuscate, the more you have to tie yourself up in knots avoiding the answer.

An example of employment right are, The employment rights act 1996. S139 covers redundancy.

Also slavery is forced coercion. Forced labour with violence. So don't be silly and equate being a seafarer with slavery.

Some seafarers, depending on the charter, do not pay UK tax or Ni. Or they get 100% of their pay tax free. So a UK marine engineer who earns £55-60 thousand a year, gets to keep the lot.

Now back to the simple question that you are sooooooooooo desperate to avoid answering.

Should you get full employment rights if you don't pay UK tax and NI?

[Catweazle]

Should you get full employment rights if you don't pay UK tax and NI?

I think the question is poor. For example, a worker might earn below the tax and NI threshold and thus pay no tax or NI, but still expect protection by employment law.

[Stumuz2]

We're talking about seafarers.
Can't believe the amount of mental anguish this very simple question is causing some people!

Also, in the UK if you earn under the tax and Ni threshold you are covered by Employment legislation.

[Mark]

P&O Ferries: Not consulting on job cuts broke law, boss admits:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-60862933

P&O Ferries boss Peter Hebblethwaite has admitted to MPs that a decision to sack 800 workers last week without consulting the unions broke the law. He said there was "absolutely no doubt" that under UK employment law the firm was required to consult unions before making the mass cuts. "We chose not to consult and we are, and will, compensate everybody in full for that," he said. He said no union would have accepted P&O's job slashing plans.

[Stumuz2]

So will the seafarers be reinstated? Will a high court injunction be issued to stop the redundancies? Will the 90 day statutory consultation period be started as is their right under UK employment law?