The mass sacking of staff by P&O Ferries could lead to a slew of successful employment tribunal claims, lawyers suggested today as trade unions prepare possible legal action over the ‘clearly illegal’ decision.
P&O fired 800 crew members on Thursday and announced plans to replace them with agency staff, citing ‘a £100m loss year-on-year’ and the need to ‘secure the future viability of our business’.
Transport minister Robert Courts MP described the manner of the sackings as ‘wholly unacceptable’. ‘I am extremely concerned and frankly angry at the way workers have been treated,’ he told the House of Commons.
The Rail, Maritime and Transport (RMT) and Nautilus International are considering legal action, with trade union firm Thompsons Solicitors saying P&O has shown 'a shocking disregard of the most basic employment law'.
Neil Todd, a trade union law specialist at Thompsons, which is acting for the RMT, said: ‘P&O’s sudden decision to fire all 800 UK staff – via a pre-recorded video call and without a single shred of consultation – is a shocking disregard of the most basic employment law. The law states that if you’re dismissing more than 20 employees, you must consult with them. The larger the number of employees being dismissed, the longer the consultation should be – up to 45 days.’
He added: ‘In our view, what they did was unlawful and we are considering all options including employment tribunal claims and High Court proceedings.’
Nautilus’ general secretary Mark Dickinson told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme that the union is ‘actively progressing’ plans for legal action alongside the RMT, adding that the decision by P&O is ‘clearly illegal’.
Christian Grierson, an employment solicitor at London firm Sharpe Pritchard, said that – if P&O had failed to consult employees – the decision would be ‘a fundamental breach of an employer’s obligation to undertake consultation when 100 or more redundancies are proposed’.
‘A protective award could be made of 45 days’ gross pay for each employee, reflecting the period that the employees would have been employed anyway, had P&O observed the consultation period,’ he said.
Rustom Tata, head of the employment group at London firm DMH Stallard, said sacked staff ‘will certainly have claims for unfair dismissal’. He also suggested that P&O may have ‘recognised the unlawfulness of its actions with comments that enhanced compensation will be paid’.
‘It very much seems that there was no prior consultation or discussion with employees of their representatives, and large elements of the employment protection legislation are being wholly ignored,’ Tata added.
He also said: ‘Given the employer’s approach it is quite likely that the employees will find considerable sympathy in the employment tribunal – albeit when any case is finally heard.’
Jeremy Coy, a senior associate in Russell-Cooke’s employment team, said the sacked employees ‘may have strong claims for unfair dismissal and for a failure to consult, which would typically entitle them to claim compensation but not to insist they are rehired’.
‘Only time will tell whether P&O will reconsider their decision or perhaps more likely reach a financial agreement with the employees,’ he added.
This article is now closed for comment.
11 Readers' comments