Downing Street today threatened P&O Ferries with "ramifications" over its “extreme” decision to sack 800 seafarers with no notice.
The firm could be stripped of Whitehall contracts after UK crew were axed in a video call, to be replaced by cheaper agency staff.
The Government is looking at whether the company broke laws that say staff must be notified 30 or 45 days before redundancy.
The Insolvency Service has been tasked with probing whether the firm complied with strict notification requirements.
No10 said ministers do not believe P&O explored all possible avenues to secure the future of their firm before making staff redundant.
RMT union general secretary Mick Lynch claimed P&O Ferries had “flagrantly broken the law, deliberately”.
Asked by the Mirror if it broke the law, P&O today insisted it followed “standard industry practice” by offering “enhanced severance terms” to those affected and “properly compensating them for the lack of warning and consultation.”.
So what can the government actually do? How much did Boris Johnson know? And are his own failings on workers’ rights to blame - including failing to ban fire and rehire?
There are an awful lot of questions the Prime Minister needs to answer…
Who owns P&O Ferries?
This is not a question for Boris Johnson but is important to give context.
The brand was bought in February 2019 by DP World, a global shipping giant primarily owned by the Government in Dubai, UAE.
It was founded 17 years ago and runs ports around the globe, handling around one in 10 of all the world’s shipping containers.
Last year the company's revenue soared by more than a fifth to more than £3.7bn and pre-tax profit rose by nearly $300m.
The Mirror revealed in January how the giant firm splashed up to £147m sponsoring a golf contest despite a £146m pension black hole.
The company declined to comment but did not dispute the figures.
Have P&O ferries acted illegally?
TV’s Judge Rinder claimed yesterday “it’s legal” - but employment lawyers and the government have serious doubts.
Downing Street confirmed it is looking into whether P&O followed laws on having to consult with workers and notify the authorities.
Firms must by law notify the Insolvency Service - and consult with staff - if they plan to make more than 20 staff redundant at one site.
If there are 20 to 99 redundancies at a site, this must be at least 30 days before the first dismissal. If there are 100 or more, it’s 45 days.
A union source told the Mirror union officials are "99% sure" the action was unlawful, in their opinion, and are looking into the situation.
Chris Deeley of JMW Solicitors said P&O’s actions “seem to be flagrant breaches of employment law” which would trigger “incredibly expensive” enhanced severance packages.
Employment lawyer Colin Davidson of Edwards Duthie Shamash said: “P&O could be facing a potential bill of millions in compensation for the shocking and callous sacking of 800 employees with no notice.
“There are two separate claims that they could be hit with – a payment for failing to consult and one for unfair dismissal, if it is found that the sackings are unfair."
Employment lawyer Peter Woodhouse of Stone King, said: “It’s difficult to see how the dismissal of the workers was lawful”.
He said there were four key questions - whether the firm consulted in advance; whether there was unfair dismissal; whether employees were given notice; and whether a discrimination claim can be brought.
Katie Maguire, employment partner at Devonshires, said: “The way P&O have flown in the face of employment law beggars’ belief and their potentially unlawful actions will cost them dearly."
P&O’s response is at the bottom of this article.
If P&O acted illegally, what will the punishment be?
TUC general secretary Frances O’Grady said the firm “must be made an example of” and “a slap on the wrist is not going to cut it”.
The TUC want the government to “increase penalties on companies that break employment law”.
It also wants the government to use its leverage with Freeports and contracts (more below) to go above and beyond any legally-required punishment.
Union officials fear any punishment or civil action against the firm will not be strong enough to stop others doing the same thing.
One told the Mirror: “They don’t give a s*** about the fact it’s unlawful.”
Was your Brexit workers’ rights promise hollow?
Transport Secretary Grant Shapps fumed today: “No-one should treat employees in that way in the 21st century."
But critics say Boris Johnson could have acted to toughen up the law already. Not only that - he promised to.
The PM pledged an Employment Bill after Brexit would “protect and enhance workers’ rights as the UK leaves the EU, making Britain the best place in the world to work.”
Yet we are still waiting for that Bill with no guarantees it will even be listed in the next Queen’s Speech.
The Tories also passed the 2016 Trade Union Act which diluted workers’ power and made it more difficult to go on strike.
Commentator Otto English tweeted: “One of the key selling points of Brexit was that ‘no longer’ would cheap foreign labour undercut British workers. The P&O debacle totally undermines that lie doesn't it.”
Downing Street today insisted one “extreme example” does not indicate “the direction of travel for the entirety of the UK”.
But employment law expert Dr Ioannis Katsaroumpas of the University of Sussex said the scandal highlighted the “weak legal framework for preventing it happening again.” The TUC demanded tougher laws to stop staff being fired at will.
Will you stop the actual sackings?
The TUC say all sacked staff must be reinstated immediately without loss of pay, and P&O should face serious consequences if not.
But can the government actually do anything to ensure this? And if not, will Boris Johnson get round the table with them?
Defence Minister James Heappey said the company had behaved "disgracefully" but claimed the Government was powerless to stop it.
He told Sky News: “Sadly it is the case that the government cannot force an employer to continue to employ people that the employer has said it doesn’t want to employ.”
When did you find out?
Senior Department of Transport officials were informed on Wednesday night of P&O’s plan to axe workers.
But it is thought they did not tell ministers - and the Prime Minister, who was travelling in the Gulf, was not told either.
The PM’s official spokesman said: “As is standard practice, the information was on a restricted circulation due to its commercial sensitivity and the potential for insolvency if this leaked”.
He added: “I don’t know exactly when the Prime Minister was informed”.
This raises the extraordinary prospect that civil servants had to withhold a scandalous treatment of workers from ministers who could have tried to do something to stop it.
Was it raised on your trip to the Gulf?
Boris Johnson visited the United Arab Emirates on Wednesday, hours before the grim news was conveyed to officials.
P&O Ferries owner DP World is majority-owned by the Dubai Sovereign Wealth Fund and, therefore, ultimately by the Dubai Royal Family.
Labour today demanded the Prime Minister answer whether “anyone” raised the issue on his trip.
The PM's spokesman denied P&O was raised in his meeting with the Crown Prince of the UAE on Wednesday.
He suggested the issue did not come up at all, in any way during the trip, though could not completely rule it out.
But he ruled out lobbying Dubai directly to solve the issue. The PM’s spokesman said: “I think we will deal directly with this company to find out what has happened. It’s not a question of needing to convince any individual or group. We’ll find out the facts and see whether they complied with the law.”
Will DP World’s Freeport licence be revoked?
DP World owns the Thames Freeport in Tilbury, Essex, part of a wave of low-tax initiatives pioneered by the Tory government.
No10 did not rule out stripping the container port’s special status away, but any decision to do so would fly in the face of Tory dogma.
The PM’s spokesman said: "We are looking very closely at the actions that this company has taken to see whether they acted within the rules.
"Once we have concluded that, we will decide what the ramifications are.
“Obviously there are a lot of valid questions in relation to existing contracts, etc.
"We are working through exactly the detail of what action the company took.
“Once we have come to that conclusion, we will set out any further steps."
Does P&O have any current government contracts and will you dump them?
Transport Secretary Grant Shapps said: "I'll be looking at whether there are contracts the Government might have with P&O.
“I’ve asked my officials, legal teams, to look at whether they exist."
Records show P&O Ferries previously held government contracts to keep supplies running if ports were hamstrung due to Brexit.
These included a deal worth up to £10.8m to provide freight capacity between Tilbury and Zebrugge from October 2020 to June 2021.
But that contract has already ended. It was not immediately clear if any current P&O Ferries contracts with the government were in force.
No10 conspicuously didn’t rule out terminating P&O contracts with government - but if none exist, then this is an empty threat.
Will you nationalise ferry routes?
The TSSA union called for the government to hit P&O Ferries “where it hurts” by nationalising ferry routes such as across the Channel.
Manuel Cortes, TSSA general Secretary, said: “P&O are holding our country to ransom by halting vital ferry trade routes so they can illegally and immorally sack their staff. The Tory government must stand up to P&O bullies who are controlled by Sultan Ahmed bin Sulayem the owner of the company.
“The government should nationalise these vital ferry routes which allow people and goods to get to and from our country - P&O must be hit where it hurts!”
But Tory chairman Oliver Dowden said he was not aware of any plans to nationalise routes.
Why didn’t you ban fire & rehire?
The scandal erupted just five months after Tory MPs killed off a bid to outlaw ‘ fire and rehire’.
Dover MP Natalie Elphicke was heckled by union members today who chanted “shame on you!”
Labour MP Barry Gardiner had tried to ban the practice of firms sacking staff, then hiring them back on worse terms and conditions.
But Tory ministers blocked attempts to force a vote on his Bill, talking beyond a 2.30pm cut-off time under arcane Commons rules.
Mr Gardiner said last night: “The disgraceful actions taken by P&O against their 800 seafarers shows yet again how employers are abusing the laws around fire and rehire.”
A Whitehall source hit back that P&O Ferries’ actions did not appear to be a case of fire and rehire. They said instead the firm appeared to be firing staff to hire different people on less money.
But No10 contradicted this, saying whether or not this counts as ‘fire and rehire’ is one thing the government is looking at.
The Prime Minister's official spokesman said: "There are rules around fire and rehire. There are rules around notifying relevant government departments when you are making redundancies, and obviously there are the contracts that we have with the company.
"We are looking at all of those issues before deciding what steps (to take). We will find out the facts and see if they have complied with the law."
Will you claw back furlough cash?
The £322 million purchase of P&O Ferries was unfortunately timed for DP World.
The company was forced to claim around £10 million to furlough 1,100 workers during the pandemic.
No10 appeared to dampen hopes that the firm could be asked, or forced, to give back furlough cash.
The PM’s spokesman said: “Businesses in receipt of support for the furlough scheme would have been using that money to carry on employing their employees during the pandemic.
“That was a lifeline for people during that global pandemic. And it is right that we took that step.”
What do P&O say?
A spokesperson for P&O Ferries said: "We know that for our staff this redundancy came without warning or prior consultation, and we fully understand that this has caused distress for them and their families.
“We took this difficult decision as a last resort and only after full consideration of all other options but, ultimately, we concluded that the business wouldn’t survive without fundamentally changed crewing arrangements, which in turn would inevitably result in redundancies.
“We also took the view, in good faith, that reaching agreement on the way forward would be impossible and against this background, that the process itself would be highly disruptive, not just for the business but for UK trade and tourism.
“We have offered enhanced severance terms to those affected to properly and promptly compensate them for the lack of warning and consultation.
"The changes we've made bring us into line with standard industry practice."
The firm added: “All affected crew who worked yesterday were notified face-to-face and in-person, on board their vessels.
“For crew who were rostered off, P&O Ferries made all efforts to notify them personally: Virtual meetings were held, they were also individually telephoned, plus email and SMS notifications were sent before dismissal letters and severance terms were shared via courier and email.
“For any crew members we did not reach personally despite this cascade of steps, regretfully the news of their dismissal must have come as a shock and we apologise for this."
