Talk:P&O Ferries

2022 Sacking
Regarding rv, content had already been sourced.

"The method of the expulsion, overseen by ex-military security guards, has been criticized by several government and business leaders. Mark Russell, a non-executive director of DP World, resigned afterwards in disagreement with the way with which the restructuring was carried out. P&O Ferries has recently seen losses during the COVID-19 pandemic as well as deficits in its pension fund. Industry sources have also cited its high overheads and competition from Irish Ferries as potential contributory factors. Verity Slater, partner and expert in maritime employment law at Stephens Scown, commented that P&O may not have to follow UK employment laws, since some of its ships are not registered in Britain."

Quotes from the source, an in-depth report by 4 named writers:

"The savage tactics, involving ex-military handcuffed-trained security guards taking seafarers off their ships ..."

"Mark Russell, a DP World non-executive director, ... resigned on Friday night with his spokesman declaring 'he cannot support the way P&O Ferries has carried out this restructuring'"

"During Covid, losses had spiralled. The company said it lost £100 million for each of the last two years ..."

"It also has a £146 million deficit in its pension fund ..."

"... this executive said P&O had a reputation in the industry for high overheads."

"... ended in Irish Ferries obtaining its goal of a far cheaper workforce than rivals including P&O ... this started to bite P&O only in June last year when Irish Ferries decided to move in on its lucrative cross-channel route from Dover."

"Talk is rife that P&O has registered its ferries offshore so they do not have to abide by UK employment laws. ... Verity Slater, partner at law firm Stephens Scown and an expert in maritime employment law, says this could be enough to avoid UK law."

CurryCity (talk) 00:13, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

My edit summary still stands, cite your sources and insert the material in the appropriate place in the article not just at random. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 09:30, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
 * What are you specifically objecting to? Is the source satisfactory? The method used, financial situations, legal question are all aspects of the redundancy move. CurryCity (talk) 11:35, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
 * When you add something to the article it needs to be a) relevant to the section it is in, b) backed up by a properly cited source. There is no point in posting the source here, it needs to be in the article. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 13:18, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
 * My apologies, I inadvertently reverted two edits when I meant to revert one, The Verity Slater quoted was inserted over an existing ref as though it was part of that cite. Reinstated the other section. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 13:27, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
 * No worries. CurryCity (talk) 13:34, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Source was right in the diff as:
 * And why would the edit not be in the relevant section? It's about the redundancy termination. CurryCity (talk) 13:31, 21 March 2022 (UTC)