Cut backs on P&O

[amajaa]

We are paying less now than we paid for cruising back in 2009 so we can’t expect everything to be the same. 

[zap99]

1 minute ago, Megabear2 said:

There were plenty of apples, pears, oranges on Britannia at Christmas in baskets in the buffet.  Strangely they never made their way to the dining room but when the lady seated with us asked the waiter for a banana he appeared 20 minutes later triumphantly waving one.  He also magicked up cream cheese for my bagel every morning so it never hurts to ask.

 

The only wasteful thing that annoyed me was a gin and tonic being accompanied every time by a 330ml tin of Canada Dry, unless of course it was a ply where they were encouraging extra drinking of gin! gin 

Funny old world. Difficult to get a banana when the ship us in the region where they grow the things.

[cruising.mark.uk]

1 hour ago, zap99 said:

Funny old world. Difficult to get a banana when the ship us in the region where they grow the things.

Much like trying to get hold of a Danish pastry in Denmark.

[majortom10]

The same thing happened a few years ago when they used to leave Cadburys Hot Chocolate sachets out for midnight snacks. They seem to go very quickly and eventually P&O changed to pots of ready made hot chocolate  and you had to ask for a cup/mug. Whilst speaking to Food/Beverage Manager one night in the bar, a fiend of ours at the time, said they had stopped leaving sachets out because they had done the logistics and they came to the conclusion the number of sachets used was logistically impossible to drink with number of passengers onboard. P&O bean counters came to the conclusion that people were stockpiling them and then taking them home so they stopped providing them. Dont know if sachets of hot chocolate have returned at midnight snacks because I have not cruised with P&O for 3 years will be interesting to find out.

[majortom10]

1 hour ago, amajaa said:

We are paying less now than we paid for cruising back in 2009 so we can’t expect everything to be the same. 

Prices of cruises are cheaper now than our first cruise on QE2 in 1997 when we booked the lowest grade inside cabin onboard and paid over £110pppn. Today for that price many would expect to get a balcony cabin.

[Harry Peterson]

2 hours ago, molecrochip said:

There are also still significant staff shortages. The problem is sourcing new staff from Asia. A lot of them don't want to travel still. Peoples priorities change. The situation is slowly getting better however there is no playbook for returning all your crew home and then 18 months later starting from scratch again. 

Maybe all those overseas staff that Carnival have exploited for so long have decided enough is enough. P&O Cruises has been very keen to distinguish itself from Ferries, but in reality the similarities are stark - pay rates a small fraction of European minimum wage rates, exhausting work, and extremely long working hours. I know all the arguments, and I know it’s not illegal as laws currently stand, but when it comes to basic fairness you’ve got two sets of people on the same ship being paid on entirely different pay scales.

 

Saga and Virgin pay better and look after their staff better - little wonder that they’ve defected!

[Harry Peterson]

2 hours ago, molecrochip said:

 

Edited January 22, 2023 by Harry Peterson
Duplicate - deleted

[terrierjohn]

2 hours ago, zap99 said:

Perhaps I can help P&O. Most folk at home don't buy 330ml glass bottles. When we purchase our coke in that size container, we buy a can. Solves the shortage of glass bottles and the single use plastics issue in one go. Cans are lighter than bottles,  so saves weight and therefore fuel..... Win, win.

I always thought that all plastic drink bottles could be recycled, regardless of the size. So I find P&Os change to heavier glass and cans somewhat puzzling.

[molecrochip]

2 hours ago, Harry Peterson said:

Maybe all those overseas staff that Carnival have exploited for so long have decided enough is enough. P&O Cruises has been very keen to distinguish itself from Ferries, but in reality the similarities are stark - pay rates a small fraction of European minimum wage rates, exhausting work, and extremely long working hours. I know all the arguments, and I know it’s not illegal as laws currently stand, but when it comes to basic fairness you’ve got two sets of people on the same ship being paid on entirely different pay scales.

 

Saga and Virgin pay better and look after their staff better - little wonder that they’ve defected!

The staff aren't exploited. Remember, they chose to take the job. Exploitation requires someone to be forced to do something.

 

If you know the arguments then you know that the pay is better than local pay, the living conditions are generally better, the opportunity to see parts of the world for free, the training that enable them to go home to a great job after. As for hours, on an annualised basis, its fairly similar to a nurse working 4x12 hour shifts a week, they just cram their hours into about 8 or 9 months.

 

Saga and Virgin do pay better for some roles but not all. As with any labour market, some pay more than others. Both lines were on par with the market pre pandemic. They both increased their pay to avoid staff shortages knowing it could nick staff from other lines.

 

The bigger difference between Virgin & P&O is that more crew get their own solo ensuite cabin. But that's due to ship design and the fact that Virgin's ships are all of the modern design. Iona and Arvia have the same improved living arrangements but as there is no guarantee of which ship you are assigned to, especially for first contract staff who don't get to state a preference, you could equally end up on Aurora sharing a cabin for two, and a bathroom for 4.

[Eglesbrech]

5 hours ago, molecrochip said:

 

There are also still significant staff shortages. The problem is sourcing new staff from Asia. A lot of them don't want to travel still. Peoples priorities change. The situation is slowly getting better however there is no playbook for returning all your crew home and then 18 months later starting from scratch again. 

I appreciate that staffing may be an issue as it is here in the U.K. in some specific occupations but surely the company (any company) should temper bookings to staffing capacity.

 

It seems like ships are now fairly full / at capacity while knowing there are staff shortages?  Is that not a recipe for providing inferior service and surely an avoidable problem. 
 

Perhaps too simplistic a take on it but I would be interested in your views.

Edited January 22, 2023 by Eglesbrech
Typo

[Bazrat]

2 hours ago, terrierjohn said:

I always thought that all plastic drink bottles could be recycled, regardless of the size. So I find P&Os change to heavier glass and cans somewhat puzzling.

you can make new bottles from recycled glass and tins from recycled can’s easier than plastic bottles from recycled plastic.

[Harry Peterson]

6 minutes ago, molecrochip said:

The staff aren't exploited. Remember, they chose to take the job. Exploitation requires someone to be forced to do something.

 

If you know the arguments then you know that the pay is better than local pay, the living conditions are generally better, the opportunity to see parts of the world for free, the training that enable them to go home to a great job after. As for hours, on an annualised basis, its fairly similar to a nurse working 4x12 hour shifts a week, they just cram their hours into about 8 or 9 months.

 

Saga and Virgin do pay better for some roles but not all. As with any labour market, some pay more than others. Both lines were on par with the market pre pandemic. They both increased their pay to avoid staff shortages knowing it could nick staff from other lines.

 

The bigger difference between Virgin & P&O is that more crew get their own solo ensuite cabin. But that's due to ship design and the fact that Virgin's ships are all of the modern design. Iona and Arvia have the same improved living arrangements but as there is no guarantee of which ship you are assigned to, especially for first contract staff who don't get to state a preference, you could equally end up on Aurora sharing a cabin for two, and a bathroom for 4.

I think we must agree to differ.  Exploitation does not require force - it simply requires one party to a transaction to be in a much weaker bargaining position than the other, and the stronger party to take advantage of that.

 

Wherever the staff are recruited, it's simply unfair to pay UK staff one one payscale and overseas staff on a much lower one when they're both working in the same place.  Exploitation like that was stopped in most countries by minimum wage regulation, but companies like P&O get round that by other means. It gives passengers cheaper cruises, and Carnival higher profits, but that doesn't make it morally right. Legally, yes. Morally no.

 

And that, I suspect, is why P&O don't have enough staff to provide passengers with an adequate service.

[Bazrat]

Our last cruise they took on extra staff at Tenerife but we didn’t see any deterioration in service, but saying that we was to busy enjoying ourselves to really look.

[Bazrat]

2 minutes ago, Harry Peterson said:

I think we must agree to differ.  Exploitation does not require force - it simply requires one party to a transaction to be in a much weaker bargaining position than the other, and the stronger party to take advantage of that.

 

Wherever the staff are recruited, it's simply unfair to pay UK staff one one payscale and overseas staff on a much lower one when they're both working in the same place.  Exploitation like that was stopped in most countries by minimum wage regulation, but companies like P&O get round that by other means. It gives passengers cheaper cruises, and Carnival higher profits, but that doesn't make it morally right. Legally, yes. Morally no.

 

And that, I suspect, is why P&O don't have enough staff to provide passengers with an adequate service.

Did you notice a deterioration in service on your last cruise.

[cruising.mark.uk]

8 minutes ago, Harry Peterson said:

Exploitation does not require force - it simply requires one party to a transaction to be in a much weaker bargaining position than the other, and the stronger party to take advantage of that.

 

 

By this definition, I've been exploited for the whole of my working life.  I think it's called being an employee.  I think it's a fact of life that employers take advantage of the fact that they generally have the upper hand in any employer / employee relationship.

[Solent Richard]

3 hours ago, Harry Peterson said:

Maybe all those overseas staff that Carnival have exploited for so long have decided enough is enough. P&O Cruises has been very keen to distinguish itself from Ferries, but in reality the similarities are stark - pay rates a small fraction of European minimum wage rates, exhausting work, and extremely long working hours. I know all the arguments, and I know it’s not illegal as laws currently stand, but when it comes to basic fairness you’ve got two sets of people on the same ship being paid on entirely different pay scales.

 

Saga and Virgin pay better and look after their staff better - little wonder that they’ve defected!

 

8 minutes ago, Harry Peterson said:

I think we must agree to differ.  Exploitation does not require force - it simply requires one party to a transaction to be in a much weaker bargaining position than the other, and the stronger party to take advantage of that.

 

Wherever the staff are recruited, it's simply unfair to pay UK staff one one payscale and overseas staff on a much lower one when they're both working in the same place.  Exploitation like that was stopped in most countries by minimum wage regulation, but companies like P&O get round that by other means. It gives passengers cheaper cruises, and Carnival higher profits, but that doesn't make it morally right. Legally, yes. Morally no.

 

And that, I suspect, is why P&O don't have enough staff to provide passengers with an adequate service.

My word, you do have a bee in your bonnet over Carnival's 'exploitation' of their workers.

 

How do you, I wonder, observe other cruise lines such as Celebrity, Saga, Norwegian, etc who also employ foreign workers?

[terrierjohn]

2 hours ago, Bazrat said:

you can make new bottles from recycled glass and tins from recycled can’s easier than plastic bottles from recycled plastic.

But surely quite a lot of the plastic is recycled for many other uses as well as bottles, and it is certainly a lot lighter to transport plastic bottles than glass ones, or even metal ones.

[terrierjohn]

3 hours ago, Harry Peterson said:

I think we must agree to differ.  Exploitation does not require force - it simply requires one party to a transaction to be in a much weaker bargaining position than the other, and the stronger party to take advantage of that.

 

Wherever the staff are recruited, it's simply unfair to pay UK staff one one payscale and overseas staff on a much lower one when they're both working in the same place.  Exploitation like that was stopped in most countries by minimum wage regulation, but companies like P&O get round that by other means. It gives passengers cheaper cruises, and Carnival higher profits, but that doesn't make it morally right. Legally, yes. Morally no.

 

And that, I suspect, is why P&O don't have enough staff to provide passengers with an adequate service.

Harry you are entitled to your views, but do bear in mind that if hotel staff had to be paid UK  wage levels, then very view of us would be able to afford to cruise. Then of course you would be condemning these same staff you seek to protect to having to take jobs at local rates, if enough even existed.

I think you need to take a much more pragmatic view.

[Bazrat]

15 minutes ago, Megabear2 said:

Not arguing with that, merely pointing out that they sacked staff here - they could perhaps have not done that by using furlough - sent thousands back to their home countries and then wonder why nearly three years later those people have moved on and found other jobs in different industries.  Realistically no one could expect those people to be keen to rush back into thr industry. Most of them will have transferrable skills that will no doubt be welcome at home.

 

P&O Ferries meantime appear to have gotten away with their actions as well.

They was made redundant or there contracts paid up being put on furlough would have been complicated because they was not uk citizens or residents of uk, as for the ferry company did you believe this government would have done anything to them.

[Bazrat]

20 minutes ago, terrierjohn said:

But surely quite a lot of the plastic is recycled for many other uses as well as bottles, and it is certainly a lot lighter to transport plastic bottles than glass ones, or even metal ones.

I agree with them being lighter but more complicated to recycle, as for weight not really a concern for a ship plus glass is crushed and bagged tin is flattened but plastic goes through a different process which as far as I know is not done onboard just bagged thus more bulky.

[Megabear2]

10 minutes ago, Bazrat said:

They was made redundant or there contracts paid up being put on furlough would have been complicated because they was not uk citizens or residents of uk, as for the ferry company did you believe this government would have done anything to them.

As I'm sure you are aware, I was referring to the UK employees not the onboard ship staff when I referred to furlough.  Anyone who spent hours trying to speak to Carnival House knows full well the staff had been decimated and unfortunately not so far replaced.  If I told you black was black you'd find a way to say I was saying it was white!

 

Seriously the point is redundant or contract paid up, the individuals sent home had to find work in different fields, they couldn't live on thin air and most had families which was why they were at sea in the first place.  Presumably the wages haven’t increased on any cruise line enough to tempt them back.  Once the "pattern" was broken it becomes harder for recruitment involving long periods away from home.  Most staff I speak to on ships are there to provide for family not because its a career move.

 

If the remuneration system is fair is a different case, not really one for a discussion on why recruitment is not happening in the way the cruise lines expected.

[molecrochip]

P&O didn't sack any staff during the pandemic. Those from Southampton were made redundant through the proper channels, staff consultations, notice periods paid etc. Those from Asia et al who were on ship contracts were paid their contracts.

 

The problem with furlough for the UK, was that it was always clear that it was going to take 18 months to fully restart once Covid was lifted. Furlough was never going to cover that. The actions taken were in consultation with UK Gov and were painful for all involved. A lot of people have returned to the organisation however the call centre is suffering from the general people shortage for lower skilled & lower professional jobs.

 

As for P&O Ferries, they broke the law, took the chance and got away with it but arguing that they woudl have ceased to exist otherwise.

 

Finally, I know of a least a couple of people who have worked their way up the ranks and taken on 'officer' roles on the hotel side of the crew. They are paid the same as a UK person undertaking the role would be. Its also worth noting that the historical pay scales have been set around a low base plus performance related share of the services charges. Now P&O have moved away from service charges, there is still an element of performance related pay but the expected take home is more certain and higher.

[Yorkypete]

32 minutes ago, terrierjohn said:

Harry you are entitled to your views, but do bear in mind that if hotel staff had to be paid UK  wage levels, then very view of us would be able to afford to cruise. Then of course you would be condemning these same staff you seek to protect to having to take jobs at local rates, if enough even existed.

I think you need to take a much more pragmatic view.

This is the usual answer  from those of us who can afford to cruise (a small percentage of the population). The view from many is that these people employed on ships are there soley for the benefit of  keeping prices down and it is not our problem if they are paid under the limits imposed by governments. My view is that they should be paid the going rate for their types of jobs and if some then cannot afford to cruise then tough luck.

[Megabear2]

7 minutes ago, molecrochip said:

P&O didn't sack any staff during the pandemic. Those from Southampton were made redundant through the proper channels, staff consultations, notice periods paid etc. Those from Asia et al who were on ship contracts were paid their contracts.

 

The problem with furlough for the UK, was that it was always clear that it was going to take 18 months to fully restart once Covid was lifted. Furlough was never going to cover that. The actions taken were in consultation with UK Gov and were painful for all involved. A lot of people have returned to the organisation however the call centre is suffering from the general people shortage for lower skilled & lower professional jobs.

 

As for P&O Ferries, they broke the law, took the chance and got away with it but arguing that they woudl have ceased to exist otherwise.

 

Finally, I know of a least a couple of people who have worked their way up the ranks and taken on 'officer' roles on the hotel side of the crew. They are paid the same as a UK person undertaking the role would be. Its also worth noting that the historical pay scales have been set around a low base plus performance related share of the services charges. Now P&O have moved away from service charges, there is still an element of performance related pay but the expected take home is more certain and higher.

 Fully appreciate that and I never said they were sacked although losing your job by way of redundancy is just as devastating.  "Sacked" is an emotive word to suggest someone did something wrong and is thrown around by people in many wrong situations.  I'm believe that years later those people may well not want to come back and now 18 months or so after sailing restarted it should be no surprise they've gone off to do other things and aren'tgoing back to the cruise industry.  Unfortunately the benefit system for those who lost their jobs rather than being furloughed is not generous and in many cases would have ceased long before the restart.  

 

Ironically the furlough scheme did last 18 months, ending on 30 September 2021.  UK government might have accidentally misled the companies and perhaps the individuals might not have had to suffer by decisions made.  Unfortunately we can't change history but once people are lost that quite often is forever as we are seeing in other industries.

[Bazrat]

39 minutes ago, Megabear2 said:

 Fully appreciate that and I never said they were sacked although losing your job by way of redundancy is just as devastating.  "Sacked" is an emotive word to suggest someone did something wrong and is thrown around by people in many wrong situations.  I'm believe that years later those people may well not want to come back and now 18 months or so after sailing restarted it should be no surprise they've gone off to do other things and aren'tgoing back to the cruise industry.  Unfortunately the benefit system for those who lost their jobs rather than being furloughed is not generous and in many cases would have ceased long before the restart.  

 

Ironically the furlough scheme did last 18 months, ending on 30 September 2021.  UK government might have accidentally misled the companies and perhaps the individuals might not have had to suffer by decisions made.  Unfortunately we can't change history but once people are lost that quite often is forever as we are seeing in other industries.

Actually if you read back your posts you mentioned sacking and compared them with that ferry company, p&o followed the rules as for workers not returning it happened in all industries mine included, as for wages companies will always pay the minimum rate if they can get employees to work for them.