Manxman1234 Posted October 4, 2023 Share Posted October 4, 2023 16 hours ago, John Wright said: Might the SPCo lie about reasons for cancellation? Of course, they might. Have the Steam Packet lied about reasons for cancellation? I think it’s very unlikely. And if they did it would have leaked very quickly. Technically it’s not a lie weather causes issues meaning ship can’t dock and has to return to port as crew would be out of working hours . Source of cancellation - weather however if crew live on board, vessel waits for break in weather, and safely docks, crew then able to operate return sailing as still 0n board. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Wright Posted October 4, 2023 Share Posted October 4, 2023 Just now, Manxman1234 said: Technically it’s not a lie weather causes issues meaning ship can’t dock and has to return to port as crew would be out of working hours . Source of cancellation - weather however if crew live on board, vessel waits for break in weather, and safely docks, crew then able to operate return sailing as still 0n board. Which gives rise to the timetabling issue I’ve set out above. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manxman1234 Posted October 4, 2023 Share Posted October 4, 2023 It’s more normal than not that crew lol ve onboard vessels, on a rolling shift pattern. Instead of needing 4 crews for a 2 week pattern of week on week off , in theory need 2 crews, saving £ and keeping costs lower for travelling public, I’m not sure what the proposal SPC have made, or rota plan, although this is potentially something that could lower the cost of travel, as less crew required, improved reliability of crossings, as crew on board, so a win for the travelling public. and yes the crews on board then need compensated accordingly, which I believe the proposal gives enhanced payments, and time off on leave 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Non-Believer Posted October 4, 2023 Share Posted October 4, 2023 9 minutes ago, Manxman1234 said: and keeping costs lower for travelling public I'm not sure how high a priority, if at all, this is. Rather, it's all about profit and Govt/Treasury revenue/levies. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Banker Posted October 4, 2023 Share Posted October 4, 2023 30 minutes ago, Non-Believer said: I'm not sure how high a priority, if at all, this is. Rather, it's all about profit and Govt/Treasury revenue/levies. The government doesn’t get involved in these matters and haven’t set any minimum dividends etc, they don’t even have a representative on board. The chairman would probably resign if any interference, however ultimately the shareholder ie treasury could order board to do whatever they want but the board could then resign Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Wright Posted October 4, 2023 Share Posted October 4, 2023 1 hour ago, Manxman1234 said: It’s more normal than not that crew lol ve onboard vessels, on a rolling shift pattern. Instead of needing 4 crews for a 2 week pattern of week on week off , in theory need 2 You still need 4 crews, plus supernumerary/relief crew to cover leave, sickness etc. They've run the Ben, and fast craft, for 25 years without live on board. They’ve made large profits for their over leveraged banking investor owners. Has there been a noticeable downside, affecting the Island? No. 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted October 4, 2023 Share Posted October 4, 2023 1 hour ago, Manxman1234 said: It’s more normal than not that crew lol ve onboard vessels, on a rolling shift pattern. Instead of needing 4 crews for a 2 week pattern of week on week off , in theory need 2 crews, saving £ and keeping costs lower for travelling public, I’m not sure what the proposal SPC have made, or rota plan, although this is potentially something that could lower the cost of travel, as less crew required, improved reliability of crossings, as crew on board, so a win for the travelling public. Reducing operational costs to pass the savings on to the travelling owners public by way of reduced fares is just so naive... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Wright Posted October 4, 2023 Share Posted October 4, 2023 5 minutes ago, P.K. said: Reducing operational costs to pass the savings on to the travelling owners public by way of reduced fares is just so naive... Except what SPCo management are offering will increase operational costs… Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Onchan Posted October 4, 2023 Share Posted October 4, 2023 1 hour ago, Banker said: The government doesn’t get involved in these matters and haven’t set any minimum dividends etc, they don’t even have a representative on board. The chairman would probably resign if any interference, however ultimately the shareholder ie treasury could order board to do whatever they want but the board could then resign Nevertheless if IOMG say pay up they really have no choice, chairman resigning or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Onchan Posted October 4, 2023 Share Posted October 4, 2023 37 minutes ago, John Wright said: You still need 4 crews, plus supernumerary/relief crew to cover leave, sickness etc. They've run the Ben, and fast craft, for 25 years without live on board. They’ve made large profits for their over leveraged banking investor owners. Has there been a noticeable downside, affecting the Island? No. So, our future boat services now in public ownership (much lauded in some quarters) is going to be forever in the hands of unions? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Wright Posted October 4, 2023 Share Posted October 4, 2023 11 minutes ago, Andy Onchan said: So, our future boat services now in public ownership (much lauded in some quarters) is going to be forever in the hands of unions? Where have I said that? Perhaps we should be asking why there aren’t worker representatives on the board, or a works council, or why management are so confrontational. Management are trying, unilaterally, to change a system that’s been agreed and worked well for 25 years. Management won’t go to arbitration. Even you can see where this will go, for officers. They want to recruit non Manx/British who will not have family or homes to stay at on Island. They’ve made a start. And they’ll claim they don’t get paid less, but, eventually, they will. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ringy Rose Posted October 4, 2023 Share Posted October 4, 2023 (edited) 1 hour ago, Non-Believer said: Rather, it's all about profit and Govt/Treasury revenue/levies. People on these boards are constantly demanding government behaves more like a hard-nosed private enterprise. And when they do, the board is full of people criticising that they’re behaving like a hard-nosed private enterprise. Edited October 4, 2023 by Ringy Rose Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Onchan Posted October 4, 2023 Share Posted October 4, 2023 6 minutes ago, John Wright said: Where have I said that? Perhaps we should be asking why there aren’t worker representatives on the board, or a works council, or why management are so confrontational. Management are trying, unilaterally, to change a system that’s been agreed and worked well for 25 years. Management won’t go to arbitration. Even you can see where this will go, for officers. They want to recruit non Manx/British who will not have family or homes to stay at on Island. They’ve made a start. And they’ll claim they don’t get paid less, but, eventually, they will. The management on behalf of the owners (us) should be allowed to run the business. I can see IOMSPCo being used as a political football. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Non-Believer Posted October 4, 2023 Share Posted October 4, 2023 1 hour ago, Banker said: The government doesn’t get involved in these matters and haven’t set any minimum dividends etc, they don’t even have a representative on board. The chairman would probably resign if any interference, however ultimately the shareholder ie treasury could order board to do whatever they want but the board could then resign The Treasury now sets an annual levy on the Steamie profits. That is the Govt. getting involved and making demands. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Wright Posted October 4, 2023 Share Posted October 4, 2023 9 minutes ago, Non-Believer said: The Treasury now sets an annual levy on the Steamie profits. That is the Govt. getting involved and making demands. Does it? Provide a link? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.