Ford drivers claim they will get £27,000 less than colleagues

Daily Echo: Ford's plant at Southampton. Ford's plant at Southampton.

A NEW row has broken out over payouts for workers hit by the closure of Southampton’s Ford plant.

Truckers who work for the motoring manufacturer claim they are in line to get almost £27,000 less than their co-workers at the Swaythling plant, due to shut next summer.

The Daily Echo has been told that there are more than 35 drivers and administration staff based at the Ford depot in Barton Park, Eastleigh, who are set to lose out on lucrative payments promised to other staff.

According to unions, the company has told them that they are not entitled to the payouts because they have been offered redeployment elsewhere – including to operations at Southampton docks.

But one worker, who wished to remain anonymous, said drivers had been kept in the dark about where they could be moved to and redundancy arrangements were an “utter shambles”.

He added: “It’s been six weeks since they announced the closure and we still don’t know what the hell’s going on. We’re pretty up in arms about it.

“There are probably 31 drivers and five clerks based at Barton Park and none of us will get these payments.

“A lot of us have been here 35 or 40 years. Everybody else in the plant is set to get thousands more than we will, even though they may only have five or six years of service.

Related links

“There’s no way they’re going to be able to redeploy 31 drivers at the docks. They have said we could be redeployed but haven’t said where. We’re in limbo and time is getting on. It’s an utter shambles. Nobody is telling us anything.”

The Unite union, which represents workers at Ford, says it is aware of the discrepancy between payouts for plant workers and HGV drivers.

The union says it breaks down into an £18,000 “continuity”

payment, which will be paid on the condition that workers do not take industrial action, and a £8,600 “special payment” for breaching employees’ contracts.

Truckers are not set to see either payment in their redundancy packages.

Unite regional officer Fred Hanna said: “Discussions are still ongoing for both of the packages and these issues will be brought up.

“As far as I’m concerned it would be ideal if they were offered the same and the company is aware of that.

“We’re hoping for the best deal for everybody.”

The Daily Echo has previously reported that more than 200 employees of Penske Logistics who work at the Swaythling plant, which makes the iconic Transit van, are not set to get the generous payouts promised to Ford staff.

Contractors said they felt “insulted” after being told they will get about six weeks’ pay and statutory redundancy – compared to pay outs of up to £93,000 for their Ford colleagues.

Ford said it was not able to comment on the differences in redundancy payouts.

A spokesman said: “From our point of view, the consultation we’re currently having is confidential so we can’t make any comment.”

For all the latest news and background on the Ford saga click here

Comments (19)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

11:56am Mon 10 Dec 12

loosehead says...

So they've been offered alternative employment but don't want it but now are moaning about others getting more than them?
Surely to be offered to remain employed is a bigger pay out than no work?
How many more years can they work ? 5-10 years?
what wage? £27,000 approx?
times that by 5= £135,000 a lot more than £85,000 redundancy pay isn't it?
tax on anything over £30,000 at 40% or work & earn a good wage?
who's been offered the better deal?
So they've been offered alternative employment but don't want it but now are moaning about others getting more than them? Surely to be offered to remain employed is a bigger pay out than no work? How many more years can they work ? 5-10 years? what wage? £27,000 approx? times that by 5= £135,000 a lot more than £85,000 redundancy pay isn't it? tax on anything over £30,000 at 40% or work & earn a good wage? who's been offered the better deal? loosehead
  • Score: 0

12:39pm Mon 10 Dec 12

Big Mac says...

Shoudl count themselves lucky they're getting anything. Time to wake up and realise the mess the whole country is in.
Shoudl count themselves lucky they're getting anything. Time to wake up and realise the mess the whole country is in. Big Mac
  • Score: 0

1:40pm Mon 10 Dec 12

starlitdragstar says...

Believe me, having sub-contracted to FMC at Barton Park in the past, their drivers, apart from a small minority, are the laziest, money grabbing bunch of people I have ever met, I see they haven't told you they were earning 60 to 100k per year before they went on to a single shift, around £40/50 for a night out, plus many, many other perks. I hope they all end up in the real world driving LGV's for approx £ 8/9 per hour, no parking in lay-bys for 3-4 hours then booking a night out, believe me I could go on and on, so please do not have any sympathy for them. The real workers in the plant and the Penske/Hampton lads deserve every penny they can get, and I'm sure most of those that work in the delivery bays will agree with me.
Believe me, having sub-contracted to FMC at Barton Park in the past, their drivers, apart from a small minority, are the laziest, money grabbing bunch of people I have ever met, I see they haven't told you they were earning 60 to 100k per year before they went on to a single shift, around £40/50 for a night out, plus many, many other perks. I hope they all end up in the real world driving LGV's for approx £ 8/9 per hour, no parking in lay-bys for 3-4 hours then booking a night out, believe me I could go on and on, so please do not have any sympathy for them. The real workers in the plant and the Penske/Hampton lads deserve every penny they can get, and I'm sure most of those that work in the delivery bays will agree with me. starlitdragstar
  • Score: 1

1:55pm Mon 10 Dec 12

southy says...

starlitdragstar
What is this bit about.
"no parking in lay-bys for 3-4 hours then booking a night out"
I sure there are laws and rules that the HGV drivers need to keep to.
They keep changing them so i not kept up with the laws changes, but i know that HGV drivers can only drive for so many hours and must take a break for so long, and then there is having a break away from the lorry, and to have so many hours of sleep ect ect ect
starlitdragstar What is this bit about. "no parking in lay-bys for 3-4 hours then booking a night out" I sure there are laws and rules that the HGV drivers need to keep to. They keep changing them so i not kept up with the laws changes, but i know that HGV drivers can only drive for so many hours and must take a break for so long, and then there is having a break away from the lorry, and to have so many hours of sleep ect ect ect southy
  • Score: 0

2:01pm Mon 10 Dec 12

southy says...

loosehead wrote:
So they've been offered alternative employment but don't want it but now are moaning about others getting more than them?
Surely to be offered to remain employed is a bigger pay out than no work?
How many more years can they work ? 5-10 years?
what wage? £27,000 approx?
times that by 5= £135,000 a lot more than £85,000 redundancy pay isn't it?
tax on anything over £30,000 at 40% or work & earn a good wage?
who's been offered the better deal?
Loose look at this part
“A lot of us have been here 35 or 40 years. Everybody else in the plant is set to get thousands more than we will, even though they may only have five or six years of service."
That sounds like these drivers are on a renewable contract very 2 years, and would be the reason why there redundancy is so low, the Penske workers contract is once every year.
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: So they've been offered alternative employment but don't want it but now are moaning about others getting more than them? Surely to be offered to remain employed is a bigger pay out than no work? How many more years can they work ? 5-10 years? what wage? £27,000 approx? times that by 5= £135,000 a lot more than £85,000 redundancy pay isn't it? tax on anything over £30,000 at 40% or work & earn a good wage? who's been offered the better deal?[/p][/quote]Loose look at this part “A lot of us have been here 35 or 40 years. Everybody else in the plant is set to get thousands more than we will, even though they may only have five or six years of service." That sounds like these drivers are on a renewable contract very 2 years, and would be the reason why there redundancy is so low, the Penske workers contract is once every year. southy
  • Score: 0

2:04pm Mon 10 Dec 12

southy says...

"“There are probably 31 drivers and five clerks based at Barton Park and none of us will get these payments. "

This what happens when you let the bosses walk all over you, You should have fight for what is right, you should be taking a long good look at your union leaders, and hook out those that are in the bosses pockets, you only get what you want if your willing to fight for it.
"“There are probably 31 drivers and five clerks based at Barton Park and none of us will get these payments. " This what happens when you let the bosses walk all over you, You should have fight for what is right, you should be taking a long good look at your union leaders, and hook out those that are in the bosses pockets, you only get what you want if your willing to fight for it. southy
  • Score: 0

2:09pm Mon 10 Dec 12

ohec says...

If negotiations are on going then i think this article may be bit premature, as for starlitdragstar's little tirade i think there may be a hint of jealousy there somewhere, it doesn't matter what the drivers did or didn't do the fact remains they are still FMC employees so are entitled to the same consideration as other FMC employees, if there are redeployment opportunities thats great but it should be the drivers choice. As for starlitdragstar's take on the contract staff how many times has it got to be said that if you are not an FMC employee all you can do is hold your hand out and be grateful for what you get because you are NOT entitled to anymore.
If negotiations are on going then i think this article may be bit premature, as for starlitdragstar's little tirade i think there may be a hint of jealousy there somewhere, it doesn't matter what the drivers did or didn't do the fact remains they are still FMC employees so are entitled to the same consideration as other FMC employees, if there are redeployment opportunities thats great but it should be the drivers choice. As for starlitdragstar's take on the contract staff how many times has it got to be said that if you are not an FMC employee all you can do is hold your hand out and be grateful for what you get because you are NOT entitled to anymore. ohec
  • Score: 0

2:24pm Mon 10 Dec 12

bigfella777 says...

They should all refuse to work and stand up for themselves, sometimes pride is more important than money.
Now they are saying the plant is going to be mothballed, not sold or knocked down, why?
They should all refuse to work and stand up for themselves, sometimes pride is more important than money. Now they are saying the plant is going to be mothballed, not sold or knocked down, why? bigfella777
  • Score: 0

2:40pm Mon 10 Dec 12

loosehead says...

southy wrote:
loosehead wrote:
So they've been offered alternative employment but don't want it but now are moaning about others getting more than them?
Surely to be offered to remain employed is a bigger pay out than no work?
How many more years can they work ? 5-10 years?
what wage? £27,000 approx?
times that by 5= £135,000 a lot more than £85,000 redundancy pay isn't it?
tax on anything over £30,000 at 40% or work & earn a good wage?
who's been offered the better deal?
Loose look at this part
“A lot of us have been here 35 or 40 years. Everybody else in the plant is set to get thousands more than we will, even though they may only have five or six years of service."
That sounds like these drivers are on a renewable contract very 2 years, and would be the reason why there redundancy is so low, the Penske workers contract is once every year.
Southy unless they're looking towards early retirement then any driver/clerk who started there at 21 would now be 56 or 61 both ages still have a few years to go to state pension age.
at 56 they have 10 years to go & if they're on the wages starlit has quoted then surely 10 years on 100,000 is far better than £68-85,000 redundancy pay isn't it?
at 61 that's still 5 years on that wage is it because the redeployment means they'll only earn their basic wage?
two sites but the same company? I know of cases similar to this where a company owns to factories & pays out redundancy & pensions differently.
It's not uncommon & as they've been offered alternative employment but have turned it down are they refusing a job offer? how would that stand in Social security payments?
We were told refuse to take a job in team work & your quitting so we don't need to pay redundancy so either volunteer to go ( the social doesn't like that word) or take up the job offered to you it's your choice so does that count here?
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: So they've been offered alternative employment but don't want it but now are moaning about others getting more than them? Surely to be offered to remain employed is a bigger pay out than no work? How many more years can they work ? 5-10 years? what wage? £27,000 approx? times that by 5= £135,000 a lot more than £85,000 redundancy pay isn't it? tax on anything over £30,000 at 40% or work & earn a good wage? who's been offered the better deal?[/p][/quote]Loose look at this part “A lot of us have been here 35 or 40 years. Everybody else in the plant is set to get thousands more than we will, even though they may only have five or six years of service." That sounds like these drivers are on a renewable contract very 2 years, and would be the reason why there redundancy is so low, the Penske workers contract is once every year.[/p][/quote]Southy unless they're looking towards early retirement then any driver/clerk who started there at 21 would now be 56 or 61 both ages still have a few years to go to state pension age. at 56 they have 10 years to go & if they're on the wages starlit has quoted then surely 10 years on 100,000 is far better than £68-85,000 redundancy pay isn't it? at 61 that's still 5 years on that wage is it because the redeployment means they'll only earn their basic wage? two sites but the same company? I know of cases similar to this where a company owns to factories & pays out redundancy & pensions differently. It's not uncommon & as they've been offered alternative employment but have turned it down are they refusing a job offer? how would that stand in Social security payments? We were told refuse to take a job in team work & your quitting so we don't need to pay redundancy so either volunteer to go ( the social doesn't like that word) or take up the job offered to you it's your choice so does that count here? loosehead
  • Score: 0

2:59pm Mon 10 Dec 12

Southampton boy says...

Why not ask if there is anyone within the plant who has a HGV, and swap with them Fords have done this in the past! problem now is most of the plant want to go now none of them want the plant to stay open thats way Fords make big payout, I have been told that they have already done some drilling in south compound to see whats under there so they can build so they will sell everything and build houses just see if I am not right
STOP BUYING FORD'S thats all they understand
Why not ask if there is anyone within the plant who has a HGV, and swap with them Fords have done this in the past! problem now is most of the plant want to go now none of them want the plant to stay open thats way Fords make big payout, I have been told that they have already done some drilling in south compound to see whats under there so they can build so they will sell everything and build houses just see if I am not right STOP BUYING FORD'S thats all they understand Southampton boy
  • Score: 0

3:12pm Mon 10 Dec 12

southy says...

loosehead wrote:
southy wrote:
loosehead wrote:
So they've been offered alternative employment but don't want it but now are moaning about others getting more than them?
Surely to be offered to remain employed is a bigger pay out than no work?
How many more years can they work ? 5-10 years?
what wage? £27,000 approx?
times that by 5= £135,000 a lot more than £85,000 redundancy pay isn't it?
tax on anything over £30,000 at 40% or work & earn a good wage?
who's been offered the better deal?
Loose look at this part
“A lot of us have been here 35 or 40 years. Everybody else in the plant is set to get thousands more than we will, even though they may only have five or six years of service."
That sounds like these drivers are on a renewable contract very 2 years, and would be the reason why there redundancy is so low, the Penske workers contract is once every year.
Southy unless they're looking towards early retirement then any driver/clerk who started there at 21 would now be 56 or 61 both ages still have a few years to go to state pension age.
at 56 they have 10 years to go & if they're on the wages starlit has quoted then surely 10 years on 100,000 is far better than £68-85,000 redundancy pay isn't it?
at 61 that's still 5 years on that wage is it because the redeployment means they'll only earn their basic wage?
two sites but the same company? I know of cases similar to this where a company owns to factories & pays out redundancy & pensions differently.
It's not uncommon & as they've been offered alternative employment but have turned it down are they refusing a job offer? how would that stand in Social security payments?
We were told refuse to take a job in team work & your quitting so we don't need to pay redundancy so either volunteer to go ( the social doesn't like that word) or take up the job offered to you it's your choice so does that count here?
No what i was on about is the renewable contract (most are not worth the paper they are writen on).
these renewable contract are not jobs for life they are a time limited contract and ends and is renewed for its employees, so redundancy is only for the contract period and not the number of years that you work at the place for, its a way for the bosses to put a max amount of redundancy pay out, whitch is a lot lower than than it would of been if the job was for life.
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: So they've been offered alternative employment but don't want it but now are moaning about others getting more than them? Surely to be offered to remain employed is a bigger pay out than no work? How many more years can they work ? 5-10 years? what wage? £27,000 approx? times that by 5= £135,000 a lot more than £85,000 redundancy pay isn't it? tax on anything over £30,000 at 40% or work & earn a good wage? who's been offered the better deal?[/p][/quote]Loose look at this part “A lot of us have been here 35 or 40 years. Everybody else in the plant is set to get thousands more than we will, even though they may only have five or six years of service." That sounds like these drivers are on a renewable contract very 2 years, and would be the reason why there redundancy is so low, the Penske workers contract is once every year.[/p][/quote]Southy unless they're looking towards early retirement then any driver/clerk who started there at 21 would now be 56 or 61 both ages still have a few years to go to state pension age. at 56 they have 10 years to go & if they're on the wages starlit has quoted then surely 10 years on 100,000 is far better than £68-85,000 redundancy pay isn't it? at 61 that's still 5 years on that wage is it because the redeployment means they'll only earn their basic wage? two sites but the same company? I know of cases similar to this where a company owns to factories & pays out redundancy & pensions differently. It's not uncommon & as they've been offered alternative employment but have turned it down are they refusing a job offer? how would that stand in Social security payments? We were told refuse to take a job in team work & your quitting so we don't need to pay redundancy so either volunteer to go ( the social doesn't like that word) or take up the job offered to you it's your choice so does that count here?[/p][/quote]No what i was on about is the renewable contract (most are not worth the paper they are writen on). these renewable contract are not jobs for life they are a time limited contract and ends and is renewed for its employees, so redundancy is only for the contract period and not the number of years that you work at the place for, its a way for the bosses to put a max amount of redundancy pay out, whitch is a lot lower than than it would of been if the job was for life. southy
  • Score: 0

5:26pm Mon 10 Dec 12

voiceof thepeople says...

unfortunately the lorry drivers do not work for Southampton Ford plant, they are part of Dagenham therefore do not qualify for the payments
unfortunately the lorry drivers do not work for Southampton Ford plant, they are part of Dagenham therefore do not qualify for the payments voiceof thepeople
  • Score: 0

6:04pm Mon 10 Dec 12

loosehead says...

voiceof thepeople wrote:
unfortunately the lorry drivers do not work for Southampton Ford plant, they are part of Dagenham therefore do not qualify for the payments
Isn't one of the plants in Dagenham being shut as well?
[quote][p][bold]voiceof thepeople[/bold] wrote: unfortunately the lorry drivers do not work for Southampton Ford plant, they are part of Dagenham therefore do not qualify for the payments[/p][/quote]Isn't one of the plants in Dagenham being shut as well? loosehead
  • Score: 0

7:22pm Mon 10 Dec 12

J.P.M says...

why do Ford workers think they are the centre of the industrial world?
When their work is plenty, we never hear from them / and they never rise in solidarity with other workers' organisations.
BUT
When they are under threat - we all have to listen to their bleating>>
why do Ford workers think they are the centre of the industrial world? When their work is plenty, we never hear from them / and they never rise in solidarity with other workers' organisations. BUT When they are under threat - we all have to listen to their bleating>> J.P.M
  • Score: 0

7:43pm Mon 10 Dec 12

voiceof thepeople says...

loosehead wrote:
voiceof thepeople wrote:
unfortunately the lorry drivers do not work for Southampton Ford plant, they are part of Dagenham therefore do not qualify for the payments
Isn't one of the plants in Dagenham being shut as well?
Yes, the press shop, but not the engine plant or the transport services
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]voiceof thepeople[/bold] wrote: unfortunately the lorry drivers do not work for Southampton Ford plant, they are part of Dagenham therefore do not qualify for the payments[/p][/quote]Isn't one of the plants in Dagenham being shut as well?[/p][/quote]Yes, the press shop, but not the engine plant or the transport services voiceof thepeople
  • Score: 0

8:37pm Mon 10 Dec 12

beiroot says...

Thought Thatcher killed off all the big redundency pay outs.In the late nineties I got laid off by a Local Authority after 20 years service and got diddly squat as we had to transfer to the private sector under TUPE. We did get a choice."Take it or leave it" Nice.
Thought Thatcher killed off all the big redundency pay outs.In the late nineties I got laid off by a Local Authority after 20 years service and got diddly squat as we had to transfer to the private sector under TUPE. We did get a choice."Take it or leave it" Nice. beiroot
  • Score: 0

9:02pm Mon 10 Dec 12

southy says...

voiceof thepeople wrote:
loosehead wrote:
voiceof thepeople wrote:
unfortunately the lorry drivers do not work for Southampton Ford plant, they are part of Dagenham therefore do not qualify for the payments
Isn't one of the plants in Dagenham being shut as well?
Yes, the press shop, but not the engine plant or the transport services
The Engine plant will be closed in a few years time, when that to will be moved to Turkey.
[quote][p][bold]voiceof thepeople[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]voiceof thepeople[/bold] wrote: unfortunately the lorry drivers do not work for Southampton Ford plant, they are part of Dagenham therefore do not qualify for the payments[/p][/quote]Isn't one of the plants in Dagenham being shut as well?[/p][/quote]Yes, the press shop, but not the engine plant or the transport services[/p][/quote]The Engine plant will be closed in a few years time, when that to will be moved to Turkey. southy
  • Score: 0

9:05pm Mon 10 Dec 12

loosehead says...

beiroot wrote:
Thought Thatcher killed off all the big redundency pay outs.In the late nineties I got laid off by a Local Authority after 20 years service and got diddly squat as we had to transfer to the private sector under TUPE. We did get a choice."Take it or leave it" Nice.
blaming Thatcher?
Surely if you joint that Authority you should have been aware of the pay & conditions package?
In that package is the amount they pay you in severance pay & as far as I know that does not change if a private company takes over your contract unless your Union didn't argue for that?
BAT transfered a lot of permanent cleaners to an agency & one of the conditions was they would have two years to decide to work for that company or take redundancy.
If after two years they would go on the private companies scheme .
Maggie never destroyed redundancy payments at all.
I got £68,000 for nearly 25years, didn't your Union fight for the right of you taking redundancy if you wanted it?
[quote][p][bold]beiroot[/bold] wrote: Thought Thatcher killed off all the big redundency pay outs.In the late nineties I got laid off by a Local Authority after 20 years service and got diddly squat as we had to transfer to the private sector under TUPE. We did get a choice."Take it or leave it" Nice.[/p][/quote]blaming Thatcher? Surely if you joint that Authority you should have been aware of the pay & conditions package? In that package is the amount they pay you in severance pay & as far as I know that does not change if a private company takes over your contract unless your Union didn't argue for that? BAT transfered a lot of permanent cleaners to an agency & one of the conditions was they would have two years to decide to work for that company or take redundancy. If after two years they would go on the private companies scheme . Maggie never destroyed redundancy payments at all. I got £68,000 for nearly 25years, didn't your Union fight for the right of you taking redundancy if you wanted it? loosehead
  • Score: 0

9:07pm Mon 10 Dec 12

loosehead says...

southy wrote:
voiceof thepeople wrote:
loosehead wrote:
voiceof thepeople wrote:
unfortunately the lorry drivers do not work for Southampton Ford plant, they are part of Dagenham therefore do not qualify for the payments
Isn't one of the plants in Dagenham being shut as well?
Yes, the press shop, but not the engine plant or the transport services
The Engine plant will be closed in a few years time, when that to will be moved to Turkey.
You total burke! what do you think that grant was for?
researching a cleaner greener engine in that very place.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]voiceof thepeople[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]voiceof thepeople[/bold] wrote: unfortunately the lorry drivers do not work for Southampton Ford plant, they are part of Dagenham therefore do not qualify for the payments[/p][/quote]Isn't one of the plants in Dagenham being shut as well?[/p][/quote]Yes, the press shop, but not the engine plant or the transport services[/p][/quote]The Engine plant will be closed in a few years time, when that to will be moved to Turkey.[/p][/quote]You total burke! what do you think that grant was for? researching a cleaner greener engine in that very place. loosehead
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree