Am I missing something obvious here? Stobart says it doesn't need the drivers at Donny because it's own existing fleet can do the job at a fraction of the cost. The Donny drivers' response is to threaten to go on strike allowing Stobart to prove that it's existing drivers can do the job at a fraction of the cost. I'm not sure I see the logic.
The fact is that Stobart and any other privately owned business are entitled to cut or add to their workforce as they see fit (within legal boundaries of course). Strobart's do not have an obligation to provide employment to anyone if it doesn't fit with their business objectives.
I know a bloke who was a supervisor at donny.They worked for tesco,and tesco have decided to to stop using their own haulage and sub it out to stobart.The men were handed their notice from tesco and then re-employed by stobart,on different terms,ie,less money...thats it in a nutshell as far as i understand. its probably a good bit of pr work for teso in that stobart are carrying the flack and not them.tesco dont want to be seen making men redundant on the back of the profits they make.
Not all of it they havent, some of their transport was done by their own drivers in Tesco trucks. Its been nailed on that Stobart were going to make these drivers redundant since they too over, seeing as they employed a load of Polish and Lithuanian drivers just before they took over the contract!!
Not true. Stobarts hired temporary agency to cover for the strike that has been threatened for weeks. But agency cover is normal, it is relied upon during busy times.
The hope was that Stobarts resources would be stretched and they woudn't be able to cope with keeping Doncaster and its other sites running. Unfortunately, Stobarts have been down the same road several times and have been more than capable of dealing with it.
