Bye.bye, Red Ensign on the Queens.

[Captain Kong]

In yesterdays Mail on Sunday there was an article about the Queens being flagged out because of the UK law banning weddings on board their ships.

.Mr Peter Shanks the CEO of Cunard said there was a big demand for weddings on board by the Captain.so that is why they were flagging out. They will now charge £1500 for a wedding on board. That will really boost the revenue of Cunard.I dont think.
Mr Shanks as an after thought just happened to mention the EU directive about equal pay for EU seafarers staring in August this year. Now that really is an incentive to Flag out..............
..
.

.He added: ‘At the same time, as managing director, I have an obligation to make sure the company prospers and takes advantage of every possible opportunity. ‘When we were registered in Britain, we couldn’t carry out actual marriage ceremonies at sea.’
Some observers have questioned whether the change has been motivated solely by a desire to introduce weddings at sea.
They point out that the company will now no longer be subject to a new EU directive, which came into force in August, guaranteeing equal treatment for all EU employees on board ships.
Mr Shanks said the EU directive had been a consideration but not the primary reason for the change.

.
See this.........
Read more: Cunard liner bosses ditching 100 years of Royal tradition to cash in on weddings | Mail Online

I dont know how many Passengers he thinks are going to get married on his ships, the average age of a Cunard passenger is around 60 years.

Who does he think he is kidding, Mr Shanks is not as inteligent as he thinks he is.
Cheers
Brian.

[Chris Allman]

#9 by me :- Whatever the reason it will be connected with saving money by the shipowners. Nationalism holds no sway anymore, money and profits rule, the bosses must get their pay rises and the poor servants must touch their forelock and carry on with wage reductions and redundancy. After all, isn't that the name of the game these days.

I knew it all along, wasn't a certain ceramic flushing thing made by ' Shanks '

Chris

[Ivan Cloherty]

In yesterdays Mail on SundayCheers
Brian.

Hi Brian, also read this article, you can fool some of the people some of the time, you can fool some people all of the time but he cannot fool all the people all of the time.

Regret to say that Prince Charles failed to respond to my letter on this subject and also failed to respond to a polite reminder. Seems it doesn't bother them as much as it bothers us. John Prescott's response was neither use nor ornament.

Doubt many British cruisers would boycott the Line, as most of them wouldn't have a clue what a Red Ensign was, or where Hamilton is.

[happy daze john in oz]

With the world economy in the state it is, particularly Europe, there will be many a shipping company that will take advantage of this. Wages will be kept asd low as possible, flags of convinience will be the only ones flown. The shipping companies will tell the crew, 'you ae so lucky to have a job'. Sad thing is though that for many of the crew this will be a true statement.

[Ivan Cloherty]

Further my post #103 I finally received today a reply for a letter I sent to HRH Prince Charles on 1st November 2011

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~#
Clarence House
London SW1A 1BA

31st March 2012

Dear Mr Cloherty

Thank you for your letter of 1st November; I sincerely apologise for the delay in replying.

Your concerns were understood about the flags under which the Merchant Navy vessels the "Queen Elizabeth", "Queen Mary II" and "Queen VIctoria" will sail.

However I am sorry to send a disappointing reply, but I am afraid The Prince of Wales has no executive powers about this issue which might assist you. I have therefore taken the liberty of forwarding your letter to the Defence Services Secretary at the Ministry of Defence, both so that they are aware of your approach to His Royal Highness and in hope that they are able to advise you.

This letter comes with The Prince of Wales' good wishes

Yours Sincerely


Major Pete Flynn PARA

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


Just to keep you updated

[Keith at Tregenna]

Held back in hope for three years, left all in the hands of officials RE: an MN postage Stamp or set of, furthered all recently with 2013 and the year of the Convey, result zilch thus far.

2013 and the year of the Convey, deserves a Stamp of Approval?

Will pass on all replies that I receive as I follow up.

K.

[Captain Gordon Whittaker]

The flag change is due to the Bermudan registry allowing marriage at sea by the Master, which is not allowed on British registry. This is considered to be a big promotional move to attract wedding parties

[Captain Kong]

Hi Gordon I wrote to Cunard asking for reason for Flagging out. this is a copy of his responce,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Eric.Flounders@cunard.co.uk
To: captainkong@msn.com
Subject: Re: Flagging out of the Queens.
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 09:57:10 +0000


Dear Captain Aspinall

Thank you for your email about Cunard vessel registry. I am sorry for my delay in replying but I have been away on holiday and only returned to the office this morning.

Yes, you are correct that the registry is to be changed from the UK to Bermuda. However, since Bermuda is a UK overseas territory with The Queen as Head of State, the ships will continue to fly the Red Ensign.

Before I go into the reasons for the change I do think it needs to be put into some sort of context. Cunard has owned over 200 ships, and of those only 9 were ever registered in Southampton (including the current 3). Our ffirst Southampton registry was in 1969, some 130 years after the company was founded. On the wider point of UK registry generally, Cunard has actually registered ships overseas for many years. When I joined the company we had a fleet of nine vessels - eight of which were registered in either Norway or The Bahamas.

The reason for the change is that the company wishes to conduct weddings on board in response to a consistent demand. This is a growing and lucrative business which at present is denied to Cunard as the law of England and Wales, to which we are currently subject, requires in the Marriages Act that approved places for marriages must be publicly accessible. Clearly a ship at sea is not.

We are changing registry reluctantly, but in these difficult economic times it would not be sensible for Cunard to miss out on a lucrative area of business - or at least, not if we want Cunard to prosper.

I hope this goes some way to explaining our posiition

Yours sincerely

Eric Flounders


Flagging out of the Queens.

brian aspinall.
.................................................. .................................................. ..........
.
.
I have just done a cruise on Queen Elizabeth from San Francisco, 25 days, to Sydney.
I asked a Very Senior Officer, who I cannot name for fear of reprisals, He told me in confidence that the wedding scam was a load of nonsence, The reason for the Flag out was for the new Legislation coming out of Europe regarding Pay Scales for all employees within Europe to be standardised also Safety laws.
By flagging out to Bermuda they take the ships out of the laws of Europe..also it is a great way of saving TAX.
I then went and asked the Purser, `How many weddings have you had so far, ` , `None `he replied, `How many weddings have you got on order?` None `He replied.
If weddings were such a great source of Business, what is the cost of a Wedding on board compared with shoreside and how many weddings do you have to conduct to make it all worth while.
The average age of a Cunard Cruiser is well over 50+, mostly Retirees. Not a lot of Wedding business there, It is the Fun boats of Carnival that would possibly attract the weddings.
So all in all it is simply a Tax Dodge, and a way of keeping crew wages down.
I asked my Cabin Steward how it would affect them, He told me that on his next Contract his wage would be Cut,

On my table there was a Vicar from the South of England and he said, It would still not be a Legal wedding in England because the Bans would not have been read and the part of the Service where the congregation are asked, `Is there anyone who knows of any lawful reason why this couple cannot marry then..............`
would not be able to be asked. So even tho` they are married on board, in British Law they are still not legally married. The words of a Vicar.
Cheers
Brian.

[Capt Bill Davies]

There have been many threads on the perception of our beloved ‘Red Ensign’ and the demise of the British Merchant Marine. This morning, I got to thinking of the many Japanese owned vessels I was in the late 70s and 80s when many owners decided that they could not operate there ships under the National flag and decided to go FOC. NYK et al were still running their ships like British Liner companies. Doctors, 4 mates etc., it was impossible.
During this time I had the pleasure of sailing with some of the finest, natural seamen in my career that accepted their fate a little too easily. The Masters, Mates and Engineers were well provided for and in the main did exactly as I did and went FOC themselves, albeit for national owners. The Japanese National flag is still alive and well although I suspect heavily subsidised. The main difference is that unlike our own flag they have not turned it into a FOC.

Bill

[huwships]

Only just seen this. As already noted, there is a reason to register in Bermuda apart from Tax (and they will have to pay something to the Bermuda Government, just not as much as they would here) and it's this: Bermuda has a Maritime Marriage Act that empowers the Masters of some Bermuda-Registered ships to validly marry (heterosexual) couples; it's an extra selling point for Cunard/Carnival.

With all due respect to the vicar who is quoted in Captain Kong's post, he's wrong about the validity of the marriage not being recognised in the UK. What determines the validity of a marriage in English (and Scots and Northern Irish) law is the law of where the marriage took place, not the law of England and Wales (nor Scotland nor Northern Ireland). I am a Barrister practising in England and Wales (since 1982) and was a lawyer in the Bermuda Attorney-General's chambers from 2007 to 2010.

Huw