Jump to content

What are we chasing legally?


Recommended Posts

The clubs statement the other day raised some questions for me.

If as reported Ashley eventually splashed the cash, what is DC after from a legal point of view. 

Is it tapping up a manager, because that never results in too much substantial.

Is it the fact no compensation was given, is so great crack on. 

My fear is that DC being the stubborn guy he is, is just not accepting the Bruce resignation. The problem here is if this is the case, then we can’t appoint a new manager, because that would be a sign of acceptance. 

Don't rule this out we are SWFC. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My understanding was that all aspects were not agreed and finalised, i.e the assistants compo. Theres probably more to it but nothing that would stop us appointing someone.

Edited by Morepork
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Pale Rider said:

The clubs statement the other day raised some questions for me.

If as reported Ashley eventually splashed the cash, what is DC after from a legal point of view. 

Is it tapping up a manager, because that never results in too much substantial.

Is it the fact no compensation was given, is so great crack on. 

My fear is that DC being the stubborn guy he is, is just not accepting the Bruce resignation. The problem here is if this is the case, then we can’t appoint a new manager, because that would be a sign of acceptance. 

Don't rule this out we are SWFC. 

 

 Bruce resigned. 

 

We’re allowed to appoint a new manager.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Hougoumont said:

It's all a bit academic now...since he became manager of Newcastle Isn't it?

 

Not really. Bruce and his appendages had contracts with us. They broke them. We are entitled to compensation.

 

There is nothing academic about a couple of million quid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From reading different things over the last few days. It sounds like Ashley sent compo (not sure how much figures vary from 1m to 2m and all the way up to 4m) and said that's your lot. Bruce has then resigned and taken his mates with him. 

 

The questions in my mind are

 

Dioes the money Ashley sent meet any release clauses in contracts? If not then DC has a right to follow this up.

 

Does it cover all staff who have gone? There seems to be consensus that the money only covers Bruce therefore again DC is in the right. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Stainless said:

From reading different things over the last few days. It sounds like Ashley sent compo (not sure how much figures vary from 1m to 2m and all the way up to 4m) and said that's your lot. Bruce has then resigned and taken his mates with him. 

 

The questions in my mind are

 

Dioes the money Ashley sent meet any release clauses in contracts? If not then DC has a right to follow this up.

 

Does it cover all staff who have gone? There seems to be consensus that the money only covers Bruce therefore again DC is in the right. 

 

 

It’s not as black and white( pardon the pun) as most people on here seem to think it is. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Pale Rider said:

Yes but did we accept the resignation?

 

An employer cannot refuse an employee's resignation, employment law is clear about that. I know no one knows the exact truth but it seems that it's all about compensation for the 2 assistants......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Windygrowler said:

 

An employer cannot refuse an employee's resignation, employment law is clear about that. I know no one knows the exact truth but it seems that it's all about compensation for the 2 assistants......

You probably know more about it than me but, if that’s the case, what’s the point of anyone having a contract ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Pale Rider said:

It’s not as black and white( pardon the pun) as most people on here seem to think it is. 

Agreed not black and white. I think the problem is there are that many stories it's which one do you believe.

 

I read in one article that Ashley had paid upfront. That concerns me as how much did he know to pay without an agreement in place. Unless there is a release clause but again who's contract is that in. Was it a buy out for Bruce if he quit to go to another job? Was it a buy out to quit under other circumstances.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, doubleo said:

You probably know more about it than me but, if that’s the case, what’s the point of anyone having a contract ?

Bit deep mate! Employment law is more designed to protect the employee rather than the employer. Regardless of whatever notice period was in Bruce's contract, his resignation cannot be refused. You can resign and not work your notice period and all the employer can do is refuse to pay you for that period. Obviously since he left to go to another club there is a compensation clause in the contract.....

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...