Jump to content

Thank you Mr chansiri


Recommended Posts

52 minutes ago, LondonOwl313 said:

I’d be surprised if he can furlough and then pay an extra 20% on top. Surely the government will say you can afford 40% of the wages so we’ll top it up. Otherwise what’s to stop people abusing it and claiming the max amount while the firms pay wages in full

 

Think you've misread it. Furloughing pays up to 80% of the wages through the Government JRS or £2,500 per month, whichever is the lower amount. Chansiri will be paying the remaining 20% so they get 100% of their wages.

  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, 0114 said:

Your right about those sort of companies. But that’s in a perfect world.

 

But specifically football related, I just don’t feel it’s right when in 2 months time these teams will be wanting to bid millions for players yet can’t afford to cover the cost of their non playing staff, when in reality the wage budget of non-playing staff will be minuscule in comparison to the players.
 

This is more than Sheffield Wednesday of course. I’ve seen many people such as Gary Neville and Preston manager Alex Neil calling for a transfer ban imposed on teams who furlough the non playing staff. 

 

In an ideal world of course you are right. It doesn't seem right to anyone that non-playing staff have to be furloughed while players continue to receive their comparatively huge salaries.

 

As a UK business we are entitled to make use of this government initiative and as we are a loss-making organisation with much of our revenue stream currently unavailable, the reality is that without this, many of these staff may well have been made redundant. It is good to know that the owner is funding the remaining 20%, which is he under no obligation to do.

 

The reason we are loss-making is largely down to player wages. Steps have been taken to address this and our wage bill has probably been reduced, certainly from last summer and was likely to be reduced further this summer. 

 

It won't sit right with most people that players are still getting paid in full but unfortunately they have the power in modern football and their contracts will dictate that no action can be taken until an agreement is reached and the PFA are heavily involved in this.

 

As has been said, they can't be furloughed without agreement and if a club tries to enforce a continued deferral or deduction without agreement then the players could be in a position to walk away for nothing due to a club breach of contract and sign for another club. I don't see how the clubs can be criticised at this stage for the current position regarding players payments.  

 

You would hope that this would cause some serious reflection and consideration of wages in the game, especially at our level where most clubs are paying players more than they can afford. Judging by the reports of transfer talks at some clubs it doesn't seem to be reigning anything in at the top of the game. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, matthefish2002 said:

I am not saying this is a bad thing from the club as they didnt have to do it but we are still taking tax payers money at a time if national crisis when first team players getting full whack of an average of £1m per year.

Would have much more praise if players had pay cut (after tax) so didnt have to furlough staff on tax payers expense.

I think there are 2 very different issues here. The first should be well done to the Chairman. It is business sense to furlough these people as sad as that may be, but he has done more than many clubs in guaranteeing they will not be out of pocket by making up the lost 20%.

The second issue is that if the players many of whom earn more in a week than the furloughed staff earn in a year. While I am sure many will have made personal contributions to one or other of the many NHS charities a visible gesture would have made a big difference with staff and supporters. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, poite said:

What a hero. I'll be starting my own 'clap for Chansiri' at 8pm every Wednesday evening if any one fancies joining me?

 

 

Why do you feel the need to mock this? 

An employee of the club simply makes a post praising the approach of his employer, what is your issue with it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, hirstyboywonder said:

 

In an ideal world of course you are right. It doesn't seem right to anyone that non-playing staff have to be furloughed while players continue to receive their comparatively huge salaries.

 

As a UK business we are entitled to make use of this government initiative and as we are a loss-making organisation with much of our revenue stream currently unavailable, the reality is that without this, many of these staff may well have been made redundant. It is good to know that the owner is funding the remaining 20%, which is he under no obligation to do.

 

The reason we are loss-making is largely down to player wages. Steps have been taken to address this and our wage bill has probably been reduced, certainly from last summer and was likely to be reduced further this summer. 

 

It won't sit right with most people that players are still getting paid in full but unfortunately they have the power in modern football and their contracts will dictate that no action can be taken until an agreement is reached and the PFA are heavily involved in this.

 

As has been said, they can't be furloughed without agreement and if a club tries to enforce a continued deferral or deduction without agreement then the players could be in a position to walk away for nothing due to a club breach of contract and sign for another club. I don't see how the clubs can be criticised at this stage for the current position regarding players payments.  

 

You would hope that this would cause some serious reflection and consideration of wages in the game, especially at our level where most clubs are paying players more than they can afford. Judging by the reports of transfer talks at some clubs it doesn't seem to be reigning anything in at the top of the game. 

I get what your saying. The irony of all this is probably every player who signs a contract from now will probably have it in their deal that have to reduce there wages if such a situation arises again. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, @owlstalk said:



The answer to anything relating to what the public has to pay for is simply to get Amazon, Facebook etc all to just pay their taxes.

If the huge businesses out there paid their taxes in this country we wouldn't even have to worry about stuff like this cos the country would be minted.

Not as easy as that Neil my old mucker as you well know :bullen:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, 0114 said:

I get what your saying. The irony of all this is probably every player who signs a contract from now will probably have it in their deal that have to reduce there wages if such a situation arises again. 

There will be a Force Majeure clause in but invoking this brings a whole world of pain and is always a very last resort 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, hirstyboywonder said:

 

 

Why do you feel the need to mock this? 

An employee of the club simply makes a post praising the approach of his employer, what is your issue with it?

 

Why do you feel the need to assume I'm mocking? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, poite said:

 

Why do you feel the need to assume I'm mocking? 

 

Just a hunch, seems a bit over the top.

 

Your reputation precedes you, unless of course you are full of praise, in which case fair play! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm with the people that have an issue with this.

 

So let's say the government weren't offering the furlough deal, would he have made all non-playing staff redundant?

 

Wouldn't there be uproar given his net worth and the obscene wages he pays to the players?

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, ruusowl said:

I'm with the people that have an issue with this.

 

So let's say the government weren't offering the furlough deal, would he have made all non-playing staff redundant?

 

Wouldn't there be uproar given his net worth and the obscene wages he pays to the players?

err we"ll never know lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest LondonOwl313
4 hours ago, hirstyboywonder said:

 

Think you've misread it. Furloughing pays up to 80% of the wages through the Government JRS or £2,500 per month, whichever is the lower amount. Chansiri will be paying the remaining 20% so they get 100% of their wages.

  

Oh right... I thought that was announced ages ago on the club website re employees furloughed on full pay so thought he meant an extra 20% on top

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, LondonOwl313 said:

Oh right... I thought that was announced ages ago on the club website re employees furloughed on full pay so thought he meant an extra 20% on top

 

It was announced a while ago but the scheme only went live for payments this week and it seems employees of the club have now received formal notification of this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 25/04/2020 at 18:42, hirstyboywonder said:

 

 

Why do you feel the need to mock this? 

An employee of the club simply makes a post praising the approach of his employer, what is your issue with it?

Because even in times such as these some people just can't stop themselves being bitter two hats. Jealousy usually or insecurity.

  • Haha 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...