Why No Player Sackings?

[judas]

I can see that various players have not had contract renewals and that's great. 14 sets of wages should start a good float.

But I am assuming the sackings are coming tomorrow right?!?

Tell me there will be sackings - and lots of them. I need sackings.

[h185forever]

...rod won't pay the termination clauses.......

[HoboHarry]

I can see that various players have not had contract renewals and that's great. 14 sets of wages should start a good float.

But I am assuming the sackings are coming tomorrow right?!?

Tell me there will be sackings - and lots of them. I need sackings.
Is this a serious question? Unless there was a clause in their contract specific to relegation how can a player be sacked if he is under contract? They might come to an agreement and pay up the contract but that is as close to a sacking as you will get.

[SeanWilson]

Is this a serious question? Unless there was a clause in their contract specific to relegation how can a player be sacked if he is under contract? They might come to an agreement and pay up the contract but that is as close to a sacking as you will get.

Gross misconduct is a sacking offence in employment law.... who would you suggest did not commit gross misconduct last season??

[erskine-hibby]

They have said to a few players that of they can find a new club they are free to go. They will not sack players, would cost too much.

[Beefster]

Gross misconduct is a sacking offence in employment law.... who would you suggest did not commit gross misconduct last season??

Who committed gross misconduct and in what way? It needs to take into account employment law so no "Aye but Collins was pish".

[Sir David Gray]

I can see that various players have not had contract renewals and that's great. 14 sets of wages should start a good float.

But I am assuming the sackings are coming tomorrow right?!?

Tell me there will be sackings - and lots of them. I need sackings.

I'm sure a few of the players who are still under contract will come to some sort of agreement to terminate the remainder of their contract but surely you must accept that it's a lot easier to get rid of a player who is out of contract in a couple of weeks than it is to terminate the contract of someone who has a year or two left.

I'm sure we would love to tell all but three or four of our players to get as far away from Easter Road as possible but unfortunately it's not quite as simple as that.

[RedHibby]

It's one of the only jobs that I know of that gross misconduct is not a sackable offence.

[Hibercelona]

Who committed gross misconduct and in what way? It needs to take into account employment law so no "Aye but Collins was pish".

"Failure to play football".

Surely thats a breach of their contracts?

[Beefster]

"Failure to play football".

Surely thats a breach of their contracts?

Aye, watertight.

[SeanWilson]

Who committed gross misconduct and in what way? It needs to take into account employment law so no "Aye but Collins was pish".

Wow, you need an answer??

My point is of course hyppthetical. When I hire someone to work for me, they sign a contract to do a job. If said employee then royally f's this up by whatever means, or continues to do something, which is not beneficial to my business repeatedly, I am then well within my rights to sack them... following the correct procedures.

in my opinion, the majority of that team did not perform to the requests of what I would have had in an employment contract, repeatedly, over and over, every week. Therefore, in my opinion committing gross misconduct and hibs should be well within rights to have them shown the door.

[Beefster]

Wow, you need an answer??

My point is of course hyppthetical. When I hire someone to work for me, they sign a contract to do a job. If said employee then royally f's this up by whatever means, or continues to do something, which is not beneficial to my business repeatedly, I am then well within my rights to sack them... following the correct procedures.

in my opinion, the majority of that team did not perform to the requests of what I would have had in an employment contract, repeatedly, over and over, every week. Therefore, in my opinion committing gross misconduct and hibs should be well within rights to have them shown the door.

This is all great but, to be blunt, your opinion is entirely irrelevant. I was looking for an answer that would be upheld in an employment tribunal.

The amount of amateur managers, CEOs and solicitors on here who actually know the square root of a donkey's dick is endlessly amusing.

[jdships]

I'm sure a few of the players who are still under contract will come to some sort of agreement to terminate the remainder of their contract but surely you must accept that it's a lot easier to get rid of a player who is out of contract in a couple of weeks than it is to terminate the contract of someone who has a year or two left.

I'm sure we would love to tell all but three or four of our players to get as far away from Easter Road as possible but unfortunately it's not quite as simple as that.

I understand from my lads at EM there are one ot two who do not want play in the Championship earning Championship wages and are HOPING to come to a settlement to be released or put up for transfer .

[SeanWilson]

This is all great but, to be blunt, your opinion is entirely irrelevant. I was looking for an answer that would be upheld in an employment tribunal.

The amount of amateur managers, CEOs and solicitors on here who actually know the square root of a donkey's dick is endlessly amusing.

I'll not entertain you with what I do for a living. Glad to have provided you a jovial experience in these dark days.

[Jonnyboy]

I'll not entertain you with what I do for a living. Glad to have provided you a jovial experience in these dark days.

Mate, these guys were hired to do a job. They did that job, albeit very poorly but they did that job nonetheless.

[HoboHarry]

Wow, you need an answer??

My point is of course hyppthetical. When I hire someone to work for me, they sign a contract to do a job. If said employee then royally f's this up by whatever means, or continues to do something, which is not beneficial to my business repeatedly, I am then well within my rights to sack them... following the correct procedures.

in my opinion, the majority of that team did not perform to the requests of what I would have had in an employment contract, repeatedly, over and over, every week. Therefore, in my opinion committing gross misconduct and hibs should be well within rights to have them shown the door.
The bit in bold is where you would fall flat on your face in court. Your opinion counts for squat, it's the law that counts. I am struggling to believe that you hire anyone if you believe that any Hibs player could be sacked for gross misconduct....

[greenlex]

I understand from my lads at EM there are one ot two who do not want play in the Championship earning Championship wages and are HOPING to come to a settlement to be released or put up for transfer .Well I hope they are told to bolt They are the main reason we are there. Cheeky *******s.

[SeanWilson]

The bit in bold is where you would fall flat on your face in court. Your opinion counts for squat, it's the law that counts. I am struggling to believe that you hire anyone if you believe that any Hibs player could be sacked for gross misconduct....

Jeez the f o. Can't believe I am defending a hypothetical point made in jest.

some of you lot need to get over yourselves.

[Phil D. Rolls]

Wow, you need an answer??

My point is of course hyppthetical. When I hire someone to work for me, they sign a contract to do a job. If said employee then royally f's this up by whatever means, or continues to do something, which is not beneficial to my business repeatedly, I am then well within my rights to sack them... following the correct procedures.

in my opinion, the majority of that team did not perform to the requests of what I would have had in an employment contract, repeatedly, over and over, every week. Therefore, in my opinion committing gross misconduct and hibs should be well within rights to have them shown the door.

A hypothetical employment lawyer writes....

Yes, but if every time they make a mess, you say "see you next week then", you are implicitly saying that their work is of an acceptable standard.

In Hibs case the employees have the defence that management was inconsistent, and did not provide adequate training.

They will also point out that a bonus is paid for wins, so winning is seen as over and above the normal expectations of their job. Finally, they can also point to accepted practice in the industry, and cite the fact that many players have a relegation clause in their contract - the absence of which suggests that relegation is not something the club would consider damaging to the business.

The manager, however, well I mean, surely a Hibs manager has a clause in their contract that says getting relegated is a sacking offence?

ps I realise you were only making a joke, but it got me thinking, I know little about employment law. Personally, I think the whole bally lot of them should be thrashed to within an inch of their lives. :)

[Gus Fring]

The League requires at least one team be relegated and allows for 2. We were one of them.

Sport typically has a winner and a loser as well. You can't make it a contractual obligation that you don't get beat.

If we were to sack players we would be legally obligated to pay them their minimum contract earnings unless they 'mutually agree' to take less. Alternatively a player can be sold to another club if the club feels they have been compensated enough.

Therefore what the club has done is say "Ok well find another club and we'll let you go there instead" and they'll likely do it for free. If the players don't go anywhere else it's easier for the club to pay them over 12 months than it is to pay them all in one lump sum.

Just because they are still under contract doesn't mean they have to play. Rowan Vine didn't kick a ball under Butcher.

[yekimevol]

If butcher is still in charge then they will look to offload them to another team for free before sacking them and giving the severance. If butchers not in charge (PLEASE LET THIS BE THE CASE) then they will be holding onto these players and giving the new gaffer a chance to look at them.

[snooky]

The League requires at least one team be relegated and allows for 2. We were one of them.

Sport typically has a winner and a loser as well. You can't make it a contractual obligation that you don't get beat.

If we were to sack players we would be legally obligated to pay them their minimum contract earnings unless they 'mutually agree' to take less. Alternatively a player can be sold to another club if the club feels they have been compensated enough.

Therefore what the club has done is say "Ok well find another club and we'll let you go there instead" and they'll likely do it for free. If the players don't go anywhere else it's easier for the club to pay them over 12 months than it is to pay them all in one lump sum.

Just because they are still under contract doesn't mean they have to play. Rowan Vine didn't kick a ball under Butcher.

.... or Fenlon for that matter. :wink: