Still can't see what the fuss is about. Happens at loads of clubs, we're not unique in that aspect. Hopefully, SISU will just give him his money and we can concentrate on Mowbray and on the pitch positivity.
@ fernandopartridge.....Verses 7, 8. - But when they continued asking him; he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin, let him first cast a stone at her................If you want to nit pick, make sure you're right. Btw, does it matter where the hearing is, he's owed the contracted money and should be paid, end of.
It'll be an employment tribunal won't it?
Blessed are the Cheesemakers
It is possible that the club have to pay up to 18 months of his contract or until he finds new employment? In which case they'd just leave him on the wage bill instead of paying a lump sum. They might try to agree a reduced lump sum to cut the overall cost of the settlement. I Don't think for one minute that they won't pay him what's been or is agreed.
Depends on the wording of the contract, i would assume it would be 18 months on termination of employment then yes thats his notice/settlement. You can bet your ass the wording is so open to interpretation that SISU are trying to wriggle out of this.
Chances are like the last court case(s), they are banged to rights and need to agree a number and move on.
Depends on the wording of the contract, i would assume it would be 18 months on termination of employment then yes thats his notice/settlement. You can bet your ass the wording is so open to interpretation that SISU are trying to wriggle out of this.
Chances are like the last court case(s), they are banged to rights and need to agree a number and move on.
Didn't someone say that SP was offered another role? If that's was true could they argue his refusal of that position impacts on his rights to a termination payment?
Anyway think this is being blown out of proportion. Imagine it will get sorted without the club being wound up!
I think it was also broken to suit the football club and to stay in this division.If he was offered another role the money must be there to pay him,,, so if that's the case pay the man his money and move on.. I would assume they got rid thinking a deal could be reached , signed TM and all will blow over with a deal in place for SP... SP is an angry man with a contract that has been broken to suit the owners,, not smart and not for the first time this has happened. Sisu have to pay up or get very close to matching what is due,, make no mistake about this,, SP was working under tough conditions and played Sisu's tune for a long time,, pay back is round the corner.....
I think it was also broken to suit the football club and to stay in this division.
It is amazing how Pressley was a hero and needed a longer contract, then he was a baddy, now he is a goody again? He was absolutely shocking, it was pointed out at the time he got his new contract too.
What's so special about the cheesemakers?
It all comes down to the finite terms in his contract. many football clubs never pay up a full contract and I bet there will be no difference with Gus Poyet either. It may well be that his contract is payable on minimum results and if anything less it affects his pay structure, who knows? I suspect a deal somewhere in the middle will be amicably arranged and paid. What's despicable is sacking him and not sitting down and sorting out an agreed level of pay and compensation to leave beforehand. But that's the nature of SISU I guess.
TM is a far different prospect I suspect and if there is a contract negotiation at the end of the season then SISU had better be sure to stick with it or he will be gone...
I think it was also broken to suit the football club and to stay in this division.
It is amazing how Pressley was a hero and needed a longer contract, then he was a baddy, now he is a goody again? He was absolutely shocking, it was pointed out at the time he got his new contract too.
It's got nothing to do with being a "Goody" again. The simple fact is he is owed money, couldn't give a fat one that it's SISU, it's their fault for giving him a 4 years contract. S**t owners, and S**t bosses, deserve all that's coming to them.I think it was also broken to suit the football club and to stay in this division. It is amazing how Pressley was a hero and needed a longer contract, then he was a baddy, now he is a goody again? He was absolutely shocking, it was pointed out at the time he got his new contract too.
I am going with a wild shot here, but what if there was a release clause in his contract that could be triggered if we entered the relegation zone?
Then even if he was fired at a time we were out of the zone (though only on goal difference) ... there could be cases for both sides to argue.
The club could say the clause was triggered by entering the relegation zone.
SP could say we were not actually in the relegation zone when he was fired and thus the clause was void.
The club could say we were technically in the relegation zone as we had the same points tally as 21st placed (Crawley I believe).
Maybe there is a reason for the sides to have a different stand point?
Agree with SBK, nothing to do with 'goody' or 'baddy'. Sometimes I side with Pressley, sometimes I don't. It's totally dependent on the situation. He's owed money. Pay the fucker.
It's always IF he's owed money. The assumption is that he is but it isn't definite. It should be paid if he is.
It's always IF he's owed money. The assumption is that he is but it isn't definite. It should be paid if he is.
It took several months for Man Utd to pay Moyes after a protracted argument in which the managers association were very critical of the club.
I don't think he'll show up there!!
I guess no manager ever wants to work there again.
I'd be surprised if this wasn't pretty clear-cut. It's hard to imagine an employment contract that doesn't cover notice periods and suchlike - I'm presuming SISU are just trying to drag it out in the hope that he might settle for less.
Unless the club really are completely broke, which I doubt given they're obviously paying all of the other staff etc., then I would imagine this will be settled out of court before the hearing. As torchy has said it does happen at other clubs too, but it feels like our owners seem to participate in this sort of brinkmanship more than most. It's not exactly served us well so far, this approach...
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?