You'd have thought someone by now would have challenged it on the basis it's a restriction of trade.Usually under employment law if you terminate someone and then pay them compensation, they can still move on to another employer, and the employee doesn’t have to pay back any of the compensation.
There not really the same role in modern football.Head coach and manager are just job titles. They mean the same thing in effect.
If what King said is true about the relationship with AV and the coaching structure… Robins will probably look back and identify that was his undoing. The inexperienced/under qualified staff seemed to be the main issue that brought about his downfall.
In his next job, he’ll probably look for some top level coaches to work with him as he did with AV.
Depends on it tho doesn’t it. If he’s on gardening leave wouldn’t he be breaking the contract to leave?You'd have thought someone by now would have challenged it on the basis it's a restriction of trade.
If you employ someone on a fixed agreement and then you decide to end that agreement early, you should have to pay whatever the remainder of that agreement is (or whatever severance is in that agreement) and the person should be able to look for new work immediately.
There is no contractual agreement between any other club so they'd not be obliged to pay anything. I doubt you could genuinely enforce any repayment of it.I guess we've paid off his contract as a "loss of earnings" and if he gets a new job straight away, it's no longer loss of earnings.
Well it would, if the statement released by the club didn't start with this.Depends on it tho doesn’t it. If he’s on gardening leave wouldn’t he be breaking the contract to leave?
It depends what was in the agreement I guess but I'm sure it's not happening anyway.There is no contractual agreement between any other club so they'd not be obliged to pay anything. I doubt you could genuinely enforce any repayment of it.
You can't through your own free will sack somebody and then try to say that the severance isn't any longer valid because they've got another job.
You'd have thought someone by now would have challenged it on the basis it's a restriction of trade.
If you employ someone on a fixed agreement and then you decide to end that agreement early, you should have to pay whatever the remainder of that agreement is (or whatever severance is in that agreement) and the person should be able to look for new work immediately.
Which I grant you is a big point but if I’m not wrong we hadn’t actually reached settlement with Mark at this point. So who knows what was agreed.Well it would, if the statement released by the club didn't start with this.
Coventry City Football Club has made the difficult decision to terminate the contract of Mark Robins as manager with immediate effect.
Is his stock high though?It’s probably bollocks.
But, if true, I can see why a manager in MR’s position would consider it. His stock is high at the moment and it’s a decent proposition (unhinged owners aside, albeit nothing new for MR). If he were to take 18-24 months out there’s a fair chance he’s looking at going back in at league 1/2 level.
Could be or there is a clause in his settlement agreement that states if he is in work within a few months that he would repay some of his payoff or even that the hiring company would?I’m guessing we’ve put him on gardening leave rather than sacked him.
This place when Hull go above us and we plunge into the relegation zone:We play them in three weeks
It would be the last thing in the world Lampard needs a game against MR when he is already going to be working to gain the trust of a lot of the fanbase
Didn’t King or someone else say they hadn’t finalised the severance? In that case he’s still under contract.
Interesting how we would be eligible for compensation? If he got sacked then he’s not in contract.
King did. That was weeks ago. You'd imagine that would be a simpler negotiation than a new manager but...Didn’t King or someone else say they hadn’t finalised the severance? In that case he’s still under contract.
Chelsea were still paying Graham Potter until October. Unless there are favourable clauses in contracts there's no reason really for a manager to take less than they're owed.King did. That was weeks ago. You'd imagine that would be a simpler negotiation than a new manager but....
Maybe not as pressing.
Is his stock high though?
in which case the statement is factually incorrect.Which I grant you is a big point but if I’m not wrong we hadn’t actually reached settlement with Mark at this point. So who knows what was agreed.
Also as a question did Chelsea use similar language with Graham who was still being paid off
It was incorrect because King later said they were still working it out. And the club can't just unilaterally "terminate" contracts anyway, unless there are specific clauses allowing for that.in which case the statement is factually incorrect.
It should say "will terminate the contract of Mark Robins upon agreement of a severance package"
And given the short shelf life of managers you'd have thought details like that would be in the contract from the start.
I know it happens.Graham Potter is still out of work!
As others have said he's still being paid by Chelsea, there's not many clubs that will pay the same wages as Chelsea, so he sits tight until Chelsea stop paying him and then looks for another job.
So we can't trust Doug King's word thenIt was incorrect because King later said they were still working it out. And the club can't just unilaterally "terminate" contracts anyway, unless there are specific clauses allowing for that.
I know it happens.
I'm saying it shouldn't be allowed. If you decide to end someone's contract early you shouldn't be allowed to them restrict them gaining new employment just because you've got to pay them off.
If you've decided to get rid then you should be forced to pay the severance/remainder of the contract and suck it up if they get employed elsewhere.
Be like you dumping a girlfriend, getting a new one but saying your old girlfriend can't get a new boyfriend yet because you're still paying the joint National Trust subscription for another 6 months.
Robins hasn't been much of a roaring success at any other clubs has he besides CCFC.
Interesting how we would be eligible for compensation? If he got sacked then he’s not in contract.
Well in this case it's semantics. To the average fan the meaning is the same.So we can't trust Doug King's word then
He hasn't been at many clubs recently because he was a roaring success here?Robins hasn't been much of a roaring success at any other clubs has he besides CCFC.
Deserves a long holiday (on Doug). 6 months away from it all will do him no harm at all.He's working with enough difficult owner in sisu and deadly Doug.
He deserves better than the psycho at Hull
To be honest that’s where he thrivesHe's working with enough difficult owner in sisu and deadly Doug.
He deserves better than the psycho at Hull
Interesting how we would be eligible for compensation? If he got sacked then he’s not in contract.
Frequently when a manager is sacked without notice there is no immediate agreement on the termsLike in any employment there will be a period of time where he can’t join a competitor given what he will be getting as a pay out.
A direct competitor in this instance will likely be defined as another championship club, would imagine Hull would have to foot his compensation bill.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
We're still paying Terry Butcher.He is probably still getting paid by the club as happened with Coleman
But none of those clubs need a manager (Yet).I want Robins to go to a proper fucking decent club, he deserves it.
A Sunderland, Burnley, Leeds United or a Middlesbrough is Robins level. He is far too good to be fucking wasted at Hull City.
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?