Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Ownership clarify discretionary staff bonus situation
Comments
-
Its a shame they're trying to find out who released the news from the club
Unless that person signed an NDA surely there is nothing in their Contract which says they cant discuss work matters outside of working hours0 -
What an incredibly peevish and ill-advised statement to put on the website. It can only conceivably have been penned by one man.
The timing - some five weeks after the story broke - is very curious, although the forthcoming EFL meeting may possibly have been factor in trying to put some sort of 'rebuttal' on the record (however shabby). The content is totally illogical and, as others have said, it's hard to know where to start. More fundamentally, it is tactically inept on the part of Duchatelet to show us vinegar pissers just how much his cage has been rattled.
Whenever he opens his mouth, I find it a source of considerable encouragement.9 -
Roland Doshitalot2
-
cracks me up how they mention CARD, they are shit scared of CARD, the same fans who offered help and feedback and where ignored.16
-
I always assumed the bonuses were discretionary, otherwise they would have been contractual! Otherwise, the club would have had little defence regarding non-payment. The timing of this is bizarre.2
-
Regarding the water thing, was the CARD water drunk or thrown away by management?
I do think the water thing was the wrong thing to pick on. Breakfasts was more important IMO as it was clear the players could get tap water.1 -
"In the meantime the club investigated how this issue became national news in the UK and beyond, a significant blow to the reputation of the club and owner and to the ability of the owner to sell the club".
But weren't we told both before this issue arose and since then that the club have agreed a price with buyers? Yeh, right.4 -
There used to be a saying in business "look after your customers, look after your staff and the bottom line will look after itself" - RD seems to work on the basis of piss all over your customers, piss all over your staff and then seem surprised about the result. Whoever takes over Charlton will have to spend good money putting this right - and if they are any good they will take it out of the purchase price.9
-
At this point it’s unclear to me whether this was discretionary or not. On the original thread it was described as being promised based on meeting certain targets.
Where I work there are three clearly defined targets - personal, divisional & company. So it’s quite possible to meet all your objectives and not get a bonus based on the other two not meeting theirs.
But if the company part wasn’t spelt out and their was an official offer, you can’t just spring it at the end. Unless, of course, you want disgruntled employees and bad press.1 -
I can see this (hopefully) getting absolutely slaughtered in the press, particularly once CARD come up with a coherent response.
Whoever wrote that crap is clearly mad and has probably stirred up a hornets nest.7 - Sponsored links:
-
It was the 'Ownership'......Addickted2TheReds said:
Yet the statement doesn't have a name attributed to it...paulie8290 said:As others have said 3 or 4 times it mentions and unsigned letter, they are obviously trying to find ouy who it was from so they can sack them
1 -
I've always wanted to post this: PWR
For the love of God what the feck does this mean?
This was mainly because of the ongoing sale of the club which caused our CEO to leave resulting in delayed player sales and delay in actions being taken to make the club more cost efficient.1 -
Huh ....1
-
I suspect there are a lot of people trying to argue that discretionary bonuses have been subsequently promised and become contractual - good employers deal directly with their employees rather than with third parties on such matters.Valiantphil said:I'm no fan of the regime, but they do have a point about CARD demanding accuracy from them - but not being aware that the disputed bonus was "discretionary", and therefore not guaranteed.
On the final point about "breakfasts and water" - there is no comment from them about food, and the inference is that the players are drinking (cheaper) tap water as opposed to bottled mineral water. Is this correct ?
As for investing £2.2m per year............well,.... Gomez will have seen you all square for a few years then !0 -
The staff are adamant that they were never told the bonuses were discretionary, but regardless it is the staff who wrote the letter and spoke directly to the media. It is their view. The attempt to divert it to CARD is woeful. Do you seriously think the staff hadn't asked management why they hadn't received the money on July 31st?golfaddick said:Playing devils advocate for a minute.
If the bonuses were discretionary and not contractual as I think we were led to believe then I don't think RD had done much wrong. Yes, the club should maybe have told the staff........but if I was a member of staff at a club in such a state as this I think I would have already had a word with my line manager or whoever is in charge just to see what the position was....maybe in June or July.
But apart from that I do agree with everything else pp's have said about the statement.
I've dismantled the statement here.
30 -
The club really is run by incompetents. RD has a reputation of being a disgraceful owner. How can his reputation be further damaged. I think what is really being said is, The club is further embarrassed by its failure and the price it is worth will reduce.
As the ownership cannot recover there is no point in further delays in the sale.3 -
Meanwhile our publicity geniuses cannot get the right date for our next home game against Coventry
https://www.cafc.co.uk/news/view/5baa1f5ecc326/walsall-league-clash-postponed-and-rearranged-date-confirmed
4 -
Great article and finished with a flourishAirman Brown said:
The staff are adamant that they were never told the bonuses were discretionary, but regardless it is the staff who wrote the letter and spoke directly to the media. It is their view. The attempt to divert it to CARD is woeful. Do you seriously think the staff hadn't asked management why they hadn't received the money on July 31st?golfaddick said:Playing devils advocate for a minute.
If the bonuses were discretionary and not contractual as I think we were led to believe then I don't think RD had done much wrong. Yes, the club should maybe have told the staff........but if I was a member of staff at a club in such a state as this I think I would have already had a word with my line manager or whoever is in charge just to see what the position was....maybe in June or July.
But apart from that I do agree with everything else pp's have said about the statement.
I've dismantled the statement here.
4 -
Is he saying that had Katrien not left we would have a much weaker squad? £10m weaker!!!! I reckon you could put together a squad capable of promotion for £10m so not an insignificant figure! Thank god she left then!0
-
Is the statement that no action is being taken against the club over unpaid bonuses true or false?0
- Sponsored links:
-
I think it’s true that legal action hasn’t YET been taken. Doesn’t mean it won’t be.andynelson said:Is the statement that no action is being taken against the club over unpaid bonuses true or false?
5 -
re the timing of Roland's Latest Rant -
Probably got a lot to do with the EFL meeting, BUT according to Belgian media, he is currently attempting to recruit an additional 100 employees for his call centre in Stayen. I wonder whether the thousands of leaflets about his UK bonus scheme delivered by ROT to Sint-Truiden homes and businesses a month ago are helping or hindering his quest?
Just askin'23 -
They are unclear whether all the staff at The Valley were supportive of the open letter.... so presumably RD thinks that some of our staff were not bothered about getting their discretionary bonus paid?
It is utterly disingenuous to offer a discretionary bonus linked to performance which the staff have apparently met only to claim you are not paying those bonuses because of financial losses which have been a feature of the club for something like 8 out of the last 9 years. The chance of a profit was so remote that the staff should have been made aware that notwithstanding performance they were highly unlikely to ever get paid.
Staff morale by RD. We can’t pay much, I am surprised they have not all left0 -
“Now they have water bottles”.
Seems to suggest that they have only recently got these?0 -
Apart from anything else the paranoia infecting the communication is also about flushing out some kind of mole on the payroll.
Absolutely in keeping with the culture of the club in terms of going after reportedly staff members for imagined transgressions, monitoring forums for dissident fans, cleaning up the internet where possible, filming in the faces of protesting fans, the whole general cold war shebang.
Who then is the mole? Some might say it is Sue Parkes on the basis that is somebody you'd least suspect. Have to rule her out as not being a club employee (being a club beneficiary doesn't count). Could it be Cojones himself? Messages innocently left in dead letter boxes disguised as manky discarded cheese sandwiches?
Or could it all be the doing of this Eddie Stobart Van and Truck For Hire, operating the classic double bluff? I think you'll find there is some alignment between when Eddie parked up and when this latest farrargo emerged.2 -
Smoke and mirrors. They wouldn't even put their names to a letter, they're hardly going to take legal action.Davo55 said:
I think it’s true that legal action hasn’t YET been taken. Doesn’t mean it won’t be.andynelson said:Is the statement that no action is being taken against the club over unpaid bonuses true or false?
0 -
Wouldn’t bet on that. They can’t be sanctioned for taking legal action. You also need to bear in mind that some will have left by the time it gets that far. They can still make a claim.SurvivaloftheFittest said:
Smoke and mirrors. They wouldn't even put their names to a letter, they're hardly going to take legal action.Davo55 said:
I think it’s true that legal action hasn’t YET been taken. Doesn’t mean it won’t be.andynelson said:Is the statement that no action is being taken against the club over unpaid bonuses true or false?
The club knows who sent the letter. Any suggestion to the contrary is disingenuous.1 -
Silly thing to say.SurvivaloftheFittest said:
Smoke and mirrors. They wouldn't even put their names to a letter, they're hardly going to take legal action.Davo55 said:
I think it’s true that legal action hasn’t YET been gym taken. Doesn’t mean it won’t be.andynelson said:Is the statement that no action is being taken against the club over unpaid bonuses true or false?
The club know who they have knocked for the bonuses.3 -
If you wanted to resolve this you would just ask a solicitor to examine the evidence and report to both sides on the issue. It’s not difficult.
Instead RD is just saying, I’m not paying. If he has a robust case, let him make it, because the arguments he has made publicly so far are drivel.10 -
I'm as sceptical about that as I am this resulting in a legal dispute.Airman Brown said:
Wouldn’t bet on that. They can’t be sanctioned for taking legal action. You also need to bear in mind that some will have left by the time it gets that far. They can still make a claim.SurvivaloftheFittest said:
Smoke and mirrors. They wouldn't even put their names to a letter, they're hardly going to take legal action.Davo55 said:
I think it’s true that legal action hasn’t YET been taken. Doesn’t mean it won’t be.andynelson said:Is the statement that no action is being taken against the club over unpaid bonuses true or false?
The club knows who sent the letter.0
