Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

Ownership clarify discretionary staff bonus situation

123468

Comments

  • Keep up the heat on this fella until he sells, he’s off his head and needs to go, I fear what will happen in the January transfer window if he’s still in charge, he doesn’t care about results we all know that, he’s admitted he wants out of football, just do it please Roland.
  • Do we know when this EFL meeting is?
  • Childish missive.
  • edited September 2018
    Not reading any of the thread (blood pressure n'all...) Suffice to say, the mob running this club, they really are a bunch of twats eh?
  • Mad what-the-fuckery!!!!
  • Sponsored links:


  • He's an arsehole of the highest order, he's also lost the fucking plot

    As much as I smelt Katrien was bad news from the start, she was hung out to dry as is everyone else who works for this dung beetle. They have no autonomy as it's always the shithead above working them like glove puppets

    That doesn't excuse them hanging about, I've worked for people like shitface in the past and have had the courage of conviction to move jobs and in the last case, take a wage drop for my own sanity
  • His use of the English language hurts my brain.
  • Can't wait for the next one ..he's like a cold sore
  • HandG said:

    His use of the English language hurts my brain.

    This is an agitation for me as well. I appreciate English isn’t his first language but on a professional level the fact that he’s not bothered to translate what he wants to say properly just speaks volumes about how much he actually cares or ever has cared for his involvement with us. It’s disrespectful. I know he wants out, but I would never buy a Belgian football club and look for the literal translation for ‘ain’t’ or ‘geezer’ should I want to address them in my saaaarf London tones

    Do it properly or don’t do it at all.

    All this shows is we really are and always have been an afterthought and experiment
  • What seems blindingly obvious is that the staff didn't think the bonus was discretionary. Which is understandable if it was linked to personal targets rather than how many young players we are able to sell. Could it be that there was a complete breakdown of communications between the owner and those setting the targets. At our club - is that possible?
  • If he's on the edge, let's push him over !!
  • I’m sure some of the Academy staff used to be on some type of bonus for our academy produced players who got sold and uncle Roland took away this bonus after he arrived , probably to improve moral .
    Pretty clear what his game is .
  • edited September 2018

    I’m sure some of the Academy staff used to be on some type of bonus for our academy produced players who got sold and uncle Roland took away this bonus after he arrived , probably to improve moral .
    Pretty clear what his game is .

    That’s my understanding too. I think I may have been about them getting players into the first team though.
  • Davo55 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 !

    I don't think that's been proven at all. The club claiming that the bonuses were discretionary does not mean that is the case.
    @Davo55
    Then it is quite simple to solve.
    Which party has written confirmation of the type of bonus offerred ?
    If nothing is in writing, then either side can describe the bonus as it suits them.
    RD will claim that the admin staff are just making trouble.
    If CARD has evidence to support the staff claim, then (IMO) it should be made public to embarass RD.
  • Sponsored links:


  • So if I offer someone a bonus based on them achieving a target and they achieve that target and I say I've changed my mind because I'm a bit skint this week. Is that breech of contract or just a complete lack of morals?
  • T_C_E said:

    So if I offer someone a bonus based on them achieving a target and they achieve that target and I say I've changed my mind because I'm a bit skint this week. Is that breech of contract or just a complete lack of morals?

    Lack of morals for sure, breech of contract would need to be proven which can be extremely difficult if only verbal. My guess is it wasn’t purely verbal and somewhere is a paper trail to a greater or lesser degree.

    The fact is it’s stupidity though, my understanding is in the whole scheme of things we are talking about very small sums. You have to look at the bigger picture and he could have avoided it all quite easily, had a happy staff which right now to him has to be more important than a 5 figure sum.

    But he’s belligerent so I doubt anything will happen until a court/tribunal decides.
  • edited September 2018
    Simplified version of the statement as I read it:

    1. The bonuses were discretionary not contractual.
    Despite the employees meeting their working targets, the team did not achieve promotion, which therefore meant discretionary staff bonuses were not paid.

    The carrot that was dangled was always plastic. Just like Roland who is now also hunting down the sender of the threatening letter... presumably to punish them for interacting with CARD and the media.

    2. Roland is not a fan of CARD
    CARD inaccurately represented the water situation at Charlton. He accuses them of further inaccuracies with the bonus situation.

    From what I can find, CARD have never said the bonuses were contractual, however they appear to be discretionary based upon staff targets... therefore if targets were met, it is not necessarily legally wrong, but is not managing your staff in good faith when they have achieved what was required.

    It is morally bankrupt of such a wealthy individual.

    3. Roland ignores the academy breakfast situation
    This was covered by the following:
    The academy players still have access to water at all times, now they have refillable bottles rather than plastic water bottles. The ownership continues to invest £2.2m per year in the Academy, which is considerably more than the majority of League One clubs invest.

    The statement seems to say "We spend lots on the Academy" and literally despite bringing up CARD's statement on the breakfast, then immediately ignores the removal of academy breakfasts.

    4. The club not selling is not Roland Almighty's fault
    He blames CARD, Supporters and even club staff... But he is the one holding out for more than the clubs worth...

    I am personally left with two thoughts regarding the clubs continued ownership by Roland Duchatelet...

    - The longer Roland clings on like dry poo on a cluster of bum pubes the harder and more painful it will be to remove him.

    - If Roland remains as owner come January, this season will be royally screwed up by player sales of Bauer, Fosu, Taylor, Pearce, Grant and any other players he can make a quick quid from.

    GET ROLAND OUT NOW
  • 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.

    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?

    I've dismantled the statement here.

    Like the see you next Tuesday reference!
  • Davo55 said:

    Is the statement that no action is being taken against the club over unpaid bonuses true or false?

    I think it’s true that legal action hasn’t YET been taken. Doesn’t mean it won’t be.
    Remember that the Dowie litigation sucked the life out of those dealing with it, perhaps they mean new owners would not like to inherit?
  • I would imagine the amounts concerned are not massive. A new owner may see it as an opportunity to gain a committed staff.
  • I would imagine the amounts concerned are not massive. A new owner may see it as an opportunity to gain a committed staff.

    Or just hold back the money until it is resolved.
  • Roland clearly overestimates the EFL. He doesn't realise how useless they are otherwise he would not have issued this tirade.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!