CAFC staff threaten to sue Duchatelet over unpaid bonuses
Comments
-
At least the last one out doesn't have to turn the lights off.shirty5 said:
You need someone to open up the gates. Bet there not from external companieskillerandflash said:How many of the staff in question actually work on Saturday? Some of them will be Monday to Friday office workers presumably, a lot of the people you see on matchday are employed by external companies
2 -
Well indeed. The staff will know only too well that anything they say to Chris will go straight to Little Ms Lickspittle and hence out into the public domain.Rob62 said:
Absolute rubbish from Sue there. The idea that the staff haven't talked about it amongst themselves is laughable. And where does she think these stories are coming from? The statement will no-doubt highlight how wrong she is on this soon enough.NorthStandUltra said:Hmmm
Two things.
First, oi, Roland, "going forward" in the way used is entirely superfluous and a tedious phrase only utilised by PR types (oops!). What's worse it's a solicism.
Second, and more importantly, how did you manage to have a very bad financial year last season when you sold Lookman for £11mn and failed to spend any of that, as promised, on the training ground? The bad finances are only because....fill in the blanks......2 -
Very brief piece from 04.17 on this bulletin,maybe there will be a longer feature in this evenings programme.Baldybonce said:Just been on BBC news.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b0bg4z6d/london-news-lunchtime-news-220820182 -
Probably hoping that we'd be taken over and the bonuses wouldn't be his problemCardinal Sin said:"A very bad financial year"....so no bonuses. Given your track record Duchatelet, what sort of financial year were you expecting when you deliberately incentivised staff with the promise of bonuses? You have been selling every player you can cash in on for several years now as it is. Fucking thief. The beating you are going to take in the end will be celebrated for generations to come as your real legacy to CAFC.
2 -
I think you have to have a ballot and give your employer 28 day notice before taking industrial action otherwise it is illegal and leaves the door open for the employer to take action of his own.1
-
Would be terrible if a stomach bug or something affected the guys before the end of the week and made them go out sick on Saturday.charltonkeston said:I think you have to have a ballot and give your employer 28 day notice before taking industrial action otherwise it is illegal and leaves the door open for the employer to take action of his own.
0 -
The financial year ended at the end of June I believe, RD probably now realizes the mess that KM left behind her, that she was covering up, hoping the club would be sold in January. No doubt it was her who promised the bonuses to the staff.1
-
I wonder what she said in her private messages to Will!NorthStandUltra said:Hmmm
6 -
Hopefully so. I was interviewed outside the ground and believe a few others were too including Jimmy Stone.clive said:
Very brief piece from 04.17 on this bulletin,maybe there will be a longer feature in this evenings programme.Baldybonce said:Just been on BBC news.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b0bg4z6d/london-news-lunchtime-news-22082018
And when asked if I could give RD a message, my answer - Just sell the club!1 - Sponsored links:
-
Now also in French language Belgian press
https://www.lavenir.net/cnt/dmf20180822_01212407/charlton-roland-duchatelet-menace-de-poursuites-judiciaires-par-ses-employes9 -
How can we be losing £200,000 a week??0
-
Google translation: (I think it has got confused between paper towels & toilet paper - at least, I hope so!)
Charlton: Roland Duchâtelet threatened with legal action by his employees
Home > Sport > Football - Today at 16:09 - Fl. G - The Future
Charlton: Roland Duchâtelet threatened with legal action by his employees
Due to unpaid premiums, employees of the Charlton English Club are considering legal action against the club's owner, Belgian businessman Roland Duchâtelet.
Nothing is going on between Duchâtelet and his Charlton club, where the employees are on the brink of revolt. Involved, premiums not paid by the former owner of Standard Liege, as reported by the Daily Mail.
Roland Duchâtelet promised his employees a 10% bonus if specific goals were reached with the club. The club's employees worked around the clock to get the bonus, even though it would have barely paid them a living wage. The goals were finally achieved but Roland Duchâtelet did not keep his promise, which broke the morale of the staff.
The Charlton staff are waiting for the Australian League consortium to pick up the League One (3rd Division) club, but the talks are dragging on. Meanwhile, Lieven de Turck has been instructed to reduce costs to the maximum by Duchâtelet.
Rations of water, food and toilet paper
According to local media, cost reduction has gone a long way. Food, water, electricity, internet access and even toilet paper are strictly rationed. For their part, Academy players do not even have access to water for free and fans must donate bottles themselves.
On the other hand, cleaning staff hours have been reduced, forcing employees to leave their offices during meal times. Hard to imagine for a club that was still in the Premier League a few years ago.
Since the Belgian businessman took control of the club four years ago, the "Addicks" lose about 10 million pounds per season (more than 11 million euros). The Daily Mail also reports that a group of English fans have taken the name "Coalition Against Roland Duchâtelet" (CARD) and are campaigning to sack the controversial owner of Charlton.2 -
Vol au vents are unaffected by the cost cutting.Fanny Fanackapan said:
Pray do tell what the real story is then, dear lady.NorthStandUltra said:Hmmm
Otherwise we have to continue to draw our own conclusions.....2 -
Not entirely accurate but paints him in a justifiably appalling light. He must be limoged as soon as possible!1
-
Obviously it would have been a little harsh but I can’t believe none of the journos after the game hurled a question about the bonuses to LB or did his ref rant take up the entire allocated time?0
-
Surely the sale of Lookman wiped out 1 years losses?N01R4M said:
Since the Belgian businessman took control of the club four years ago, the "Addicks" lose about 10 million pounds per season (more than 11 million euros). The Daily Mail also reports that a group of English fans have taken the name "Coalition Against Roland Duchâtelet" (CARD) and are campaigning to sack the controversial owner of Charlton.0 -
Wasn’t the club losing £1m a month before Roland brought it?Chris_from_Sidcup said:
Surely the sale of Lookman wiped out 1 years losses?N01R4M said:
Since the Belgian businessman took control of the club four years ago, the "Addicks" lose about 10 million pounds per season (more than 11 million euros). The Daily Mail also reports that a group of English fans have taken the name "Coalition Against Roland Duchâtelet" (CARD) and are campaigning to sack the controversial owner of Charlton.0 -
Yrs, there are very clear laws relating to the taking of industrial action. Just walking out,"wildcat strikes" as they are known, would be unlawful and those taking part could be dismissed with no right whatsoever to an employment tribunal. On the other hand if they were a) represented by a union, b) consulted appropriately with all affected staff members, c) organised and held a secret ballot in line with legislation, d) got a clear majority in favour of strike or action short of a strike, e) gave due notice of the industrial action, they are protected. Dismissal of someone taking part in lawful industrial action is unfair dismissal and the penalty for that would be a compensatory award in addition to the basic unfair dismissal compensation. Also relevant, as I imagine a lot of Charlton staff have low service, is that the usual two years qualifying period for unfair dismissal does not apply in such cases (or other forms of discrimination such as race, gender etc).charltonkeston said:I think you have to have a ballot and give your employer 28 day notice before taking industrial action otherwise it is illegal and leaves the door open for the employer to take action of his own.
6 - Sponsored links:
-
Exactly. Fools rush in etc etc. Those involved need to follow existing industrial regulations or they could find themselves not only out of pocket - but out of a job.Davo55 said:
Yrs, there are very clear laws relating to the taking of industrial action. Just walking out,"wildcat strikes" as they are known, would be unlawful and those taking part could be dismissed with no right whatsoever to an employment tribunal. On the other hand if they were a) represented by a union, b) consulted appropriately with all affected staff members, c) organised and held a secret ballot in line with legislation, d) got a clear majority in favour of strike or action short of a strike, e) gave due notice of the industrial action, they are protected. Dismissal of someone taking part in lawful industrial action is unfair dismissal and the penalty for that would be a compensatory award in addition to the basic unfair dismissal compensation. Also relevant, as I imagine a lot of Charlton staff have low service, is that the usual two years qualifying period for unfair dismissal does not apply in such cases (or other forms of discrimination such as race, gender etc).charltonkeston said:I think you have to have a ballot and give your employer 28 day notice before taking industrial action otherwise it is illegal and leaves the door open for the employer to take action of his own.
0 -
I could live with that.Covered_End_Lad said:
I have a horrid feeling that a strike would cause us to forfeit the game. Hope I am wrong.bristoladdick said:Staff strike on Saturday? Gets the match postponed, more embarrassment for Roland and helps Lee Bowyer, as a few players will be back from injury for the re-arranged fixture.
3 -
so could ihappyvalley said:
I could live with that.Covered_End_Lad said:
I have a horrid feeling that a strike would cause us to forfeit the game. Hope I am wrong.bristoladdick said:Staff strike on Saturday? Gets the match postponed, more embarrassment for Roland and helps Lee Bowyer, as a few players will be back from injury for the re-arranged fixture.
0 -
I still would be interested in how these bonuses were promised, and what was the wording in the letter
If there is some get-out clause in the wording - "subject to the financial state of the club, blah, blah" - then however morally wrong it might be, from a legal point of view the employees might not have a case.
Which doesn't mean that there shouldn't be protests, but might have an effect if it went to a tribunal of some sort.3 -
Me toohappyvalley said:
I could live with that.Covered_End_Lad said:
I have a horrid feeling that a strike would cause us to forfeit the game. Hope I am wrong.bristoladdick said:Staff strike on Saturday? Gets the match postponed, more embarrassment for Roland and helps Lee Bowyer, as a few players will be back from injury for the re-arranged fixture.
0 -
Sue Parkes will read this and choke on her vol au vents (hopefully!)ForeverAddickted said:9 -
ForeverAddickted said:
Yes, but that would be making them pay for something that is his responsibility and far outside their control. This is a rich man and the sum total of their bonuses is unlikely to amount to much. After all, they've met his cost-cutting targets and he presumably didn't promise them a £5 bonus for every £4 they saved.killerandflash said:I still would be interested in how these bonuses were promised, and what was the wording in the letter
If there is some get-out clause in the wording - "subject to the financial state of the club, blah, blah" - then however morally wrong it might be, from a legal point of view the employees might not have a case.
Which doesn't mean that there shouldn't be protests, but might have an effect if it went to a tribunal of some sort.
What a despicable, spiteful creep the man is. What a sad time to care about the club.6 -
Has made the BBC website: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/452735476
-
Guardian article. They asked RD for comments but he’s not yet replied.
7 -
The whole notion that he can’t pay this because they need to reduce costs to sell the club is absolute bollocks.
Any purchaser may well want him to reduce any ongoing obligations - so get rid of overpriced players, reduce staffing levels, introduce efficiencies. I’m sure a lot of us have been there, but, the one off payment of a promised bonus to those expected to work towards those goals has zero impact on the ongoing obligations.
This has nothing to do with reducing costs to achieve a sale, and everything to do with him not spending money.
Also, blaming the lack of player sales - I thought the plan was for a Cat1 academy to produce those players. Where is that, and whose fault is it that this part of the business plan hasn’t been executed?16
