Staff at Charlton being relieved of their duties

PragueAddick said:

swordfish said:

PragueAddick said:

swordfish said:

I believe @PragueAddick previously posted an interesting insight into Raelynn's attributes having met her if you care to read it. Sorry but being a technophobe (only got my first ever smartphone this year) I don't know how to create the link, but it's probably one of his more recent posts if that helps. (3 posts on June 10th and 11th well worth the read) 

Well, I need to qualify that post, quite a lot. Firstly, it was only a Zoom meeting. Secondly, I wouldnt retract anything I wrote about that encounter, but it was a certain situation. She took charge of some issues, and sorted them ahhhrt admirably. However those things were a mess because of a great deal of initial naivety from TS and co. about the global band of Addicks. Small in total numbers but big on tribal issues. She definitely has some qualities, but I wont be the only one with corporate experience to have encountered people who are great at getting things done, but less great at enabling others to get things done. This may or may not apply to her, I have no way of knowing. Generally I’m not a great fan of a business owner bringing in family members to senior positions. It can work out but there can be no surprise if it creates suspicion and mistrust. 

I didn't think my post really said anything that needed qualifying as it was more a sign post for those wishing to read about your experience, which would have provided the context had followers chosen to read about it 

I offered no opinion and you are in a more informed position than many contributors on here, so thanks for sharing and summarizing it so succinctly above.

Sorry mate, I meant that I needed to qualify *my* post😀

cabbles said:

_MrDick said:

I have a friend whose son works back office down at the Valley. I contacted him to see if things were ok and to ask if his son still has a job, which he has. From what I’ve been told is that TS is going through a back office restructure which sounds like it’s a reduction in headcount - two or three doing a particular role rather than four or five. This might explain why a number of the newer staff have been let go - didn’t fit in with the plan?  Evidently Thomas has spoken to all staff and those that can be found another role will be re-deployed. RM’s background is in organisational development - @bolloxbolder @bobmunro can better elaborate on the scope of OD than I -  but it may explain why she’s involved in this restructure?

Org Dev looks at the capabilities and skills needed by the organisation to carry out their roles and develop new skills/training/learning and development across the org.  It can involve many courses/training/learning 

There is another OD which is Org Design, which is mainly focused on spans and layers, how the organisation is structured to deliver efficiency and aligned to operational/commercial goals.  They cross over, as each influences the other to an extent.  All very much within the HR realm though so I am sure Bollox and Bob - when he returns - which he will ;-) can further enlighten from how it works having seen it first hand in day to day HR roles.  

aliwibble said:

I have to admit, if I was the volunteer Fan Adviser, I'd be considering my position right now.

Airman Brown said:

CAFCTrev said:

How many non-playing staff did we have at the height of the prem days, say 2005-ish? I think I recall someone on here saying it was around 400-500. How many do we have these days, it cant be more then 50-70 I reckon?

Not a commentary on the current staffing issues, just curious about the comparison. 

I think you’re counting stewards…

LoOkOuT said:

Scoham said:

From Facebook

That’s what Fender has to say. I’m want to hear Gibson weigh in before deciding.

aliwibble said:

bobmunro said:

_MrDick said:

I have a friend whose son works back office down at the Valley. I contacted him to see if things were ok and to ask if his son still has a job, which he has. From what I’ve been told is that TS is going through a back office restructure which sounds like it’s a reduction in headcount - two or three doing a particular role rather than four or five. This might explain why a number of the newer staff have been let go - didn’t fit in with the plan?  Evidently Thomas has spoken to all staff and those that can be found another role will be re-deployed. RM’s background is in organisational development - @bolloxbolder @bobmunro can better elaborate on the scope of OD than I -  but it may explain why she’s involved in this restructure?

As others have said, employees with less than 2 years service have not acquired employment rights to bring a claim for unfair dismissal unless the reason was linked to a protected characteristic. If it's a cost cutting exercise then TS would likely go for the cheapest option and dismiss those that would not qualify for statutory redundancy payments (again less than 2 years service) and they would just receive contractual notice. The only possibility (a long shot) of making a claim at Employment Tribunal would be for age (a protected characteristic) discrimination - if he's gone for a last in/first out approach to cutting numbers then it is possible that would constitute indirect age discrimination on the basis that those with less service are likely to be younger. Then again he may just be naive to think US 'at will' employment applies to the UK!

In some cases pregnancy/maternity discrimination might be a go-er as well, although it's a lot less likely. I have to admit I'd be a bit wary of having a restructure headed up by someone who doesn't have a working knowledge of UK employment law, particularly if they've been coming from a very different working environment like the US.

SporadicAddick said:

I wrote on another thread many many months ago that one day, in hindsight, we may see the TS era in a similar light to the RD era...

TS still has credit for taking ESI out of the equation and his intentions are much more positive than the experiment we were under RD, but there are a number of actions that point to the circus returning (if it hasn't already been pitched up for some time).

Thomas, as the bloke that stands near me in the upper CE is prone to shout, "sort it aaahrt"

swordfish said:

I think before jumping to conclusions as to whether UK employment law is being properly applied, it's worth mentioning that our Non-Exective Director, Leo Rifkind, works for Freshfield's, who specialize in many areas of international law.

I'm not saying he's involved in the day to day running of the Club and is necessarily an expert in this field himself, but he'll probably know where to direct TS should the Sandgaard's seek his advice. I doubt they'd be 'winging it' as it were. 

lolwray said:

SporadicAddick said:

I wrote on another thread many many months ago that one day, in hindsight, we may see the TS era in a similar light to the RD era...

TS still has credit for taking ESI out of the equation and his intentions are much more positive than the experiment we were under RD, but there are a number of actions that point to the circus returning (if it hasn't already been pitched up for some time).

Thomas, as the bloke that stands near me in the upper CE is prone to shout, "sort it aaahrt"

I mentioned this a few months ago and was poo pooed...I expect theres a little less poo poo around now

Crusty54 said:

JamesSeed said:

JohnnyH2 said:

JamesSeed said:

JohnnyH2 said:

Dan Burke was the clubs Fans Liasion Officer, a role the club must have to be within the EFL rules. They may get around this by having the Fans Advisor (Lucy) cover that from the voluntary role

I doubt that. Would think Fan Liaison Officer would be a proper paid role, or else it would be less than a box ticking exercise. 

So they have made someone redundant when they will then replace them with someone else?

It’ll be interesting to see what happens. 

You can only make someone redundant if their job no longer exits. Their work can be incorporated into a new job description to appoint someone. Anyone being made redundant should be considered for other available jobs.

cafcfan said:

swordfish said:

I think before jumping to conclusions as to whether UK employment law is being properly applied, it's worth mentioning that our Non-Exective Director, Leo Rifkind, works for Freshfield's, who specialize in many areas of international law.

I'm not saying he's involved in the day to day running of the Club and is necessarily an expert in this field himself, but he'll probably know where to direct TS should the Sandgaard's seek his advice. I doubt they'd be 'winging it' as it were. 

He doesn't anymore. Left 9 months ago. He's now an investment manager at Atai Life Sciences, whoever they are.

Fanny Fanackapan said:

cafcfan said:

swordfish said:

I think before jumping to conclusions as to whether UK employment law is being properly applied, it's worth mentioning that our Non-Exective Director, Leo Rifkind, works for Freshfield's, who specialize in many areas of international law.

I'm not saying he's involved in the day to day running of the Club and is necessarily an expert in this field himself, but he'll probably know where to direct TS should the Sandgaard's seek his advice. I doubt they'd be 'winging it' as it were. 

He doesn't anymore. Left 9 months ago. He's now an investment manager at Atai Life Sciences, whoever they are.

Hmmm.

Wonder why he's still listed as being in post on the OS....

More less than positive information not for sharing with the fans ?