Official Statement regarding Gus Poyet on Website NOW *merged*

[Rookie]

500 pages, blimey. Glad the LMA have said something was annoying that people were able to guess about the reasons for rescheduling without any basis.

 

[Rookie]

How come he had time to work for the BBC over the weekend but not to give to the disciplinary? Can't see the club being impressed with that

Read the statement from the LMA it explains alot

 

[Lord Bracknell]

League Managers' Association statement on Gus Poyet's Brighton disciplinary hearing >>>

The League Managers Association (LMA) has issued the following statement regarding Gus Poyet, manager of Brighton & Hove Albion FC, in response to media speculation and a number of statements made by the Club.
Brighton & Hove Albion FC ordered Gus Poyet to attend a crucial disciplinary hearing today, despite the fact that he only returned from annual leave yesterday and the charges were not particularised until 13th June. Further, the very lengthy appendices to the initial report comprise around 500 pages and these were also only delivered recently. Clearly Gus needs to have a fair and reasonable opportunity to respond to what we believe are unfounded charges against him.
Also, it has repeatedly been made clear to the Club that Gus’s LMA representative, Richard Bevan was not available to accompany him today, but was available to attend on Thursday 20th or Friday 21st June as well. These two dates fall within the five working day period for an employee to offer alternatives to the original date set by the Club as set-out in the Club’s own handbook. We believe that our members are entitled to the same legal protections that other employees enjoy. Football clubs need to observe basic employment rights like any other employer in our view. Just to be clear, however, we are confident that Gus will demonstrate there is no case to answer in this matter.
Notwithstanding these important points, the Club decided to go-ahead with the hearing in the absence of both Gus and Richard Bevan. Late this afternoon the Club agreed to adjourn and reconvene the disciplinary hearing to Thursday 20th June 2013. The LMA is pleased that the Club has agreed to an arrangement whereby Gus and his chosen representative will be able to attend.
The LMA will not be making any further statement at this stage.


That sounds much more like it, than the statement the club has made.

Let's look at the FACTS.

The Club concluded its internal investigations on 13 June. Gus Poyet has now been presented with the Club's conclusions. This does not mean that the investigation has been completed. That will only be the case, once the employee has had the opportunity to consider the Club's case and respond. The conclusion of the investigations will therefore be after the end of the meeting that will take place on 20 June. In other words, the meeting on 20 June is part of the investigation.

It will then be up to whoever is conducting the Disciplinary Meeting to reach those conclusions and decide what action is appropriate. This might be dismissal. Or it might be something else.

If the decision is taken to dismiss, the employee has a right to appeal against the decision and the appeal must be considered by a panel that does not include the individual who has taken the decision. Sufficient time needs to be provided to allow for the preparation of an appeal. Only once the Appeal Meeting has been held can dismissal be confirmed.

Anyone who imagines that the whole issue can be resolved with a dismissal confirmed by Friday is, quite simply, WRONG.

Failure to follow this procedure will result in an Employment Tribunal concluding that wrongful dismissal has occurred - even if it finds that the dismissal is fair.

 

[bristolseagull]

How come he had time to work for the BBC over the weekend but not to give to the disciplinary? Can't see the club being impressed with that

Agreed, you'd think he'd have considered the most significant meeting of his career slightly more important than being on tele.

Wanker

 

[GreersElbow]

It's the implication in your posts that Gus purposely, and for no valid reason, avoided today's meeting and that it's simple to get legal representation from your union at the drop of a hat. Your statement in a previous post around "just sack him" shows your agenda and it's not based on what are slowly appearing to be the facts.

I made that comment before reading the LMA statement.

So, if we sack him what does that mean? I'm confused - because if we end up doing, then where do you stand? Will you begin supporting the team Poyet next managers?

The facts are clear, but the end result is open to speculation and the comment, unless you don't want people to have a voice on what they'd wish to see. The LMA commenting on the fact they're happy with the club adjourning the hearing sounds like someone didn't tell the club a representative was available, who's omission is that?

 

[the right footed denilson]

What a mess.

 

[SIMMO SAYS]

Posted this on a thread that is fast disappearing up its own ####!

So if that is true and he hasn't got a case to answer when are we all going to send our season tickets back to punish the club-----------it's all about the money now----follow the dosh

 

[El Sid]

More assumption and innuendo with no grounding.

Nothing unusual there.

 

[joker]

Gus will have been invited to the hearing to put across any further information he may have relating to the accusations. If he has nothing further to add he does not need to attend and it would have stated that in a letter. The club will write to him again with one further invite and it will state that if he fails to attend then decisions will be made based on the facts already established.

Therefore predict that Gus has nothing further to say and he will attend no further hearings, the club will make a decision based on thefacts they have and none of us know what they are. Gus will be acting on legal advice with actions that he takes.

I know a fiar bit about this type of process and suspect that I am not far off.

This, also if the club do not follow the exact procedure as laid out by their insurers then they will not be covered if any compensation or losses do occur, they are following the exact procedure, Mr Poyet would have been sent the full list of charges against him so to say he doesn't know is an untruth, the clubs insurers would have been advising the club all the way along, it is great to know our club is in good hands that follow the rules and procedures of employment law.
Well done Mr Bloom and Mr Barber for doing things what appears to be the absolute correct way and looking after our club

 

[Deadly Danson]

Two things strike me with that statement. Firstly, 500 pages!! Good grief, thats one hell of a document-the club must think they have a very strong case.
Secondly, assuming Gus' annual leave had been planned all along (and he didn't just take it to delay matters) then had none of this happened today would have been his first day back at work and presumably his first day to start transfer business etc so we would not be massively further forward in planning for next season (although I accept he may have coordinated from afar).

 

[B.W.]

Your agenda is dull.

Dull but accurate. Your agenda is sad.

 

[kevtherev]

The statement from the LMA is a bog standard statement, they would have issued for any manager going through this. That's why they are the managers union, they are hardly likely to say, " Mr Poyet didn't turn up today just to be awkward , therefore causing as much disruption to Brighton and Hove Albion Football Club and their preparations for the coming season, as he possible can. Because he is very difficult man to co-operate with. Unless everything is on his own terms and he does not like being told what to do and likes everyone to dance to his tune"...are they

 

[One Teddy Maybank]

Let's look at the FACTS.

The Club concluded its internal investigations on 13 June. Gus Poyet has now been presented with the Club's conclusions. This does not mean that the investigation has been completed. That will only be the case, once the employee has had the opportunity to consider the Club's case and respond. The conclusion of the investigations will therefore be after the end of the meeting that will take place on 20 June.

It will then be up to whoever is conducting the Disciplinary Meeting to reach those conclusions and decide what action is appropriate. This might be dismissal. Or it might be something else.

If the decision is taken to dismiss, the employee has a right to appeal against the decision and the appeal must be considered by a panel that does not include the individual who has taken the decision. Sufficient time needs to be provided to allow for the preparation of an appeal. Only once the Appeal Meeting has been held can dismissal be confirmed.

Anyone who imagines that the whole issue can be resolved with a dismissal confirmed by Friday is, quite simply, WRONG.

But the disciplinary committee potentially can immediately consider the findings, with an announcement within 24 hours I would suggest. As you say it's the appeals process that may take longer, though presumably an employee could be on 'gardening leave' during that time?

 

[hybrid_x]

so if we sack the idiot on friday, and he appeals - we cannnot hire a new manager in this "appeal" time?

eeek.

barber has f00ked up i think.

 

[B.W.]

Or - as is looking more and more likely - he was wrongly suspended.

So why the massive report that Gus, his lawyers, and the LMA rep are apparently incapable of reading timely? Wishful thinking on your part, maybe?

 

[ROSM]

Where does it blow my "expert opinion" to bits? Not entirely sure, but it appears you have a problem with me due to your patronising content. What I said was fundamentally correct, read the link.

The LMA has said the negotiation will take place later this week - I stated that negotiation has to take place before an employment tribunal takes place.

They aren't formally at negotiation yet. He was suspended.

they provided details of the charges on 13th (last Thursday, the day it was leaked that he would attend a hearing on Friday which he clearly was never going to, which also led to leaks that he had refused to attend),

they provided 500pages of detail and arranged a disciplinary panel hearing for Monday 17th (so less than 2 working days)

The club were informed Gus wouldnt be attending and also that his lma rep wasn't available until 20th. However the club chose to go ahead and commence despite his reasonable absence. and then claimed they dispute a matter of procedure that now appears to be adherence to their own handbook.

It is only after the disciplinary and assuming an unfavourable decision, a step to legal action that mediation starts and your post becomes relevant.

 

[Uncle Spielberg]

Ok this is the deal. Poyet and Barber DO NOT get on. Poyet after the suspension has decided to gun for Barber. After all if he is gone, why not bring him down with him by going ALL the way to refute these charges ? The club have found nothing of substance under employment law to nail him. Poyet and his legal team know this. Poyet get's on ok with Bloom but his sniping at the budget over the season has worn Bloom down, Bloom has had enough of his hystrionics so he wants shot. Poyet wants out but with a pay off and his " reputation " in tact. The 3 of them are working a way out to make this happen. That is the stalemate we are at and like it or not I think I am right on this one.

 

[B.W.]

Why should he have to return from annual leave because his employer's charged him with something? Would you?

I would give it a higher priority than Gus has. Wouldn't you?

 

[Rookie]

The statement from the LMA is a bog standard statement, they would have issued for any manager going through this. That's why they are the managers union, they are hardly likely to say, " Mr Poyet didn't turn up today just to be awkward , therefore causing as much disruption to Brighton and Hove Albion Football Club and their preparations for the coming season, as he possible can. Because he is very difficult man to co-operate with. Unless everything is on his own terms and he does not like being told what to do and likes everyone to dance to his tune"...are they

But it's not though is it, just because it doesn't suit your agenda does not mean it's not right. It clearly explains why Gus didn't show

 

[GreersElbow]

so if we sack the idiot on friday, and he appeals - we cannnot hire a new manager in this "appeal" time?

eeek.

barber has f00ked up i think.

i don't understand why barber is getting the flack, there's a board. That board containers multiple people who run different departments...seeing as Dick Knight is the honorary lifetime president, he chairs the meetings. He can get the flak and explain where the 83 FA Cup final money went!