That will be a very short reference !
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Poyet to Sunderland
- Thread starter hola gus
- Start date
That will be a very short reference !
He's still got to figure which story rings true ... saying that I can't see anyway Barber or anyone says anything, lawyers would be all over it
This has to be true. BHA have absolutely no obligation to say anything about Gus' dismissal to anyone. It's in the public domain that he was dismissed for gross misconduct, that's really all that needs to be confirmed if Short talks to TB/PB. I would be astonished if any other tack was adopted.
BensGrandad
New member
What a ridiculous suggestion. What would he expect PB to say we made a mistake? All he can say is we sacked him and that is now in the hands of the legal people,.
forumwayseagull
Well-known member
If he gets asks to do a reference.....then that is very different to the reasons for a sacking. I would have thought the problems with references etc are more what is NOT said than what is. Either way I can hardly see the word GLOWING being used,
The legal issues surrounding the sacking are far too sensitive and current for anyone to actively comment on.
The legal issues surrounding the sacking are far too sensitive and current for anyone to actively comment on.
Creaky
Well-known member
Not really - PB could give an honest reference detailing the reasons for the dismissal.
In fact the only possible reason for not doing so is if they feel that this could be challenged in court as untruthful.
I have given poor references for ex-employees in the past - without being free to do so job references are worthless.
Then you are very fortunate. I don't know of any employer in recent times that will give a reference, except for the very basic dates, role etc. That's different to a personal reference of course but they have zero value. 100% not a word uttered from our side
Creaky
Well-known member
Granted most references I have received for job candidates have been very bland and uninformative outside of dates of employment and salary.
I always followed up written references with a telephone call which were often far more informative - I was saying that I felt confident when providing a job reference in giving details of why an employee was dismissed and/or being truthful about their capabilities and work ethos.
As I said you have been very fortunate. Nor, would I imagine they have been such high profile and with an army of lawyers ready to pounce.
If anyone at the club says anything that gives reason to Short to reject it would be "catastrophic". Even if Short were to say nothing of what might be said he could find himself dragged into the mess too, so he won't be calling anyone. This one will be down to his nous and can't see him taking another risk having got PDC wrong, but who knows?
Creaky
Well-known member
From the gov.uk website
[references] "must be fair and accurate - and can include details about workers’ performance and if they were sacked"
"If the worker thinks they’ve been given an unfair or misleading reference, they may be able to claim damages in a court . . . . Workers must be able to show that:
it’s misleading or inaccurate . . . "
https://www.gov.uk/work-reference
So as long as you are honest and can backup the reference given then there is nothing amiss in giving a full and truthful reference.
The sensible approach it to provide a full reference if positive and just supply dates of employment if negative.
symyjym
Banned
I would have thought that insisting on viewing his employment termination would be essential, and Gus could explain why he is going to dispute it.
Also Gus has been employed by the BBC, ITV & Sky since, so an employment reference from them would be considered his last employment I would have thought?
Apart from that Gus did get the results on the pitch so he looks good on paper.
The only thing that will go against him now has been phoning up fellow contenders and then going to the media and ruling them out for Sunderland. It’s almost an aggressive move instead of sitting back and letting the job come to him. I feel he may have scared them off, and this action would put the of a question mark focus back on the gross misconduct charges i.e. not being able to control himself when he gets excited and not thinking.
OK, but Poyet would have them in court straight away and it will be down to whoever is sitting in judgement. Invariabley they aren't black and white and it would be foolish in the extreme to get involved .. they've bugger all to gain and everything to lose.
I'll leave it there I think
Good point, I hadn't considered that, but Radio Poyet should really stop broadcasting on all frequencies for a while, at least until he lands that Premier League role he craves so much.
symyjym
Banned
Yep I think it has been his to lose. Also soneone mentioned on here that by ruling the other contenders out he is implying that he is at best third choice.
I think he has already talked himself out of the job tbh, which is a shame becasue I wanted to see him tested.
cloud
Well-known member
Roma 5
Bologna 0
Gus to Bologna - a club which has no ceiling
Bologna 0
Gus to Bologna - a club which has no ceiling
- Jan 3, 2012
- 17,352
I think between personnel managers 20 years ago there were "codes" in references. That might be just sticking to the dates and nature of employment rather than giving any opinion if you actually thought they were rubbish.
But here, everyone knows he was dismissed for gross misconduct. In confidence they might be able to state the reasons. No doubt they will already have asked GP, so will probably know them anyway. This would only confirm.
Surely that would not stop them from commenting on his performance as a manager when things were going well.
But I am sure we won't be doing anything without appropriate legal advice.
But here, everyone knows he was dismissed for gross misconduct. In confidence they might be able to state the reasons. No doubt they will already have asked GP, so will probably know them anyway. This would only confirm.
Surely that would not stop them from commenting on his performance as a manager when things were going well.
But I am sure we won't be doing anything without appropriate legal advice.
Da Man Clay
T'Blades
- Dec 16, 2004
- 16,286
We'll give dates of employment and conformation he was dismissed for gross misconduct. Not a single chance of anything else for various reasons.
This from Sam Wallace in The Independent - a man with his head so far up Poyet's arse, it's amazing he can see to type. The same reporter who broke the news that he was a certainty to take over at Reading:
How gross was Poyet’s misconduct anyway?
As Gus Poyet occupies the favourite’s position for the vacant Sunderland job, Brighton have still not explained what constituted his “gross misconduct” charge that led to his suspension and eventual sacking. Could it be that it amounted to very little and that Brighton are counting on Poyet not taking legal action against them? Either way, it need not give Sunderland cause for concern.
How gross was Poyet’s misconduct anyway?
As Gus Poyet occupies the favourite’s position for the vacant Sunderland job, Brighton have still not explained what constituted his “gross misconduct” charge that led to his suspension and eventual sacking. Could it be that it amounted to very little and that Brighton are counting on Poyet not taking legal action against them? Either way, it need not give Sunderland cause for concern.