Why didn't they just sack him?

[Mental Lental]

We wouldn't have to pay off Gus in a single payment. It would be at his current pay rate, and only until he got another job which payed equal or more.

But we might be better off paying him off in a big lump sum before the season starts, seeing as the new rules are for the season that is just about to start.

 

[DavidinSouthampton]

Another 'lets have a go at Barber for no apparent reason' thread?

Is that any worse than the "Let's have a go at Poyet for no apparent reason" threads? People talk about disrespecting the club and all sorts of other tosh when they are just jumping to conclusions. We - the general public - do not actually know the ins and outs of what is going on. It is possible that Gus will end up being the injured party on the evidence we have at the moment.

This is not a "defend Poyet" comment. It is merely a "we don't know" comment.

Edit - and in response to the original post, much though it would have gone against the grain for me, if there was a genuine desire to get rid of Gus at the beginning, it might have been easier and quicker to sack him and sort the rubbish out afterwards. Again, we don't know if that was the intention. Maybe people genuinely wanted to sort things out. I have been involved in the past in an organisation which suffered because of bending over backwards to "do the right thing". That occasion, to be fair, did include being over accommodating and making to an individual who ended up being devious and manipulative, which I don't think gus is.

 

[Surf's Up]

How much more sense would it have been to have just sacked him outright and then defended a compensation claim in good time whilst a new manager was getting on with the job? How can it possibly be tenable for him to keep working here even if he's found not guilty of whatever allegations have been made?

Unless there's deep splits within the Board on this matter, I can't see the logic.

This is how most clubs handle these things. In fact I can't recall any club ever conducting the ending of a managers contract the "proper" (i.e. using a proper ACAS Code of Practice style Discipllinary Procedure). They just get rid and sort out compo afterwards. The problem here as I see it is the £2.5m compo clause which I'm sure seemed a clever idea at the time and which was included as an indicator of the high level of trust and mutual respect that existed between the parties at the time. This mutual trust and confidence now appears to have broken down completely and the only way for the club to avoid paying Poyet the £2.5m is if they can sack him legally.
Among the consequences of this is the fact that employment law is a lawyers playground. If there's a 500 page appendix to the main charge sheet do not assume this will be done and dusted by the end of this week. The games have already started with GPs non-attendance at the first scheduled hearing. It is likely that the hearing will take several days. I would imagine Poyet's lawyers will also be challenging the impartiality of the internal Disciplinary Board set up to hear the case and so on and so on and so on. This could take weeks to resolve and of course that's exactly what Poyet will want because it ramps the pressure up on the club more and more as each day passes and the new season draws closer and closer.

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

Is that any worse than the "Let's have a go at Poyet for no apparent reason" threads? People talk about disrespecting the club and all sorts of other tosh when they are just jumping to conclusions. We - the general public - do not actually know the ins and outs of what is going on. It is possible that Gus will end up being the injured party on the evidence we have at the moment.

This is not a "defend Poyet" comment. It is merely a "we don't know" comment.

But there are reasons which are documented on the internet - and hence discussable on NSC - regarding Poyet, whether you agree with them or not.

There is nothing on Barber except whispers, nods and winks on NSC.

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

This is how most clubs handle these things. In fact I can't recall any club ever conducting the ending of a managers contract the "proper" (i.e. using a proper ACAS Code of Practice style Discipllinary Procedure). They just get rid and sort out compo afterwards. The problem here as I see it is the £2.5m compo clause which I'm sure seemed a clever idea at the time and which was included as an indicator of the high level of trust and mutual respect that existed between the parties at the time. This mutual trust and confidence now appears to have broken down completely and the only way for the club to avoid paying Poyet the £2.5m is if they can sack him legally.
Among the consequences of this is the fact that employment law is a lawyers playground. If there's a 500 page appendix to the main charge sheet do not assume this will be done and dusted by the end of this week. The games have already started with GPs non-attendance at the first scheduled hearing. It is likely that the hearing will take several days. I would imagine Poyet's lawyers will also be challenging the impartiality of the internal Disciplinary Board set up to hear the case and so on and so on and so on. This could take weeks to resolve and of course that's exactly what Poyet will want because it ramps the pressure up on the club more and more as each day passes and the new season draws closer and closer.

IF Poyet is dismissed this week, he can appeal but the club can move on and start preparations for next season. Any legal action simply becomes about compensation and really doesn't matter to the club if it takes years.

 

[Smile]

But there are reasons which are documented on the internet - and hence discussable on NSC - regarding Poyet, whether you agree with them or not.

There is nothing on Barber except whispers, nods and winks on NSC.

I thought I read in the Argus that Barber clashed with Poyet, would this not lead you to believe he wanted Poyet out?

 

[Surf's Up]

IF Poyet is dismissed this week, he can appeal but the club can move on and start preparations for next season. Any legal action simply becomes about compensation and really doesn't matter to the club if it takes years.

My point is that I don't think he will be sacked this week and the club will not be able to move on (appoint another manager, coach, whatever you want to call them) if/when Poyet is sacked and then appeals. The other issue will be their inability to appoint a first team coach all the while the Oatway situation remains unresolved.

 

[Seagull73]

But there are reasons which are documented on the internet - and hence discussable on NSC - regarding Poyet, whether you agree with them or not.

There is nothing on Barber except whispers, nods and winks on NSC.

And doesn't that strike you as odd? The club can make statements as the accuser, but Poyet can't as the defence?

I would be pretty sure thats why the LMA statement was as forthright as it was last night.

 

[Psalm 56:5]

This is a good point. We need to be running at under an 8 million pound loss for the 2013/2014 SEASON (as I understand it.) If this is true, if we sack him before the pre-season is underway wouldn't that constitute us as still being in the 2012/2013 season and as such Tony can pay him off without the cash coming into the remit of the 2013/2014 season? The fixtures aren't even out yet are they?

I think the UEFA monitoring periods for each season start on 1st June

 

[The Merry Prankster]

Maybe there are deep splits within the board and maybe splits have been created by Paul barber - a man I neither respect nor trust. I would much rather pb be given his p45 than gp. I just hope that none/not many of our newer fans and season ticket holders don't start falling out of love with bha over this complete shambles.

Too late. I've got two of them working at my house who are both disillusioned and bemused, this will filter through to the three kids they bring. I can't offer them any solace as I'm in the same boat but fortunately have my Albion insanity to protect me.

 

[dragonred]

the club are trying to do this by the 'book' clearly in terms of employment law but I can't help but feel they may have gambled poorly and thought GP was a shoe-in somewhere else and so this would all be sorted quietly, quickly and with a compromise agreement at the end to keep most of whatever dirty linen there may or may not be unwashed in public - it certainly doesn't do anyone any favours that it has been allowed to drag on the way it has, and whilst there is law and procedure to follow, sometimes you just have to act and act decisively and worry about the consequences after (and I say that as someone paid to give advice on such matters) because that way you don't allow the dispute to start to spread and affect all areas of life/business. Some will no doubt say this is not 'legal advice', I'd say experience of actually having been asked and paid to give real not paper advice shows the law at times is 10% procedure/rules and 90% knowing how to get the best result on a practical level. I for one don't get the impression at all that BHA like their business ever done in public but for whatever reasons this situation has been allowed to drag on and with that comes the inevitable speculation and tit for tat. GP has the LME, they are a very well funded mouth piece for managers who never seem to accept any fault in their members whatsoever - if a manger walks out and breaks a contract for a better paid job, they inevitably say he was pushed so actions 'justified', if a manager fired for poor performance or breach of contract they will fight on the basis of getting every last penny for them as compensation as that decision was somehow 'unfair'- knowing that is how they represent their clients the club should have budgeted to pay off/fight and just got on with making the change happen. A simple statement thanking GP for his efforts at the club and saying he had been relieved of his duties, get on with appointing a new person and then sort out the arguments in private between the lawyers should have been the way forward. That would have put GP and an y dispute regarding him totally in the background, almost an irrelevance to the fans and club as we all concentrate on a new manager, new players and most importantly a new season where we want a promotion push from day 1.

 

[glasfryn]

Maybe there are deep splits within the board and maybe splits have been created by Paul barber - a man I neither respect nor trust. I would much rather pb be given his p45 than gp. I just hope that none/not many of our newer fans and season ticket holders don't start falling out of love with bha over this complete shambles.

it actually dawned on me last night or rather early this morning that the club are trying their damnedest to get rid of Gus on the cheap
now I have never met Mr Barber but he is the man in charge of finance and the few interviews I have seen and read I really don't like the guy and whatever anyone says everything seems to lead back to him
it maybe that he is just doing his job ,but so was Gus and it does seem like they are like battling tops it does also seem like one of them has to go and yes I would rather it was Barber, but I also know which one it is more likely to be
I really hope the club know what they are doing as this fiasco is really leaving a bad taste in the mouth and it may last for longer than they want
I for one am seeing the whole thing in a bad light and I know I am not the only one

 

[Bevendean Hillbilly]

It's fairly clear that only a few on here have anything but a flimsy grasp on the intricacies of employment regulations and the relative options available to either party.

That being the case, why don't we all wait and see what happens and go on with our lives in the meantime?

 

[Fef]

I thought I read in the Argus that Barber clashed with Poyet, would this not lead you to believe he wanted Poyet out?

No it wouldn't. Non sequitur. It simply means that Barber and Poyet had a disagreement with each other. The removal of the manager is not his decision - that is the province of the Chairman.

 

[Bra]

The club appear to have tried to do this legally which is commenable but it appears to have come back and bit them so to speak. Like others I suspect gus will try to delay as much as possible, object to the disciplinary panel, grievance etc knowing that with each day the clubs need to settle grows. The club may have a cast iron case we dont know, but taking the time necessary to prove it is another story. Hindsight then, sack him and deal with the fallout then.

 

[Tricky Dicky]

I was thinking this same thing - clubs just sack managers every day without a second thought.

But clubs don't actually "sack" managers normally -as you and I would understand sacking. It may be labelled that in the press, but they normally come to a mutually agreed conclusion, as in, "We want to you go", "ok, I'll take xxxx", job done. This is a different situation.

 

[withdeanwombat]

Another sorry aspect of this case is that we will almost certainly need a new manager, and many "prospects" may be put off by these sheenanigans.

Nice ground, new training ground on the way, but what exactly happened with the last manager?

 

[stss30]

The club appear to have tried to do this legally which is commenable but it appears to have come back and bit them so to speak. Like others I suspect gus will try to delay as much as possible, object to the disciplinary panel, grievance etc knowing that with each day the clubs need to settle grows. The club may have a cast iron case we dont know, but taking the time necessary to prove it is another story. Hindsight then, sack him and deal with the fallout then.

This is my view as well.

 

[yxee]

I thought I read in the Argus that Barber clashed with Poyet, would this not lead you to believe he wanted Poyet out?

It's his job to clash with Poyet, especially if Poyet was demanding more money. Doing his job doesn't necessarily means he wants Poyet out!

 

[JCL - the new kid in town]

Maybe there are deep splits within the board and maybe splits have been created by Paul barber - a man I neither respect nor trust. I would much rather pb be given his p45 than gp. I just hope that none/not many of our newer fans and season ticket holders don't start falling out of love with bha over this complete shambles.

To be fair to Barber although it is likely he is in charge and has the final say, no doubt he will be following the legal teams advice so if you want to sack anyone surely it should be the legal team?