Wage cut for players and staff (Statement on 24/4)

[AGoodLaugh]

The **** people make up on here about contracts is unreal. If a player doesn't want to take a pay cut or leave the club, the only way to make them leave is to pay their contract off in full. 

[AGoodLaugh]

11 minutes ago, graygo said:

 

The club can't just decide to rip up contracts, they either agree with the staff a drop in salary or offer to allow them out of their contract which is what they have done. The other alternative is that Hearts break the player's contracts which is a dangerous road to go down and is why the player's union are keen to have talks with the club 

 

9 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

Employers who have long term contracts with employees can't just unilaterally make changes to the contracts. Without knowing what the contracts say I don't know if there is exceptional circumstances/force majeure clause. Neither I suspect does anyone else posting on here. The use of the word "offered" suggests to me not be as simple as "take it or you leave without compensation or redress" 

Thank you for actually talking sense 

[80bob]

9 minutes ago, FarmerTweedy said:

It's actually very reassuring that the club are moving quickly to take action to help get through this period. 

Iam sure My employer proposed a similar offer But not at the 50% mark in the 2008 financial crisis. It was an offer to protect families and jobs in a period of uncertainty . I think it’s a very bold and brave move. However good or bad our actually cash flow is , no one would have expected any club or business to budget or strategically plan for this global crisis.

[soonbe110]

1 minute ago, AGoodLaugh said:

The **** people make up on here about contracts is unreal. If a player doesn't want to take a pay cut or leave the club, the only way to make them leave is to pay their contract off in full. 

Not so. A compromise agreement can be agreed. Usually depends if said player already has another club lined up. 

[Busby8]

Just now, AGoodLaugh said:

The **** people make up on here about contracts is unreal. If a player doesn't want to take a pay cut or leave the club, the only way to make them leave is to pay their contract off in full. 

 

That is exactly my take on it too.

 

Unless of course there is some kind of force majeure clause that Hearts could use.

I'd doubt it though

 

[Malinga the Swinga]

Ian Murray on SKY now talking about Hearts. No mention of what players have or have not accepted terms. 

[AGoodLaugh]

Just now, soonbe110 said:

Not so. A compromise agreement can be agreed. Usually depends if said player already has another club lined up. 

Yes that's what I said - the player would need to agree to the compromise i.e. want to leave the club. 

[JamboAl]

1 hour ago, Last Laff said:

There has been £millions put into the club externally over the last few years, if the club are completely struggling to pay wages and bills for a few months towards the end of the football season anyway it’s really concerning.  Isn’t season ticket sales from this season that we are in plus over income such as commercial sponsorship not meant to cover costs for the complete season at least?  The cup run income added to that as a bonus also.  If the club is being ran so brilliantly off the pitch then how has it come to this so soon?  I get that it may be a precautionary approach to things but the whole point in fan ownership that should have been achieved by now was to make sure the club never finds itself in a position of concern in the future and a couple of weeks since the football closure it seems to be happening again. 

We are not yet in fan ownership or have I missed something?

Do you think FoH (with the greatest of respect) would have been able to forecast this event or its gravity?

[HMFC86]

Borussia monchengladbach players and coaches are voluntarily forgoing part of their salary to help the club and other staff 

[Famous 1874]

So without knowing much about the ins and outs of the situation, if a player refuses to take the 50% cut, what happens?

[Busby8]

16 minutes ago, Hackney Hearts said:

 

It's one or the other. It's not complicated.

What if they just don't take either ?

What will the club do ?

[JamboAl]

1 minute ago, Busby8 said:

What if they just don't take either ?

What will the club do ?

The end game is not too difficult to predict.

A company can only go on for so long paying out money with nothing coming in, whether players are under contract or not.

It is a time for compromise and common sense by everyone.

[Busby8]

1 minute ago, JamboAl said:

The end game is not too difficult to predict.

A company can only go on for so long paying out money with nothing coming in, whether players are under contract or not.

It is a time for compromise and common sense by everyone.

 

 

I agree, but that wasn't my question.

[The Real Maroonblood]

10 minutes ago, HMFC86 said:

Borussia monchengladbach players and coaches are voluntarily forgoing part of their salary to help the club and other staff 

Well done.

[gashauskis9]

43 minutes ago, HardcoreJambo said:

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/hearts-exodus-set-sparked-uche-21716673

 

Apologies if this was previously posted.

 

Uche and Damour on their way out. Good news as neither are good enough to be at Hearts.

 

I honestly wouldn't be opposed to the entire squad been cleared out. Sell Hickey and start again. Just this time don't involve Levein or his sidekick.

What is it about the footballing authorities that make them think that they are above the law of the country?  We’re in the midst of a global crisis which could bankrupt the world economy FFS.  Give it a couple of months and nobody will give a **** about football and footballers.  Wishart can ****ing do one.  Who’s representing Joe Public who are being asked to take unpaid leave all over the world?

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

13 minutes ago, Famous 1874 said:

So without knowing much about the ins and outs of the situation, if a player refuses to take the 50% cut, what happens?

They have a problem. You can’t just sack players. They’re very well protected.

[Gokuzo_The_Jambo]

All the negative pish on this thread directed at the club or Budge is a joke. Nobody could have anticipated this in their yearly budget. Every UK budget will have an element of contingency, but not to the extent of a massive depression and ceasing of all social and culture spending. The club is taking steps to mitigate the damage and prevent disaster.

 

Football won't be the only victim in this situation. There are businesses all over the UK who are struggling right now, but if this continues, expect firms to go bust all over the UK (even with rescue plans 'promised by the UK gov'). That will in turn effect investment in the the construction industry, both private sector, public sector and housing. With reduced work, job cuts, lay offs, reduced disposable income, nobody will be spending or investing - all points to another recession on the horizon, especially if this is meant to last until July/Aug. House builders will most likely go pop, market value (stocks are crashing already) on everything will drop, banks will be ****ed (again). The longer this goes on the worse it will get. Any any injections of spending and loans now by the Goverment now will be felt a decade down the line in new taxes and conservative approaches on spending.

 

Good luck all.

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

31 minutes ago, Hackney Hearts said:

 

It's one or the other. It's not complicated.

No, it’s not one or the other. Hearts can’t just terminate a player’s contract or cut their wage without their consent. 

[jackal]

I wonder how long other clubs will go before they publicise they are doing the same thing. I think we are getting the bad press again and also lets the venters get their digs in but if it isnt done their might not be a club to pay anyone anything at the end of this. Like a previous poster I am self employed and income is now almost zero but I have had additional problems running from October and most of my savings are running low but I still have bills too pay. No one can budget for this sort of thing and being offered living wage is way better than some others have been offered or more than others actually earn each year.

Also it isnt for the rest of their contract but a period until this is sorted out, I dont think many players live hand to mouth each month or will find financial hardship despite what they may say in the papers.

 

[Mikey1874]

35 minutes ago, graygo said:

 

The club can't just decide to rip up contracts, they either agree with the staff a drop in salary or offer to allow them out of their contract which is what they have done. The other alternative is that Hearts break the player's contracts which is a dangerous road to go down and is why the player's union are keen to have talks with the club 

 

33 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

Employers who have long term contracts with employees can't just unilaterally make changes to the contracts. Without knowing what the contracts say I don't know if there is exceptional circumstances/force majeure clause. Neither I suspect does anyone else posting on here. The use of the word "offered" suggests to me not be as simple as "take it or you leave without compensation or redress" 

 

24 minutes ago, AGoodLaugh said:

The **** people make up on here about contracts is unreal. If a player doesn't want to take a pay cut or leave the club, the only way to make them leave is to pay their contract off in full. 

 

There's a procedure in contract law to vary contracts. I believe it's a standard notice period eg 21 days. Accept contract or go. 

 

I know because it's been done by my employers. 

[Nookie Bear]

1 minute ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

 

 

There's a procedure in contract law to vary contracts. I believe it's a standard notice period eg 21 days. Accept contract or go. 

 

I know because it's been done by my employers. 

 

When you say "go", how does that apply to footballers who have a value?

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

1 minute ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

 

 

There's a procedure in contract law to vary contracts. I believe it's a standard notice period eg 21 days. Accept contract or go. 

 

I know because it's been done by my employers. 

Contracts held by footballers are different though - because the government bodies expect them to be honoured.

 

It’s why when a club go into administration, footballers are secured creditors and are usually required to paid in full - even though lots of other creditors lose case. Football Associations insist on it.

[FarmerTweedy]

16 hours ago, MrBones said:

I really don't think

That much is evident! 

[Footballfirst]

2 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

There's a procedure in contract law to vary contracts. I believe it's a standard notice period eg 21 days. Accept contract or go. 

 

I know because it's been done by my employers. 

That makes sense.   Indeed, termination of a contract for a player, say with more than a year left, may be an attractive option to them, if they didn't think they would get much game time going forward.  It would allow them to negotiate a deal with another club, as a free agent, with no additional costs other than what is agreed in the new contract.

[JamboAl]

4 minutes ago, Busby8 said:

 

 

I agree, but that wasn't my question.

I thought the in-between bit would be obvious even if there is no definitive answer.

Firstly it will depend on how long this is to last and no one knows.  AB will no doubt be working on a best guess time frame and has probably calculated we can afford that period with all staff on half pay or the contract alternative.  A player must then judge whether he/she is better receiving half for (say) 3 months or digging his/her heels in for full pay and losing their job entirely - bearing in mind that other clubs will be in a similar or worse position than us so getting a new employer will not be a dawdle. 

If all staff refuse the offer then I can see no alternative to admin or even liquidation.

Can you outline an alternative strategy?

[Jimbojack]

3 hours ago, jock _turd said:

Well I have had a night to sleep on it and think for ages before getting to sleep. I have to come back and say that what AB has done is exactly the right thing. It is a set of circumstances that , I don't think, have ever arisen before and swift action is required. AB is first and foremost a business woman and I think her actions supersede the inaction noted by other football clubs who have CEO's who are not as savvy when it comes to money matters. I think she recognises the gravity of the situation better and wants to insulate Hearts as best she can. Let us be plain here while other teams fans may be sitting back saying look at Hearts they must be in shit having to do that but the truth is NO FOOTBALL CLUB CAN AFFORD TO SPEND MONEY THEY DO NOT EARN ! and to do so would be much more damaging to any club long term. In short if we manage to get our players to accept wage cuts and other teams do not try to do the same we will come out of this episode in much better shape than teams who do not. For example to all the hibs fans laughing their dicks of at this move by Hearts. This current period of clubs not earning money could last for months and all the money you spend over that period will never find its way back to your coffers... your CEO/owner is already asking you to pay for infrastructure improvements he is not going to pony up to replace money spent paying players who are not earning money for the club.

Sensible post at last

[JAMBO _MOBY]

42 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

Employers who have long term contracts with employees can't just unilaterally make changes to the contracts. Without knowing what the contracts say I don't know if there is exceptional circumstances/force majeure clause. Neither I suspect does anyone else posting on here. The use of the word "offered" suggests to me not be as simple as "take it or you leave without compensation or redress" 

Pretty standard to ask staff to take a pay cut, loads of industries did this in 2008 credit crunch.  If they don’t agree they move to redundancies next.

[Busby8]

Just now, JamboAl said:

I thought the in-between bit would be obvious even if there is no definitive answer.

Firstly it will depend on how long this is to last and no one knows.  AB will no doubt be working on a best guess time frame and has probably calculated we can afford that period with all staff on half pay or the contract alternative.  A player must then judge whether he/she is better receiving half for (say) 3 months or digging his/her heels in for full pay and losing their job entirely - bearing in mind that other clubs will be in a similar or worse position than us so getting a new employer will not be a dawdle. 

If all staff refuse the offer then I can see no alternative to admin or even liquidation.

Can you outline an alternative strategy?

 

Can you answer my specific question that you answered on behalf of Hackney ?

[graygo]

8 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

 

 

There's a procedure in contract law to vary contracts. I believe it's a standard notice period eg 21 days. Accept contract or go. 

 

I know because it's been done by my employers. 

 

Football contracts are protected. Club's would do it all the time otherwise.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2020/mar/17/barnet-lay-off-all-non-playing-staff-coronavirus-national-league

[Japan Jambo]

3 hours ago, Geoff Kilpatrick said:

You mean they aren't already?

 

One or two struggling to find their own feet...

[Paolo]

2 hours ago, soonbe110 said:

Yes, the higher paid ones. Why would she pay Hickey to go away? One of the few assets we have. In any case the pay reduction won’t be 50% for him. 

If he is earning more that £18,700 he will have been asked to take a reduction, but it won’t be 50% if it takes him below that figure.  

[qferryjam]

3 hours ago, Last Laff said:

You think the huns are going to ask players and management to halve their wages and if not Morelos can leave for free?  

Who knows what Rangers will do , they may be able to offload season tickets earlier than most but will still struggle 

 

with working capital , all Scottish clubs rely on match tickets to pay the bills Tv money is negligible in comparison to England 

 

they may do another share thingy or Just ask fans to cough up like Partick Thistle and Raith 

[Pasquale for King]

2 hours ago, Francis Albert said:

Offered. They can reject the offer and stay on full pay as I understand it.

They can, and then be made redundant just like any other person in the land.

[Paolo]

16 minutes ago, Dusk_Till_Dawn said:

They have a problem. You can’t just sack players. They’re very well protected.

Yes.  They could easily reject both options out to them, knowing if redundancy did happen, it would effectively be the same as the offer of termination, only maybe a few weeks later.  And with no football being played, there is little difference. 

[Footballfirst]

4 minutes ago, Dusk_Till_Dawn said:

Contracts held by footballers are different though - because the government bodies expect them to be honoured.

 

It’s why when a club go into administration, footballers are secured creditors and are usually required to paid in full - even though lots of other creditors lose case. Football Associations insist on it.

Footballers aren't secured creditors in insolvency situations. They are employees just like all the club's office or shop staff.  They are just as likely to be asked to take a pay cut or made redundant as anyone else. I think any "preferred creditor" status only applies to redundancy payments.

 

That was evidenced in Hearts own administration.

 

It is the rule books of the Football Associations and Leagues that require all "football creditors" to be paid in full, under the threat of football sanctions.

 

Again, Hearts football creditors were paid in full, not because of the provisions of the CVA agreement, but because of the then SPL/SFA rules, otherwise the club could have had further sanctions applied. They were repaid from FOH's initial cash injection after the club exited administration.

[Pasquale for King]

1 hour ago, Last Laff said:

And if they don’t take either? 

They get made redundant just like anyone else who’s boss can’t pay their wages.

[Hackney Hearts]

6 minutes ago, Dusk_Till_Dawn said:

No, it’s not one or the other. Hearts can’t just terminate a player’s contract or cut their wage without their consent. 

 

Well it doesn't say without their consent. And it doesn't specify what might be part of a termination arrangement (presumably something other than paying the contract up in full).

 

But people seem to be avoiding the issue here.

Thousands of businesses are going to go bust. Hundreds of thousands of people (potentially millions) are going to have their pay cut by 100%. Breach of contract? "So sue me". If there's suddenly a million people with a case for breach of contract - how are the courts going to cope with that? How are the courts going to operate full stop? We're in uncharted waters and people (especially professional footballers) will need to stop being quite so self-centred. 

 

And as for people criticising AB for this, that's just agenda-driven nonsense.

[qferryjam]

6 minutes ago, graygo said:

 

Football contracts are protected. Club's would do it all the time otherwise.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2020/mar/17/barnet-lay-off-all-non-playing-staff-coronavirus-national-league

This is all a guessing game , no one knows what’s in the contracts except there is a relegation one in every contract at Hearts , there could also be an exceptional circumstances clause , we just don’t know 

[Pasquale for King]

9 minutes ago, graygo said:

 

Football contracts are protected. Club's would do it all the time otherwise.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2020/mar/17/barnet-lay-off-all-non-playing-staff-coronavirus-national-league

Only by Football rules, they are not laws and can be challenged in the real world. Football players contracts are no different than yours or mine in the eyes of the law. 

Edited March 19, 2020 by Pasquale for King

[graygo]

1 minute ago, Pasquale for King said:

Only by Football rules, they are not laws and can be challenged in the real world. Football players contracts are no different than yours or mine in the eyes of the law. 

 

I know but any club going down that route will very quickly find they are a club without a league to play in.

[Pasquale for King]

Just now, graygo said:

 

I know but any club going down that route will very quickly find they are a club without a league to play in.

If all the clubs do it they won’t ban everyone, again though the real world and the courts would call that a restriction of trade and be deemed illegal. I’m sure more qualified folk than I will no doubt be able to give us more details. 
 

[JamboAl]

1 minute ago, Pasquale for King said:

Only by Football rules, they are not laws and can be challenged in the real world. Football players contracts are no different than yours or mine in the eyes of the law. 

In the final analysis we can simply go into liquidation and the employees will get next to nothing.

We can then go along to Ibrox for advice and start up the next day as a new club with all our old honours etc and pretend it did not happen.

[fabienleclerq]

56 minutes ago, Ted Hastings said:

 

Damour is a bit of a weird one, looked to have turned a bit of a corner in the last few games, thought he was very good in the derby. Would certainly have been a number of other names i would have picked before Damour in the cull list, and there isn't exactly a shortage of names to choose from after this sh*tshow of a season. 

 

Damour would be the first one I bounced. Woeful footballer, can't pass it 5 yards, turns like a tanker (which has cost us two goals alone) can't tackle, shits out of tackles. 

[Pasquale for King]

1 minute ago, JamboAl said:

In the final analysis we can simply go into liquidation and the employees will get next to nothing.

We can then go along to Ibrox for advice and start up the next day as a new club with all our old honours etc and pretend it did not happen.

Worst case scenario of course but Naismith could guide us on that 😜.

[TyphoonJambo]

Just now, fabienleclerq said:

 

Damour would be the first one I bounced. Woeful footballer, can't pass it 5 yards, turns like a tanker (which has cost us two goals alone) can't tackle, shits out of tackles. 

Totally agree, wouldn't bother me if i never seen that shiester in a hearts top ever again. That last gutless performance sealed it for me. 

[Jambof3tornado]

1 hour ago, alwaysthereinspirit said:

Not if the groundskeeper says no to 50%. 

Well he is at work and planning his next few weeks so pretty sure the mowers will keep on mowing!!

[graygo]

4 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said:

If all the clubs do it they won’t ban everyone, again though the real world and the courts would call that a restriction of trade and be deemed illegal. I’m sure more qualified folk than I will no doubt be able to give us more details. 
 

 

I'll agree with you again if you want, yes the contracts will not hold up in court. The football authorities would take a dim view to this though and any club ripping up contracts and ending up in court over it would find themselves in serious bother.

 

Edit: "If all club's do it" is a mutiny and would see football changed from top to bottom. 

Edited March 19, 2020 by graygo

[Pasquale for King]

2 minutes ago, fabienleclerq said:

 

Damour would be the first one I bounced. Woeful footballer, can't pass it 5 yards, turns like a tanker (which has cost us two goals alone) can't tackle, shits out of tackles. 

How can you say that? I’ve never seen him even make a tackle so **** knows how you can make that spurious accusation  😜.

[Busby8]

16 minutes ago, qferryjam said:

This is all a guessing game , no one knows what’s in the contracts except there is a relegation one in every contract at Hearts , there could also be an exceptional circumstances clause , we just don’t know 

 

It is all a guessing game, you are quite right.

 

However some of the debate on here is whether players have only 2 options ;- 50% cut or leave.

They don't.

They can just simply do nothing and sit tight with their current contract.

 

I'm not saying it's wise, I'm not saying it will help the club, in fact it definitely won't

And I don't know what the eventual outcome is likely to be if some choose that 3rd option.

The club may then decide on some other strategy to impose their will,.... but only after/if the players exercise that 3rd option

 

Bottom line is that right now, while the club are engaging with the players and asking them TO AGREE, the players have 3 choices, not 2.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited March 19, 2020 by Busby8

[Mr Elwood P]

53 minutes ago, AGoodLaugh said:

The **** people make up on here about contracts is unreal. If a player doesn't want to take a pay cut or leave the club, the only way to make them leave is to pay their contract off in full. 

Talking of making stuff up ...