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

[Seymour M Hersh]

24 minutes ago, Siphiwe Tshabalala said:

I’m embarrassed to be a Hearts supporter, with those players representing US.

 

If they want full pay throughout this crisis, I’m expecting them to win all remaining games without hesitation. Will that happen? No, no it won’t happen. 
 

Arseholes.

 

Another reason for you to observe the Govt. house arrest then. 

[Seymour M Hersh]

20 minutes ago, TheBigO said:

She's raisin a good point

 

A total fruit cake that one. 

[Nookie Bear]

And if you are really disgusted: don’t buy a Hearts season ticket. 👍🏻

[Last Laff]

5 hours ago, Smithee said:

I wonder about you sometimes, what Hearts fan doesnt know the benefactor's behind the STC deal?

The mystery benefactor aren’t just behind the sponsorship deal though are they? They’ve paid for loads of added extras over the past few years. 

[Fozzyonthefence]

30 minutes ago, Nookie Bear said:

Assuming the players take a cut then the clubs should stay open for business. Is that not the point?

If the English PL clubs can’t stay open for business I’ll have no sympathy for them given the obscene amounts of money they earn then spunk away on average players.

 

I’m not sure the players just taking a blanket 30% cut as the PL is suggesting I’d the best solution though.  That would only benefit the clubs although it would be good if they used that money to take their other staff of the JRS and save the taxpayer money.

 

However, I’d prefer they go down the route Jordan Henderson seems to be suggesting.  It would appear he and other players don’t simply want any wage cut to just benefit their rich employer - they want to have control over where it is going.  As has been pointed out, a straight forward 30% cut would cost the government millions in lost tax so if they were making that contribution directly to the NHS would that not be a better option?  The clubs may  say otherwise though as I’m not sure how they would benefit out of it or is there a more tax efficient way of doing it?

[Fozzyonthefence]

6 minutes ago, Nookie Bear said:

And if you are really disgusted: don’t buy a Hearts season ticket. 👍🏻

I won’t be. 

[Paint the town maroon]

I thought Ann spoke well. She cleared up the 30% v 50% thing. In hindsight i was wrong that I gave her a hard time on Friday for the confusion on this but it was clearer up quickly. 
 

She firmly put the emotional pressure back on the high paid players but I think we are all missing something here. None of these players were arm twisted or unfairly bullied to sign those lucrative deals. She admitted it was our salary approach and took the blame but CL must be part of this as well and not least the 4 year deal crap.

 

Every business is feeling it but in football terms it’s our own bloody fault that we overspent significantly on a shite bag group of players - so while we want the players to ‘repay’ some of that I am not sure they have any real obligation to do that when most of the other clubs are deferring.
 

 

[luckydug]

9 hours ago, Pasquale for King said:

She is going to furlough them, discussions go on to also take a 30% cut. Like all of us they will be expected to be ready to go back to work when it’s possible. Aberdeen seem to have their players phoning round ST holders asking them to renew, which is construed as work. 

The Aberdeen chappie is being advised that you can't furlough people who are either working or still getting paid. 

As Hearts players are still receiving a wage if he is correct that rules out topping up their wages with furlough payments. 

So if AB wants to cut the payroll by 50%

we are back to square one. 

Unless the Aberdeen lawyers are wrong of course. 

[Nookie Bear]

4 minutes ago, Fozzyonthefence said:

If the English PL clubs can’t stay open for business I’ll have no sympathy for them given the obscene amounts of money they earn then spunk away on average players.

 

I’m not sure the players just taking a blanket 30% cut as the PL is suggesting I’d the best solution though.  That would only benefit the clubs although it would be good if they used that money to take their other staff of the JRS and save the taxpayer money.

 

However, I’d prefer they go down the route Jordan Henderson seems to be suggesting.  It would appear he and other players don’t simply want any wage cut to just benefit their rich employer - they want to have control over where it is going.  As has been pointed out, a straight forward 30% cut would cost the government millions in lost tax so if they were making that contribution directly to the NHS would that not be a better option?  The clubs may  say otherwise though as I’m not sure how they would benefit out of it or is there a more tax efficient way of doing it?

Would you not have sympathy for the low paid workers who lose their jobs, as well as the local businesses who would suffer? 
 

The first aim of any business is to keep afloat and that is what is happening. If they can then use their wealth to directly impact on the current situation, then even better. But at the moment any cut in salaries now only really benefits club owners. 
 

However I don’t think the government can just apply a tax on a specific section of society and channel those funds to one purpose. That does not seem right - perhaps they can push through an emergency tax increase for anyone earning >£100k?

[Fozzyonthefence]

27 minutes ago, Nookie Bear said:

Keeping fit for a non-professional is not a basic requirement of their role so it doesn’t matter if they are training or not. 
 

I expect most footballers - even Hearts - are professional enough to keep training as much as they can but, if they are not deemed to be working then don’t be surprised to see a few extra pounds in weight when they return. 

I don’t think it will matter whether they are deemed to be working or not as to what shape they come back in.  That’s just terminology.  The ones with the right attitudes will come back in reasonably good shape (albeit not match fit), the ones with bad attitudes will come back  unfit.  I’d hazard a guess that the St Mirren and Hamilton players will generally come back in better shape than ours.

[DETTY29]

46 minutes ago, TheBigO said:

She's raisin a good point

I'd add in any super wealthy politicians  including House of Lords and party donors with businesses doing similar or worse, registering businesses and hiding wealth offshore in tax havens to avoid paying 10s and 10s of billions of pounds to HMRC every year.

 

Of course we have been told not to dare criticise the government during this crisis as we are all in it together.

[Nookie Bear]

2 minutes ago, luckydug said:

The Aberdeen chappie is being advised that you can't furlough people who are either working or still getting paid. 

As Hearts players are still receiving a wage if he is correct that rules out topping up their wages with furlough payments. 

So if AB wants to cut the payroll by 50%

we are back to square one. 

Unless the Aberdeen lawyers are wrong of course. 

He may be right. If you are being furloughed then you cannot be expected to carry out your job in any way, I think?

 

Havjng said that, I imagine many people are savvy enough to try to keep working from home in that situation as long as their company pays the 20% shortfall?

[Fozzyonthefence]

7 minutes ago, Paint the town maroon said:

I thought Ann spoke well. She cleared up the 30% v 50% thing. In hindsight i was wrong that I gave her a hard time on Friday for the confusion on this but it was clearer up quickly. 
 

She firmly put the emotional pressure back on the high paid players but I think we are all missing something here. None of these players were arm twisted or unfairly bullied to sign those lucrative deals. She admitted it was our salary approach and took the blame but CL must be part of this as well and not least the 4 year deal crap.

 

Every business is feeling it but in football terms it’s our own bloody fault that we overspent significantly on a shite bag group of players - so while we want the players to ‘repay’ some of that I am not sure they have any real obligation to do that when most of the other clubs are deferring.
 

 

From what AB said, it is the SPFL clubs that currently have no obligation to pay the players.  For those players that are getting 100% of their wages deferred they must think Christmas has come early.

[TheBigO]

3 minutes ago, DETTY29 said:

I'd add in any super wealthy politicians  including House of Lords and party donors with businesses doing similar or worse, registering businesses and hiding wealth offshore in tax havens to avoid paying 10s and 10s of billions of pounds to HMRC every year.

 

Of course we have been told not to dare criticise the government during this crisis as we are all in it together.

I was just making a dried fruit pun, mate.

 

Don't disagree though!

[Fozzyonthefence]

3 minutes ago, Nookie Bear said:

He may be right. If you are being furloughed then you cannot be expected to carry out your job in any way, I think?

 

Havjng said that, I imagine many people are savvy enough to try to keep working from home in that situation as long as their company pays the 20% shortfall?

I think the bigger issue for Hearts is not whether the players are still deemed to be working but that apparently they can’t be on reduced pay either.  Surely that rules out a significant number of the first team squad from being furloughed, despite AB saying that all footballing staff would be.  If she / her lawyers have got this wrong it will be very embarrassing for her.  

[JamboAl]

45 minutes ago, Nookie Bear said:

I am sure it can be reviewed over the time and then bigger cuts are enforced. And out of contract players will be released etc 

AB is already reviewing it "over the time".  Firstly ASKING for a 50% cut, then, with furlough, reducing that cut to around 30%.  It seems to me she is working on something like a 3 months lay-off but if it becomes apparent that it will take much longer I would expect, and so would common sense, that her sums will be adjusted accordingly.   The one thing for sure is that we cannot keep paying (even reduced) salaries indefinitely with no revenue coming in.  Suspended salaries remain an option.

Some out of contract players would have been out of the door anyway but I suspect there will be more now.  She offered players the option of tearing up their contracts recently and I'd be surprised if that offer was not still on the table at the end of the season to (some) players who are not out of contract at the end of the season.  I think it will be a long time before we run with such big staff numbers again unless they are income generating staff.

[SectionDJambo]

25 minutes ago, Last Laff said:

The mystery benefactor aren’t just behind the sponsorship deal though are they? They’ve paid for loads of added extras over the past few years. 

As did Strongbow.

It's not unusual for any club's sponsors to give extra help, as and when they can. Especially if they are happy with how a club is being run and the sponsorship is attracting positive feedback for them.

[The Real Maroonblood]

1 hour ago, TheBigO said:

She's raisin a good point

Especially in the currant situation.

[Fozzyonthefence]

15 minutes ago, Nookie Bear said:

Would you not have sympathy for the low paid workers who lose their jobs, as well as the local businesses who would suffer? 
 

The first aim of any business is to keep afloat and that is what is happening. If they can then use their wealth to directly impact on the current situation, then even better. But at the moment any cut in salaries now only really benefits club owners. 
 

However I don’t think the government can just apply a tax on a specific section of society and channel those funds to one purpose. That does not seem right - perhaps they can push through an emergency tax increase for anyone earning >£100k?

I would have a bit sympathy for them yes, but no more so than for any other low paid workers losing their jobs.

 

As I said, il not sure what the best way to do it is but I’d rather see the players cuts going direct to the NHS or other deserving cases of their choice rather than just a saving to the clubs.

[Nookie Bear]

3 minutes ago, JamboAl said:

AB is already reviewing it "over the time".  Firstly ASKING for a 50% cut, then, with furlough, reducing that cut to around 30%.  It seems to me she is working on something like a 3 months lay-off but if it becomes apparent that it will take much longer I would expect, and so would common sense, that her sums will be adjusted accordingly.   The one thing for sure is that we cannot keep paying (even reduced) salaries indefinitely with no revenue coming in.  Suspended salaries remain an option.

Some out of contract players would have been out of the door anyway but I suspect there will be more now.  She offered players the option of tearing up their contracts recently and I'd be surprised if that offer was not still on the table at the end of the season to (some) players who are not out of contract at the end of the season.  I think it will be a long time before we run with such big staff numbers again unless they are income generating staff.

Yeah I can see that although - and this has been my issue with her approach from Day 1 - is that no footballer is going to agree to a termination at this time without a substantial part of their contract being paid up. 

[luckydug]

5 hours ago, Smithee said:

I wonder about you sometimes, what Hearts fan doesnt know the benefactor's behind the STC deal?

Sometimes ! 

He's just a nuisance who's only aim is to disrupt threads. 

Takes the contrary position on everything just for the sake of it. 

I would normally accept he is entitled to his opinion but he doesn't actually have an opinion, just the opposite to the majority view, ALL THE TIME. 

 

[JamboAl]

1 hour ago, Nookie Bear said:

I am sure it can be reviewed over the time and then bigger cuts are enforced. And out of contract players will be released etc 

It IS being reviewed, hence the on offer reduction from 50% to 30%ish

[RonnieG]

Not sure if its mentioned on the tread but i read that a lot of the german teams have gone back to training.  In pairs only for now, with distancing etc.    I will not be surprised to see UK teams - especially in Scotland - follow this.  Lockdown all of April. Then a controlled return to pre lockdown with the usual advisements in place.    Obv just my opinion. 

[luckydug]

1 hour ago, Fozzyonthefence said:

Lots of non professional sportsmen / women will be keeping fit at home.  Doesn’t mean they are working and clearly AB / her legal advisers don’t think so either or they wouldn’t be trying to furlough all playing staff since they wouldn’t qualify if they were deemed to be working.

According to Aberdeen FC lawyers people can't receive furlough payments if they are receiving a wage. 

Hearts players will be receiving a wage. 

If article 12 is enacted THEN they can receive Govt help. 

Makes sense actually and a much fairer use of taxpayer's cash imo. 

[JamboAl]

3 minutes ago, Nookie Bear said:

Yeah I can see that although - and this has been my issue with her approach from Day 1 - is that no footballer is going to agree to a termination at this time without a substantial part of their contract being paid up. 

Dikamona already has - but still wants to come back.

Another thing to consider is that a contract is a two way street.  There may be players who would want to leave but can't because they are handcuffed under the terms of their contract.   Things will definitely be different when we return and some players, especially foreign, may see a brighter future in their homeland as opposed to sitting on a cold bench in Scotland on a Saturday afternoon.

[Nookie Bear]

3 minutes ago, JamboAl said:

Dikamona already has - but still wants to come back.

Another thing to consider is that a contract is a two way street.  There may be players who would want to leave but can't because they are handcuffed under the terms of their contract.   Things will definitely be different when we return and some players, especially foreign, may see a brighter future in their homeland as opposed to sitting on a cold bench in Scotland on a Saturday afternoon.

Clevids contract was up at the end of May, although that is not belittling his actions. 
 

I cant see many players chancing their luck as free agents in the current climate, especially if a choice between doing nothing with no salary or getting paid to sit in an Edinburgh flat doing nothing!

 

Some transfers will still happen but we are in the world of free agents and secure contracts are gold dust and not given up easily. 

[Jambotillidie90]

I hope Berra taking a cut when his Mrs showing off fourteen hundred quid shoes in a Scottish wedding magazine that my wife showed me. Disgraceful.

[Mikey1874]

2 hours ago, Nookie Bear said:

Is that not true, though?

 

Cutting wages and ensuring support staff get full salaries only serves to minimise the loss to the club. Unless the clubs are literally writing a cheque to the NHS the money saved does not benefit anyone but the club. 
 

I don’t believe that an EPL club should be using government money to pay their support staff at this time, however. They can afford to maintain their salaries for some time. 

 

90% tax on EPL wages, say above their average wage of £3 million would build a few hospitals. 

[Fozzyonthefence]

19 minutes ago, luckydug said:

According to Aberdeen FC lawyers people can't receive furlough payments if they are receiving a wage. 

Hearts players will be receiving a wage. 

If article 12 is enacted THEN they can receive Govt help. 

Makes sense actually and a much fairer use of taxpayer's cash imo. 

We’ll soon find out who is wrong then - the Aberdeen lawyers or the Hearts lawyers.

 

Re Article 12,  AB is not suspending players wages yet, she said she is going to furlough all players and said that nobody would be taking more than a 30% cut.  Going by the Aberdeen lawyers, and extracts the panel were reading from the GRS, I’m struggling to see how our bigger earners would qualify.

[JamboAl]

44 minutes ago, Nookie Bear said:

Yeah I can see that although - and this has been my issue with her approach from Day 1 - is that no footballer is going to agree to a termination at this time without a substantial part of their contract being paid up. 

Dikamona already has!

[ri Alban]

1 hour ago, XB52 said:

100% correct

I have BT for UFC. I don't mind fighters earning a fortune.

[gashauskis9]

2 hours ago, Nookie Bear said:

But it’s only football that is getting the attention, because everyone has been looking for this opportunity to give it a kick for some time. Which is Fair enough!

 

Personally I would be going after anyone involved in finance  earning >£100k - it’s payback time - and anyone involved in holistic therapies 😁

I agree

[Tatlock]

Regards the furlough situation and keeping fit. As it was explained to me by a legally qualified friend of mine, the situation is apparently as follows. If the Club creates a specific training program which they then issue to players to work on during their furlough period or if they request that monitoring equipment stats are regularly transferred from the player to club officials, then they are continuing to work for their employer and therefore cannot claim to be furloughed. If they are told by their employer to keep themselves fit until they return to employment and stats are only recorded on their return to work then they ARE on furlough. The difference is quite clear. Do X and we’ll be monitoring or do Y and it’s your personal responsibility to keep fit and we’ll see you when you get back. 

[Mikey1874]

3 minutes ago, Tatlock said:

Regards the furlough situation and keeping fit. As it was explained to me by a legally qualified friend of mine, the situation is apparently as follows. If the Club creates a specific training program which they then issue to players to work on during their furlough period or if they request that monitoring equipment stats are regularly transferred from the player to club officials, then they are continuing to work for their employer and therefore cannot claim to be furloughed. If they are told by their employer to keep themselves fit until they return to employment and stats are only recorded on their return to work then they ARE on furlough. The difference is quite clear. Do X and we’ll be monitoring or do Y and it’s your personal responsibility to keep fit and we’ll see you when you get back. 

 

Yeah.

 

And I think Aberdeen have their players doing work for the club like phoning fans. 

 

That's partly why Leeds United for example haven't put anyone on furlough. 

Edited April 5, 2020 by Mikey1874

[Italian Lambretta]

1 hour ago, RonnieG said:

Not sure if its mentioned on the tread but i read that a lot of the german teams have gone back to training.  In pairs only for now, with distancing etc.    I will not be surprised to see UK teams - especially in Scotland - follow this.  Lockdown all of April. Then a controlled return to pre lockdown with the usual advisements in place.    Obv just my opinion. 

Sadly i think Wee Jimmy Krankie will have us cooped up in our houses until next year. 

 

 

[luckydug]

1 hour ago, Fozzyonthefence said:

I would have a bit sympathy for them yes, but no more so than for any other low paid workers losing their jobs.

 

As I said, il not sure what the best way to do it is but I’d rather see the players cuts going direct to the NHS or other deserving cases of their choice rather than just a saving to the clubs.

The whole idea of the cuts is so the club can survive this crisis. 

I hope you are referring to the mega rich EPL clubs and not struggling Scottish clubs like Hearts. 🤔 

[luckydug]

18 minutes ago, Tatlock said:

Regards the furlough situation and keeping fit. As it was explained to me by a legally qualified friend of mine, the situation is apparently as follows. If the Club creates a specific training program which they then issue to players to work on during their furlough period or if they request that monitoring equipment stats are regularly transferred from the player to club officials, then they are continuing to work for their employer and therefore cannot claim to be furloughed. If they are told by their employer to keep themselves fit until they return to employment and stats are only recorded on their return to work then they ARE on furlough. The difference is quite clear. Do X and we’ll be monitoring or do Y and it’s your personal responsibility to keep fit and we’ll see you when you get back. 

What about the bit that says people can't be furloughed if they are earning a

wage ? 

Our players will still be getting a wage. 

[luckydug]

4 minutes ago, Italian Lambretta said:

Sadly i think Wee Jimmy Krankie will have us cooped up in our houses until next year. 

 

 

As will Boris. 

It's a four nation approach. 

 

[Mikey1874]

Ron Gordon confirming in papers today that Hibs players will be paid back in full. 

[Ricardo Shillyshally]

Just now, Mikey1874 said:

Ron Gordon confirming in papers today that Hibs players will be paid back in full. 

Good. It will cost them a lot of money to do that.

[busby1985]

The EPL is making a total fool of itself over this virus and it’s selfishness. Burnley now telling us how much money they’ll lose in broadcasting money and match day revenue if the games are played behind closed doors. Liverpool have the cheek to furlough staff along with Newcastle and Spurs. I really hope when the dust settles from all this, we see the EPL bubble burst. A total out of touch monster which has lost all aspects of reality. 

[Mikey1874]

2 minutes ago, Ricardo Shillyshally said:

Good. It will cost them a lot of money to do that.

 

And it makes it harder for Hibs to move to player wage cuts the more they go on about paying it all back. 

[TheBigO]

1 minute ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

And it makes it harder for Hibs to move to player wage cuts the more they go on about paying it all back. 

Yup. What if there's no attended football til October or January or something?

 

And there's the elephant in the room of the furlough scheme being used for staff but players being paid in full. Surely a company wide stance such as at Hearts is more moral on all counts?

[Pasquale for King]

2 hours ago, luckydug said:

The Aberdeen chappie is being advised that you can't furlough people who are either working or still getting paid. 

As Hearts players are still receiving a wage if he is correct that rules out topping up their wages with furlough payments. 

So if AB wants to cut the payroll by 50%

we are back to square one. 

Unless the Aberdeen lawyers are wrong of course. 

Yeah I heard him say that and I hope he is wrong because I’m getting the extra 20% myself. All the Aberdeen players are doing is phoning round ST holders trying to get then to renew, what ruse can they do.

Budge said that she would use furlough and use 30% cuts to pay the players if they agree. 

[DETTY29]

Some tweets from Derek Rae from a German and USA perspective.

 

German advice is that behind closed doors possible but players need to be in permanent lock down  away from families and so on.  And staff and officials.

 

Its been pretty much credited that the Germans are miles ahead if the curve in terms of approach and resources compared to UK.

 

Ignore USA, their President is a cretin.

 

 

 

Edited April 5, 2020 by DETTY29

[Hungry hippo]

25 minutes ago, luckydug said:

What about the bit that says people can't be furloughed if they are earning a

wage ? 

Our players will still be getting a wage. 

 

The government website says furloughed employees can have wages topped up by employers so I believe we are correct.

 

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/claim-for-wage-costs-through-the-coronavirus-job-retention-scheme

 

 

[Tatlock]

27 minutes ago, luckydug said:

What about the bit that says people can't be furloughed if they are earning a

wage ? 

Our players will still be getting a wage. 

I believe it’s an either or situation. If players are on furlough, the government pays 80%of their wages up to a maximum of £2,500 per month. If they earn over that then hearts are offering to pay 70% of their existing salary. The choice for the players is take 70% if that’s more then furlough pay or go on furlough and take the lower amount. Some players get it but others who want it deferred Don’t give a stuff about the club and should be hounded out at the first opportunity.

[Fozzyonthefence]

38 minutes ago, luckydug said:

The whole idea of the cuts is so the club can survive this crisis. 

I hope you are referring to the mega rich EPL clubs and not struggling Scottish clubs like Hearts. 🤔 

Yes I was referring to EPL and I know the proposed cuts are designed to help the clubs.  However, it would appear that some of the players would like this money to go elsewhere.

[Pasquale for King]

24 minutes ago, Hungry hippo said:

 

The government website says furloughed employees can have wages topped up by employers so I believe we are correct.

 

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/claim-for-wage-costs-through-the-coronavirus-job-retention-scheme

 

 

Looks like the Aberdeen owners lawyers are complete idiots who can’t use google 😃😆. He is based in the US so at best he might think the rules are the same over here.

Edited April 5, 2020 by Pasquale for King

[Pasquale for King]

27 minutes ago, DETTY29 said:

Some tweets from Derek Rae from a German and USA perspective.

 

German advice is that behind closed doors possible but players need to be in permanent lock down  away from families and so on.  And staff and officials.

 

Its been pretty much credited that the Germans are miles ahead if the curve in terms of approach and resources compared to UK.

 

Ignore USA, their President is a cretin.

 

 

 

The Aberdeen owner said the US owners are looking at playing behind closed doors this winter. The golf authorities have different plans for the majors and the Ryder Cuo to be played in September-November possibly behind closed doors too. Stendel mentioned in Germany they think it will be a year without fans in stadiums.