|
|
Post by notoriousbigz on Oct 1, 2019 12:38:46 GMT
Technically if Royals didn’t want to pay them anymore they could just sack them. Not if they’ve entered into a contractual agreement with them stating they’ll pay them £X for X years. What do I know, I'm only a lawyer....
I'm told Hamilton is going through the FIBA mediation malarkey at the moment, so wait and see how that turns out.
|
|
|
|
Post by notoriousbigz on Oct 1, 2019 12:42:33 GMT
I think there are different issues for the two players. I had heard that MBA was actively looking for another BBL team over the summer(how absolutely accurate that is I don't know), therefore he must have known he wouldn't be back at Royals and is likely to be waiting final payment for last season. I also doubt he'll find anyone in the BBL will pay him remotely close to what he got last season. Despite his seeming lack of team play at times for Royals, I'd take him at Lions, I think Justin could control some of MBA's more selfish tendencies & he'd be a massive plus on our roster. I've not heard that Hamilton was looking anywhere else, so I'm guessing he thought he'd be back & Royals are trying to renege on any deal. I'm slightly confused by Bigz comments, surely you can't sack someone just because you don't want them to play for you anymore, otherwise any contract is pointless for the 1st 2 years. For an unfair or constructive dismissal claim you have to have the qualifying period (two years continuous employment) in order to be able to bring a claim before a tribunal in the UK.
The FIBA mediation process may be a way around that mind you - if they find one way then it becomes binding in a court.
Very fact sensitive mind.
|
|
|
|
Post by sussexbantam on Oct 1, 2019 12:49:37 GMT
I'm deleting this - as it may just be absolute tosh !
|
|
|
|
Post by saintpat on Oct 1, 2019 12:54:46 GMT
I think there are different issues for the two players. I had heard that MBA was actively looking for another BBL team over the summer(how absolutely accurate that is I don't know), therefore he must have known he wouldn't be back at Royals and is likely to be waiting final payment for last season. I also doubt he'll find anyone in the BBL will pay him remotely close to what he got last season. Despite his seeming lack of team play at times for Royals, I'd take him at Lions, I think Justin could control some of MBA's more selfish tendencies & he'd be a massive plus on our roster. I've not heard that Hamilton was looking anywhere else, so I'm guessing he thought he'd be back & Royals are trying to renege on any deal. I'm slightly confused by Bigz comments, surely you can't sack someone just because you don't want them to play for you anymore, otherwise any contract is pointless for the 1st 2 years. For an unfair or constructive dismissal claim you have to have the qualifying period (two years continuous employment) in order to be able to bring a claim before a tribunal in the UK.
The FIBA mediation process may be a way around that mind you - if they find one way then it becomes binding in a court.
Very fact sensitive mind.
Wow, so a 2 year contract means basically nothing! Is that just the UK or all over Europe? |
|
|
|
Post by notoriousbigz on Oct 1, 2019 12:58:19 GMT
I'm deleting this - as it may just be absolute tosh ! Theres no difference between fixed term or open ended - www.gov.uk/fixed-term-contracts/employees-rights
There's some basic info on tribunals - www.gov.uk/employment-tribunals
Like I say - if they can prove they've shown willing and turned up to practice etc theoretically they may be able to bring a claim for their employer simply not paying them.
If the employer sacked them on the spot for whatever reason - they'd be in more difficulty. The FIBA Tribunal may be their way around it though.
|
|
|
|
Post by notoriousbigz on Oct 1, 2019 13:00:31 GMT
For an unfair or constructive dismissal claim you have to have the qualifying period (two years continuous employment) in order to be able to bring a claim before a tribunal in the UK.
The FIBA mediation process may be a way around that mind you - if they find one way then it becomes binding in a court.
Very fact sensitive mind.
Wow, so a 2 year contract means basically nothing! Is that just the UK or all over Europe? Different countries have different tribunal laws - I don't know what it is anywhere else but yes, over here they're basically not worth all that much.
The cost of getting to a tribunal/small claims hearing (in the event a team has just not paid a player who's been playing) is also a stumbling block.
The death of the justice system in this country is not something I wish to go into now however - I have that argument most days in work!
|
|
|
|
Post by connors on Oct 1, 2019 14:48:43 GMT
I suspect a lawyer or HR professional would be able to explain the difference to us between a normal employment arrangement and a specific fixed term contract to hire the services of a professional (in this case sportsman).
As others have alluded to I do not believe they could just terminate the latter just because it is under 2 years old. It does sound a strange situation......
|
|
|
|
Post by notoriousbigz on Oct 1, 2019 14:54:40 GMT
I suspect a lawyer or HR professional would be able to explain the difference to us between a normal employment arrangement and a specific fixed term contract to hire the services of a professional (in this case sportsman). As others have alluded to I do not believe they could just terminate the latter just because it is under 2 years old. It does sound a strange situation...... Its there in black and white. I've dealt with more than my fair share of unfair dismissal claims in my time....
There's no difference unless the fixed term contract is on a sub-contracting basis - but I doubt it will be.
As I said, the key will be the FIBA arbitration clause - because I suspect their rules on these things are different to the UK law and probably more fit for purpose too - if they rule whatever's gone on is unfair then their decision becomes a binding contract in law and breach of the arbitration committee's rulings can be enforced.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2019 14:55:41 GMT
I think there are different issues for the two players. I had heard that MBA was actively looking for another BBL team over the summer(how absolutely accurate that is I don't know), therefore he must have known he wouldn't be back at Royals and is likely to be waiting final payment for last season. I also doubt he'll find anyone in the BBL will pay him remotely close to what he got last season. Despite his seeming lack of team play at times for Royals, I'd take him at Lions, I think Justin could control some of MBA's more selfish tendencies & he'd be a massive plus on our roster. I've not heard that Hamilton was looking anywhere else, so I'm guessing he thought he'd be back & Royals are trying to renege on any deal. I'm slightly confused by Bigz comments, surely you can't sack someone just because you don't want them to play for you anymore, otherwise any contract is pointless for the 1st 2 years. I've done HR in the past and in the first 2 years you can sack anyone without even having to give a reason. It's really **** |
|
|
|
Post by LTFan on Oct 1, 2019 15:50:56 GMT
I think there are different issues for the two players. I had heard that MBA was actively looking for another BBL team over the summer(how absolutely accurate that is I don't know), therefore he must have known he wouldn't be back at Royals and is likely to be waiting final payment for last season. I also doubt he'll find anyone in the BBL will pay him remotely close to what he got last season. Despite his seeming lack of team play at times for Royals, I'd take him at Lions, I think Justin could control some of MBA's more selfish tendencies & he'd be a massive plus on our roster. I've not heard that Hamilton was looking anywhere else, so I'm guessing he thought he'd be back & Royals are trying to renege on any deal. I'm slightly confused by Bigz comments, surely you can't sack someone just because you don't want them to play for you anymore, otherwise any contract is pointless for the 1st 2 years. I've done HR in the past and in the first 2 years you can sack anyone without even having to give a reason. It's really **** But surely the world of basketball works a little different to standard HR rules? In the world of entertainment (which I’m assuming sports better aligns to), if your company signs a contract with someone (say, a tv presenter) agreeing to pay them ‘£X per month for X years’ you can’t simply walk away from that deal within the first 2 years because you feel like it – you’d be breaking your part of the contract. The best scenario you could hope for would be jointly agreeing a sum to pay them off for the remainder of the contract. |
|
|
|
Post by notoriousbigz on Oct 1, 2019 16:20:23 GMT
I give up 😂
|
|
|
|
Post by benji on Oct 1, 2019 16:22:58 GMT
I've no legal background, but I tend to prefer the fact that the contract is intended to give some security of employment, if not, why does it even exist!
|
|
|
|
Post by boshspice on Oct 1, 2019 16:58:53 GMT
I would say this is all par for the course for the BBL. Not the most professional of leagues. This is far more common in Europe than here. Hersey is 100% correct with that statement. Since living on the continent I can say that I’ve witnessed a lot of unprofessional activity. For example, ex-Manchester big man Vlatko Granić has just joined a team that owes their star player from last year a whole heap of cash. Apparently they’ve gone for the classic ‘ignore’ tactic, ie every time he contacts them they give him the silent treatment and hope he won’t take it any further. It’s turning into a bit of a soap opera. One of the main ‘basketball’ things I’ve learned since relocating to Europe is that the BBL really ISN’T that unprofessional compared to other leagues. Badly updated websites, lack of communication with fans (there was no official press release when Scott Martin was released by Pardubice for example), players being essentially slandered when there actually IS a press release (a manager released a list of 6 points as to why one his players was totally unprofessional/ unemployable into the public domain- it was damning to say the least!), lack of live media coverage, players being unpaid are pretty regular occurrences. I’ve even witnessed a group of fans run onto the court in an attempt to intimidate referees and opposition players in the final period in a close game (no punishments were handed out). A further (and final example) of strange happenings and goings on, directly effected me recently. The team I was playing with in the lower tiers of Czech basketball gave me a summer workout plan etc, training dates and times. I turned up for training to find out that my team effectively no longer existed anymore and the management decided not to inform me/ a number of the other guys. You seriously couldn’t make it up. Makes for a great story, but also makes you wonder if it’s worth continuing to play in a structured team in the long run. Long of the short, the BBL is definitely not perfect, neither is it far less professional than some other top tier leagues in Europe. |
|
|
|
Post by 33bird on Oct 1, 2019 16:59:42 GMT
You'll find what's moral and what's legally enforceable in this country are quite often different things.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2019 18:30:14 GMT
This is far more common in Europe than here. For example, ex-Manchester big man Vlatko Granić has just joined a team that owes their star player from last year a whole heap of cash. Apparently they’ve gone for the classic ‘ignore’ tactic, ie every time he contacts them they give him the silent treatment and hope he won’t take it any further. It’s turning into a bit of a soap opera. Sounds familiar...  |
|
|
|
Post by notoriousbigz on Oct 1, 2019 19:20:32 GMT
I've no legal background, but I tend to prefer the fact that the contract is intended to give some security of employment, if not, why does it even exist! Mate we'd all prefer it. I'm just telling you what's what. |
|
|
|
Post by benji on Oct 1, 2019 20:58:34 GMT
I'm no expert, but the way I read this, from the government's web site, is that after 2 years, they can choose not to renew a contract as long as there's a fair reason for it. This doesn't appear to be the case here, it's not a renewal, it's in the middle of a contract.
"If a contract isn’t renewed
This is considered to be a dismissal, and if the employee has 2 years’ service the employer needs to show that there’s a ‘fair’ reason for not renewing the contract (eg, if they were planning to stop doing the work the contract was for).
Workers have the right:
not to be unfairly dismissed after 2 years’ service - for employees who were in employment before 6 April 2012, it’s 1 year’s service
to a written statement of reasons for not renewing the contract - after 1 year’s service"
However this is in the middle of a contract, which to me would imply that this part is rather more relevant:
"If the employer wants to end the contract earlier
What happens depends on the terms of the contract. If it says:
nothing about being ended early, the employer may be in breach of contract"
Unless a multiple year contract is considered to be not one contract, but a succession of annual contracts, in which case a renewal would be required at this point and a written statement is all that would be required.
|
|
|
|
Post by notoriousbigz on Oct 2, 2019 6:21:35 GMT
Ok I genuinely give up now.
Beleive what you want.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 2, 2019 7:08:11 GMT
Ok I genuinely give up now. Beleive what you want. It really couldn't be more clear mate, I dont understand why so many are struggling |
|
|
|
Post by connors on Oct 2, 2019 7:11:45 GMT
I suspect a lawyer or HR professional would be able to explain the difference to us between a normal employment arrangement and a specific fixed term contract to hire the services of a professional (in this case sportsman). As others have alluded to I do not believe they could just terminate the latter just because it is under 2 years old. It does sound a strange situation...... Its there in black and white. I've dealt with more than my fair share of unfair dismissal claims in my time....
There's no difference unless the fixed term contract is on a sub-contracting basis - but I doubt it will be.
As I said, the key will be the FIBA arbitration clause - because I suspect their rules on these things are different to the UK law and probably more fit for purpose too - if they rule whatever's gone on is unfair then their decision becomes a binding contract in law and breach of the arbitration committee's rulings can be enforced.
Good enough for me Bigz.....just goes to show the life of a jobbing pro sportsman is fraught with a lot of challenges just like the rest of us! |
|
|
|
Post by notoriousbigz on Oct 2, 2019 7:12:51 GMT
Ok I genuinely give up now. Beleive what you want. It really couldn't be more clear mate, I dont understand why so many are struggling The only shade of grey which would make it different to most employment contracts is the inclusion of the necessity for any disputes to go before FIBA's arbitration panel. Given both sides have agreed to that clause, they agree to be bound by the decision of the arbitration panel, which would then become a breach of contract case enforceable in a Court. Apparently that's where its going right now.
But Im not even getting into that when people cant understand a basic principle of unfair dismissal. Glad I'm not the only one though!
|
|
|
|
Post by notoriousbigz on Oct 2, 2019 7:16:06 GMT
Its there in black and white. I've dealt with more than my fair share of unfair dismissal claims in my time....
There's no difference unless the fixed term contract is on a sub-contracting basis - but I doubt it will be.
As I said, the key will be the FIBA arbitration clause - because I suspect their rules on these things are different to the UK law and probably more fit for purpose too - if they rule whatever's gone on is unfair then their decision becomes a binding contract in law and breach of the arbitration committee's rulings can be enforced.
Good enough for me Bigz.....just goes to show the life of a jobbing pro sportsman is fraught with a lot of challenges just like the rest of us! Bottom line is protection for any worker with under 2 years employment is absolute tosh. Its not fair, I don't think its morally right, but it is what it is. I remember the uproar when the Tory government changed the qualifying period from 1 year to 2 and ramped up the tribunal fees for Claimants - and still nothing was done. They quite simply don't want people kicking up a "fuss".
|
|
|
|
Post by sussexbantam on Oct 2, 2019 7:48:57 GMT
Thanks for the education Bigz. Not often you get something free from a lawyer !
Could you explain why football managers get huge pay-offs when they're sacked from their jobs ? I don't follow how that works given they have no employment rights until year 2 ?
|
|
|
|
Post by notoriousbigz on Oct 2, 2019 7:55:16 GMT
Thanks for the education Bigz. Not often you get something free from a lawyer ! Could you explain why football managers get huge pay-offs when they're sacked from their jobs ? I don't follow how that works given they have no employment rights until year 2 ? They have the financial power to demand guarantees written into the contract - they don't need the work and the clubs often go and head hunt them - if you want the guy you'll have to guarantee the contract. Not the case with basketball players at this level as they're generally ten a penny. As are regular jobs in the real world - if you don't accept the general terms there'll be someone else who will. Not the case for sought after football managers. And don't get me started on the NBA, as they're all centrally contracted to the league as I understand it. |
|
padaceth
Rookie
Posts: 65 
Favourite Team: Newcastle Eagles
|
Post by padaceth on Oct 2, 2019 8:12:47 GMT
I suspect a lawyer or HR professional would be able to explain the difference to us between a normal employment arrangement and a specific fixed term contract to hire the services of a professional (in this case sportsman). As others have alluded to I do not believe they could just terminate the latter just because it is under 2 years old. It does sound a strange situation...... Its there in black and white. I've dealt with more than my fair share of unfair dismissal claims in my time....
There's no difference unless the fixed term contract is on a sub-contracting basis - but I doubt it will be.
As I said, the key will be the FIBA arbitration clause - because I suspect their rules on these things are different to the UK law and probably more fit for purpose too - if they rule whatever's gone on is unfair then their decision becomes a binding contract in law and breach of the arbitration committee's rulings can be enforced.
Bigz is right, as a HR professional I left a job because whenever we had a problem with an employee the first words the board said were "have they been with us two year, if not sack them", the only way to take it to tribunal would be if there were grounds under one of the protected characteristics (race, gender etc etc) |
|
