LayLay gets Compensation

LayLay gets Compensation

Apparently we weren't allowed to release him and have to pay out his salary.

Bugger

http://au.fourfourtwo.com/news/107978,phoenix-ordered-to-pay-G**.aspx

what a load of bloody nonsense. he was utterly useless for most of the time. what a waste of money (that we could be spending on another striker!!)

Tony P may be able to answer this - is there any appeal process avaliable? And if so will we be likely using it?

lol

scribbler2009-07-18 14:30:00

http://au.fourfourtwo.com/news/107978,phoenix-ordered-to-pay-Gao.aspx

I've fixed the link.
Arsenal2009-07-18 14:37:48

pretty lame - but perhaps he does deserve something. maybe two weeks pay...

Yeah a slap up the side of the head and a kick in the arse

50k, does that come out of the cap now?

Its punitive so its not a salary expense

Are you sure Uber?  I think it's an award of wages not paid, so would fall under the cap.

That's just money down the toilet. I wonder if we got some sort of advice on the ramifications of ripping up his contract, and if so who from. Obviously 20/20 hindsight but clubs need to be really sure of the legalities of their actions where contracts are concerned.

last years cap though surely

If they got advice it was probably from Sean O'Sullivan at DLA Phillips Fox.  He does Terry's employment work.

Not sure which cap it would come out of.  If last year's then who cares?  I suspect if they're aiming for a genuine punishment it will come out of this year's cap.

But its not the FFA punishing us, its an aussie court, so im assuming that when they say, we have to pay him compensation, it wouldnt specify where in the Nix's budget the money comes from.

i am bloody pissed off about this. it has ruined my morning. as if G** wasnt bad enough. I hate to be racist but I hate this little chinese bastard.

G**'s doing well out of Westpac ...

"A source close to the worker says she has been under intense scrutiny since the blunder in early May, when she missed the decimal point while formalising a $100,000 overdraft facility on G**'s account, leaving him with access to $10m.

G** managed to transfer $3.8m to an overseas account and fled to China with his girlfriend, Kara Hurring. His business partner, Huan Di Zhang, and mother, Lei G**, have also disappeared."

That is racist.  So please lay off it or we'll whack you with the banstick.

Hang on a second.

He didn't say all Chinese are bastards.  He didn't say I hate him because he's Chinese.  He stated that he is Chinese which is a fact and not a racist statement.

He didn't say anything racist, just inplies it.
The "I hate to be racist" comment doesn't help....

Oh I take it back then.

Carry on.  I hated that black bastard Cleberson too.  Not using black in a negative way of course, just descriptively.
Smithy2009-07-19 13:45:01

(Implies, not infers). Saying he hates the bastard is fine, but to reference in nationality raises questions of race. What puts the statement into the grey area was using G**'s nationality as a point of reference.

A bit rough on the Nix. If they terminated his contract because he wasn't meeting the required/desired standard, he would have been subject to compensation/contract pay out, but for breeching club rules etc, that is an act of discipline.

Nope, he's in China's second divsion (League One) with Beijing Hongdeng.

Well, that was a terrible mistake from the Club's point of view.

Had he was given procedural fairness, the cost would either be much smaller or that it would be found that he indeed has broken code of conduct and the club was fully justified in dismissing him with a break of contract and no cash

As it is, the club was not found to have done the matter appropriately and can't be fully justified in dismissal because there was no referring G** to the appropriate consult in employment law about his job termination.

So next time they have to be careful about how they follow things through the next time they terminate a players contract.

Frankly, I don't think the club can get out of this. Also they have to look at providing a package not to similar to redundancy type termination that would be relative to the amount of time the player was part of the club as well as to the relative salary of that player.

Any job termination that is not following NZ employment legislation laws is illegal. So G** should have in writing his 3 warnings (with signed signatures) about his conduct etc before any termination action of his contract if he had not change his behaviour conduct approprately within ample time and fairness.

Legally, he deserve the money owe to him, if procedures are not carried appropriately to give ample warning and time for the player to change his behaviour and conduct so he can fulfill his contract, then he is the victim in this case and the breach of contract is actually on the other foot i.e. the club were a breach of contract.

It sucks, I know, the whole idea is that fairness has to be done for both sides and all appropriate opportunities are made to resolve without termination. If the right procedure was not carried through, then it can be argued that G** could have still be a fledging club player that could finish his contract amicably when given appropriate time and help. If G** was having personal problems or conflict that impeded his performance and conduct as a club player then the club needs to take this account with special regards to that [not neccessary resolve it] during their job review/warning meetings with management. It is possible that G** hadn't been given much help at all with his problems and had very little time or advice.

On the face of it [since we will never get the full picture], it is very clear that the club was acting too quickly to give him the boot (actually at the time, I thought it was very quick termination out of the blue compared to Cleberson and George prolong stay on the sideline).

I think they should just payout him and end the sorry affair because it would be hard to overturn this type of revelation from the courts. Unless they have new evidence to say otherwise. It's not worth the cost of the lawyers.