Furloughing staff

Yid-ol

Just-in-Edinburgh
Joined
Jan 16, 2006
Messages
26,784
I would rather the stability of the club's future be the main concern and have things put in place now to give us the best chance of the club surviving. Yes it's shitty that the club sent paying the 20% extra.

Until the club's start getting income again via games or able to sell next season's season tickets all club's (even ones who make a profit) could go under.
 

1882andallthat

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2009
Messages
1,669
No the original poster is not alone, the action the board of this club have taken doesn't sit easily with me.
I will additionally say this, many on here have ridiculed Liverpool in the past on other things, me included, but one thing that their owners have done that sets them apart from our owners is that they have considered their decision, and in doing so they have listened to the majority of their fans and they have I believe taken a decision that is in accordance with the majority of their fans and decided to reverse their original decision and admit they were wrong. They did it with ticket prices too.

Our board have yet to do that. I'm taking a bit of a punt here because I don't profess to know everyone of our fans views, but I'm guessing that the decision to furlough non playing staff is not a decision that the majority of our fans agree with at all, maybe I've misunderstood our fanbase and I've got that wrong, but my gut instinct is that I'm not wrong on this point.

Do the majority of our fans views count for less than theirs ? They shouldn't, but according to Messrs Levy and Lewis they obviously do.

I've no doubt that there will be some on here that think that what I have just said means I'm uninformed and I'm ignorant and I'm too easily upset and I'm talking out of my arse. Before you come to that conclusion and post to this extent, consider the last paragraph after this.

On this matter, Liverpool's board have listened and considered their original decision and they have changed their mind and rightfully so in my opinion, and no one can change that perception or fact because the facts speak for themselves, loud and clear, and so too do the facts speak equally loud and clear in our board's case, but not in the same way I'm afraid to say....
 

Yid-ol

Just-in-Edinburgh
Joined
Jan 16, 2006
Messages
26,784
No the original poster is not alone, the action the board of this club have taken doesn't sit easily with me.
I will additionally say this, many on here have ridiculed Liverpool in the past on other things, me included, but one thing that their owners have done that sets them apart from our owners is that they have considered their decision, and in doing so they have listened to the majority of their fans and they have I believe taken a decision that is in accordance with the majority of their fans and decided to reverse their original decision and admit they were wrong. They did it with ticket prices too.

Our board have yet to do that. I'm taking a bit of a punt here because I don't profess to know everyone of our fans views, but I'm guessing that the decision to furlough non playing staff is not a decision that the majority of our fans agree with at all, maybe I've misunderstood our fanbase and I've got that wrong, but my gut instinct is that I'm not wrong on this point.

Do the majority of our fans views count for less than theirs ? They shouldn't, but according to Messrs Levy and Lewis they obviously do.

I've no doubt that there will be some on here that think that what I have just said means I'm uninformed and I'm ignorant and I'm too easily upset and I'm talking out of my arse. Before you come to that conclusion and post to this extent, consider the last paragraph after this.

On this matter, Liverpool's board have listened and considered their original decision and they have changed their mind and rightfully so in my opinion, and no one can change that perception or fact because the facts speak for themselves, loud and clear, and so too do the facts speak equally loud and clear in our board's case, but not in the same way I'm afraid to say....
On the daily running of the clubs finances and what's best for the club, I really hope the board don't listen to the fans otherwise we will be fucked.
 

coys200

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 22, 2017
Messages
8,436
Even taking morals out of it I’m just shocked Levy could get this so wrong purely on a business level. I know loads that were borderline renewing because of the football we were playing and Mourinho but this is the last straw for many. Many sponsors present and future will feel the same. Who wants to be associated with a brand that’s morally corrupt. I’m personally finding it hard to believe in and support a club that can be so lacking in compassion.
 

coys200

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 22, 2017
Messages
8,436
I would rather the stability of the club's future be the main concern and have things put in place now to give us the best chance of the club surviving. Yes it's shitty that the club sent paying the 20% extra.

Until the club's start getting income again via games or able to sell next season's season tickets all club's (even ones who make a profit) could go under.
You seriously think £2-3m is gonna be the difference between us going under or not. There’s absolutely no justification to use the furlough scheme none.
 

tototoner

Staying Alert
Joined
Mar 21, 2004
Messages
26,136
It's completely disgusting and we should reverse the decision immediately like Liverpool have done.

My enjoyment of following Tottenham took a massive knock when Mourinho replaced Pochettino. This is another knock - a moral one.
 
Last edited:

Yid-ol

Just-in-Edinburgh
Joined
Jan 16, 2006
Messages
26,784
You seriously think £2-3m is gonna be the difference between us going under or not. There’s absolutely no justification to use the furlough scheme none.
2-3 million can put places under. I'm not saying it will, but I would rather put stuff in place now to stop us going under than to do it last minute when it's too late. Other cost cutting could and I expect will be put on top, so the 2-3 million will go up.

Levy is a business man, and seems to be a great one IMO, he just let's himself down on the football side to release money to spend... But that's been down to us having less of a revenue in previous years to the bigger club's.
 

thekneaf

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2011
Messages
1,138
The PR line Levy has gone for its that everyone apart from the players is getting a 20% hit on salary, whether you're furloughed or not.

So for the higher earners, this is admirable given they're still working.

For lower earners it doesn't sit right and wouldn't even cost that much to top them up. But then it's quantifying who the staff are that can't carry the burden of a 20% reduction because of myriad reasons, childcare, single patent, main breadwinner...

For those frustrated by this, genuinely upset, start a petition and make some noise outside of this site. Ripping up your season ticket doesn't help that single mum or dad.

Oh, and everyone should join a union.
 

Monkey boy

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 18, 2011
Messages
4,543
It really doesn’t sit right with me either and I guess is just another stick for other people to beat us with which as a fan is the most hurtful thing of all.

What I still don’t understand is that if ALL non playing staff have been furloughed then how are we getting social media videos on a daily basis? Who is maintaining the pitch at the stadium, who is maintaining the training grounds, who is running the kitchens ensuring that the players are eating well (I know how ridiculous that sounds but Liverpool indicated they had someone doing this so assumed we were the same).
 

scat1620

L'espion mal fait
Joined
May 11, 2008
Messages
9,116
Didn't much like ENIC before any of this, and my opinion of them hasn't been raised any in the last month.
 

nferno

EarthVorm Jim
Joined
Jan 7, 2007
Messages
4,374
Any big business protecting their shareholders’ funds/stream of dividend income by enrolling staff on furlough is poor form in my opinion. It should be a grant for SMEs and a tiered hybrid grant/loan going up the business sizes.

the rich having some semblance of maintaining their lifestyle while the poor get poorer, that is what this is doing.

I don’t like how we are being unfairly targeted though, as if we’re the only club to do it.
 

CantSmileWithoutYou

Tit for Tat
Joined
May 20, 2015
Messages
1,565
I ask because we have an undergrad on a zero hours contract. He works when he has the time away from his uni and part time job. He’s been furloughed and the rules are explicit in that he is not allowed to earn anything.
Yes. You're not allowed to do any work for anyone (including your employers). Your employer can top up the 80% to 100% but you can't then "work from home" for that extra 20%.
My understanding was that being furloughed by one employer does not stop you working for another employer .
it does stop you. You may be fined an HMRC reserve the right to investigate. Unless of course you quit the job you are furloughed from.
I ask because we have an undergrad on a zero hours contract. He works when he has the time away from his uni and part time job. He’s been furloughed and the rules are explicit in that he is not allowed to earn anything.
Yes. You're not allowed to do any work for anyone (including your employers). Your employer can top up the 80% to 100% but you can't then "work from home" for that extra 20%.
My understanding was that being furloughed by one employer does not stop you working for another employer .
it does stop you. You may be fined an HMRC reserve the right to investigate. Unless of course you quit the job you are furloughed from.

Just to Clear this up for you.

1. If you are furloughed, you cannot work for your company AT ALL. You will receive 80% of wages up to 2.5k. Your company may choose to top up to 100%

2. One furloughed by your company. You can work elsewhere, for any amount of hours/earnings (e.g Tesco Delivery driver).
The only caveat to this, is if your main contract of employment, it states that you must not undertake any other forms of work, work for anyone else.

So, if you're furloughed, and your contract doesn't specifically say you can't, you can go get a temporary job elsewhere and collect you furlough money.
 

punky

ONE MICHAEL DAWSON!
Joined
Sep 23, 2008
Messages
6,652
How does the club's decision to furlough staff sit with you? Does it make a difference to how you feel about the club?

I'm not one for grandstanding or for taking the morale high ground just because I can but have to admit it sits really bad with me. Given the amount I have invested in supporting spurs (time,money etc) I always try to magnify the good and downplay the bad elements but finding it really hard to downplay this decision.

The club has made the highest profit ever in premier League and has 3 of the top 5 profits ever in the league, been profitable 7 years in a row, have restructured stadium debt so that it is not a noose around the club's neck and yet they can't pay 550 non playing staff their wage?!

Clubs that have nowhere near our financial strength are paying staff their full wages while we don't even top up the furlough payment to ensure they get their full salary.

I will think long and hard before traveling back to London, spending money In the stadium, club shop etc when all of this is over as it really has left a sour taste in mouth.

Am I alone in feeling a bit let down? I freely admit thats on me as I thought that the club I supported had better values than this but just wanted to see if others had views on this.
I've made my feelings clear how disgusted I am at Levy about this but boycotting the club, the shop, the tickets won't help. It will just end up punishing the staff as they'll make layoffs and punish other fans as there will be less money for transfers so we'll be less successful.

In my mind Levy isn't the club. Chairmen come and go just like players. The club is the club and remains. That's what we need to get behind for when football restarts.

Perhaps write to Levy and the club if you think it will help your conscience?
 

Vinny_Sammways_left_peg

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2014
Messages
8,826
Even taking morals out of it I’m just shocked Levy could get this so wrong purely on a business level. I know loads that were borderline renewing because of the football we were playing and Mourinho but this is the last straw for many. Many sponsors present and future will feel the same. Who wants to be associated with a brand that’s morally corrupt. I’m personally finding it hard to believe in and support a club that can be so lacking in compassion.
Really? Really? With those involved with the game globally, at the top no less, you think this one decision is going to put people off?

People banging on about morality ignoring all the dirty money that exists in this sport already and you question if people would think about throwing money at something they'd benefit from ...

The question you should be asking is if the money stays in the game if/when some semblance of normality resumes (which feels an awfully long way off as we stand currently)
 

Metalhead

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 24, 2013
Messages
15,877
The PR line Levy has gone for its that everyone apart from the players is getting a 20% hit on salary, whether you're furloughed or not.

So for the higher earners, this is admirable given they're still working.

For lower earners it doesn't sit right and wouldn't even cost that much to top them up. But then it's quantifying who the staff are that can't carry the burden of a 20% reduction because of myriad reasons, childcare, single patent, main breadwinner...

For those frustrated by this, genuinely upset, start a petition and make some noise outside of this site. Ripping up your season ticket doesn't help that single mum or dad.

Oh, and everyone should join a union.
It probably helps that they have pretty much one, single unified football forum so they can organise things and there may well be a sense of community around their club that has sadly dissipated at our club over the years. I know that their fans are irritating but clearly they are able to influence what happens at the club.
 
Last edited:

tototoner

Staying Alert
Joined
Mar 21, 2004
Messages
26,136
Even taking morals out of it I’m just shocked Levy could get this so wrong purely on a business level. I know loads that were borderline renewing because of the football we were playing and Mourinho but this is the last straw for many. Many sponsors present and future will feel the same. Who wants to be associated with a brand that’s morally corrupt. I’m personally finding it hard to believe in and support a club that can be so lacking in compassion.
exactly, we are meant to be a Global Brand now, how is this going to look for potential sponsors and potential Stadium Naming companies.

it's myopic penny pinching from ENIC which hurts the brand a lot more than the few millions saved
 

jay2040

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2012
Messages
999
It's completely disgusting and we should reverse the decision immediately like Liverpool have done.

My enjoyment of following Tottenham took a massive knock when Mourinho replaced Pochettino. This is another knock morally.
The problem is it is not a moral decision as it is a business decision.
You state that this is another knock morally, so was the first moral knock getting rid of Poch ?
 
Top