Furloughing staff

[Phomesy]

They obviously feel that the club making the most profit in the country, should not be cutting the wages of all non-playing staff, many of them their friends by 20%.
They feel that the club that is making the most profit in the League, and that the owners, one of them the 9th richest Briton in the world, should not be trying to "profiteer" out of the global pandemic.
They will feel that if there is a short term cashflow issue, the owners should be propping up the club, however they would be prepared to help if the club reverse their previously made decisions.
Did the owners pass the record profits back to the players/staff, no, so why should they feel compelled to help out the owners, when the owners have shown that all they care about is money ?

So you are inferring (or imputing) their motives but don't actually know them? Have I got that correct?

Again I refer you to the measures taken in the Australian Rules Football League. A sport much better placed to resume some form of economic activity in the next year.

Our future is not under any immediate threat whatsoever, we have best balance sheet in the land, unless this thing is still here for the next 5 years, at which stage there will be no football, and the world will be in hyper-inflation and it will be survival of the fittest and battlefields on the streets.

5 years?

That's how long you think any business has contingency plans for? Has reserves in place for?

Are you fucking insane?

If this thing goes for more than 6 MONTHS half the clubs in the country will cease to exist unless they've taken action to reduce their outgoings and taken whatever Govt assistance is on offer.

Don't you fucking get it? No football = no TV money = no crowds = no revenue =no sponsorship = EVERYTHING DIES.

Smaller clubs are actually better placed to deal with this as they they have lower overheads but EVERYONE IS FUCKED until football can start again and WE DON'T KNOW WHEN THAT WILL BE.

So all this holier than thou shit is just simply useless bollocks screaming into the void.

Again I REFER YOU TO AUSTRALIAN RULES. Check out the measures taken there. See how they've recognised what the problems are.

If we have a short-term cashflow issue, ENIC need to (and will be forced to) step up and invest.

We already have a cashflow problem. It began the minute the United game was cancelled.

The very fact you don't get this, is part of the problem.

Unless something extraordinary happens in treatment or vaccine in the next six months the players will be taking a %100 pay cut because there will be no fucking teams left to play for. except perhaps in China.

 

[coys200]

You are beyond belief.
Just type in West Ham rights issue on the internet, and then feel free to apologise.

Fuck it, just keep living in your make belief world, you are giving Lighty64 a run for his money

I guarantee you a West Ham rights issue won’t happen. There’s a massive amount of PR in that statement. There’s definitely an element of Brady trying to make Levy look bad. Which tbh isn’t tough right now, but GSB are just awful liars.

 

[Trotter]

So you are inferring (or imputing) their motives but don't actually know them? Have I got that correct?

Again I refer you to the measures taken in the Australian Rules Football League. A sport much better placed to resume some form of economic activity in the next year.



5 years?

That's how long you think any business has contingency plans for? Has reserves in place for?

Are you fucking insane?

If this thing goes for more than 6 MONTHS half the clubs in the country will cease to exist unless they've taken action to reduce their outgoings and taken whatever Govt assistance is on offer.

Don't you fucking get it? No football = no TV money = no crowds = no revenue =no sponsorship = EVERYTHING DIES.

Smaller clubs are actually better placed to deal with this as they they have lower overheads but EVERYONE IS FUCKED until football can start again and WE DON'T KNOW WHEN THAT WILL BE.

So all this holier than thou shit is just simply useless bollocks screaming into the void.

Again I REFER YOU TO AUSTRALIAN RULES. Check out the measures taken there. See how they've recognised what the problems are.




We already have a cashflow problem. It began the minute the United game was cancelled.

The very fact you don't get this, is part of the problem.

Unless something extraordinary happens in treatment or vaccine in the next six months the players will be taking a %100 pay cut because there will be no fucking teams left to play for. except perhaps in China.

Over-dramatic or what.

In respect of our players, OK I know one of them, not a first-teamer (more than happy to get that verified), this is collective feeling amongst them.

In respect of Aussie Rules football, which you seem to mention a lot, but nobody over here knows what they are doing, you haven't told us, just keep telling people to refer to it, all I can see is they have postponed season until May 31 - Enlighten me if anything else.

5 years, obviously that was hyperbole, I was basically saying if this thing was here in 5 years, football would be a distant memory and the last things on anyone's mind.
However there is no getting away from the fact that our balance sheet is the healthiest in the land, our owners are some of the richest people in the world, we are in a better position to ride this out than almost every club.
Our club has distanced itself from the rest of the football community over the last couple of weeks by its actions, and that doesn't sit well with the players. The players will force Levy's hand, they hold all the cards, they have long-term unbreakable multi million pound contracts.
Clubs are taking actions now, in the belief we will be back up and running in next few months (whether that happens, nobody knows at this stage)

 

[Phomesy]

Over-dramatic or what.

I had to get your attention as you were busy pompously deriding other posters like you know every fucking thing which you clearly don't.

In respect of our players, OK I know one of them, not a first-teamer (more than happy to get that verified), this is collective feeling amongst them.

So you are absolutely sure they are following a collective agreement based on ensuring the best outcome for low paid full time staff at spurs while simultaneously refusing to reduce their wage bill in protest at Levy's actions - even though it's first team wages that are one of the largest expenses Spurs faces? Which is the biggest threat to those low paid staff having a job at all?

DO you see the problem here? Maybe you could explain it to your non first team mate who could pass it onto the guys who earn the big bucks?

In respect of Aussie Rules football, which you seem to mention a lot, but nobody over here knows what they are doing, you haven't told us, just keep telling people to refer to it, all I can see is they have postponed season until May 31 - Enlighten me if anything else.

It takes a minute of googling but if you're too fucking lazy to educate yourself rather than shitting on people who do here's a link describing how players will take a pay cut up to %70 depending on the length of the crisis.

AFLPA and AFL reach agreement on response to COVID-19

The AFL and AFLPA today reached agreement on a deal for players to take a reduction in their salary for the rest of the year of up to 70 per cent as a response to the COVID-19 crisis.

www.aflplayers.com.au

I'll let you take the time to see how many staff Clubs have laid off just to hope the sport can survive.

And this is a sport much more "socialised" that EPL. Which is to say I'll be keeping my AFL club membership regardless of whether there is any footy played.

5 years, obviously that was hyperbole, I was basically saying if this thing was here in 5 years, football would be the last things on anyone's mind.

Daniel Levy's job is to make the club survive until 2022. That's not hyperbole.

This thing is here longer than July. The moment this reality hits the other clubs is the moment panic sets in.

However there is no getting away from the fact that our balance sheet is the healthiest in the land, our owners are some of the richest people in the world, we are in a better position to ride this out than almost every club.

You just ignore everything I wrote in my post. Our balance sheet is great in "ordinary circumstances".

These are NOT "ordinary circumstances".

Our wonderful new stadium is currently a massive fucking white whale which will not be used for the foreseeable future.

Do you get that? Everything we currently do - everyone we employ - is based on 60, 000 people coming to that stadium at least once a week.

At least ONCE a WEEK.

That might not happen for a YEAR.

Our club has distanced itself from the rest of the football community over the last couple of weeks by its actions, and that doesn't sit well with the players.

I don't think you, the "rest of the football community" or "the players" have quite realised what is actually going on - and will continue to "go on" with this pandemic.

The only way football starts with fans attending in the 12 months is with the consent of the population that "people will die".

Do you see that consent happening any time soon?

The players will force Levy's hand.

The players will take the same cut as Aussie rules players have or never have a job again.

Unless they go to China.

And that would be very honourable of them wouldn't it?

Clubs are taking actions now, in the belief we will be back up and running in next few months (whether that happens, nobody knows at this stage)

We do know. It won't happen.

Aussie Rules might re-start sport again by the end of the year - but only behind closed doors. And Australia has been able to manage this outbreak far better (as in limiting deaths/containing spread). even that is a very optimistic outlook at this stage.

Barring some amazing breakthrough or the virus bizarrely burning out (it's not if you look at Singapore) all mass sporting gatherings are off until a vaccine.

Any club believing we are up and running in a few months is delusional.

And will go broke.

 

[Phomesy]

Just to reiterate - I hope I'm wrong.

I pray I'm wrong (and I'm not religious)

I wish to all my heart that we look back on this and go "Gee, Levy - what a ****. Imagine being such a **** like that and anyone who thought he should be a **** like that"

That would be my preferred outcome.

But right now I don't see any game being played in front of spectators at NWHL until August 2021 at the earliest.

Hope I'm wrong

 

[Trotter]

Just to reiterate - I hope I'm wrong.

I pray I'm wrong (and I'm not religious)

I wish to all my heart that we look back on this and go "Gee, Levy - what a ****. Imagine being such a **** like that and anyone who thought he should be a **** like that"

That would be my preferred outcome.

But right now I don't see any game being played in front of spectators at NWHL until August 2021 at the earliest.

Hope I'm wrong

I hope you are wrong also, but also I think that your comparison are totally distorted from an economic point of view at the moment.
Premier League, three quarters of the season through, that money in the bank, and by far the greatest income stream. From our point of view Champions League money earned, 3/4 of a season of sponsorship monies earned. Those games were played with full crowds. Clubs could put out a competitive PL team with no crowd. If we fulfil the TV contract we will still make profit in the 2019-20 season, and if we don't fulfil it have plenty of reserves to fall back on in short term, and rich shareholders that would have no option but invest to protect their asset, assuming football is still an ongoing business when the pandemic is over, some players contracts coming to end in less than 3 months time etc.
Clubs budget from season to season, we have already earned maybe 85% of our season's money.

Whereas Aussie Rules, not started (well 1 game behind closed doors), clubs nowhere near as dependent on the TV money as they are the spectator income in comparison, but they have had neither so far, and don't know when they will start earning at least the TV portion of it, and quite likely won't get any spectator income for the season

It all really comes down to when we can start playing again, to fulfil the TV contract and sponsorship agreements, the crowd is of secondary importance to Premier League clubs finances. Working assumption is some time, probably back-end of June this year, but we will see.

If government advice is no gatherings until say 12 months down the line, then nobody would have an issue with the club using the scheme, but still would about the wage reductions, when it is for a couple of months, it is seen as penny-pinching by clubs that are basically rolling in cash.

I would compare PL more to Baseball in respect of TV to spectator income generation percentage, just read they are planning on starting behind closed doors in May, and see no mention of players having salaries reduced.

In respect of clubs going under, I think some will (Southend and Macclesfield would be the likeliest) and if this whole situation goes to a general decrease in extortionate player wages and ridiculous transfer fees (what other business have massive balance sheet values attributed to their staff) then something worthwhile will have come out of it.

 

[spursfan77]

The Trust have explained what the club have told them about the non playing staff, it seems we are topping up the 20% of the furloughed staff (although I haven’t seen that reported in the media) have I read that right?

Edit: I just reread it. I’m obviously still half asleep. The club won’t change this approach after reading this:

CLARIFYING THE STAFFING SITUATION AT SPURS
There are 550 non-playing staff at Tottenham Hotspur. Roughly 60% of those, so around 330 staff, have been asked to agree to a 20% wage cut and to continue working from home for April and May. Some 40%, that’s around 220, have been asked to agree to join the Government’s Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme, otherwise known as being “furloughed”. They are forbidden from carrying out any work for THFC for the duration of their furlough period, which has to be for a minimum of three weeks. Under the furlough scheme, the state will pay 80% of the wages of those furloughed staff up to a total of £2,500 a month. The Club is topping up the wages of staff where 80% of their usual earnings amounts to more than £2,500 a month. None of the 550 affected staff at Spurs are earning less than 80% of their previous full wage.
The Club is continuing to pay the wages of non-furloughed staff at 80% of normal level, and is also paying the furloughed staff directly, but will claim those payments back from HMRC. The Government’s furlough scheme is currently intended to cover the months of April and May only. It is possible to recall staff from furlough at any point after an initial three-week period.
The Club’s Directors have also taken a 20% wage cut. We understand that casual and matchday-only staff are receiving payments under the furlough scheme based on projected earnings from average monthly pay packets to date.
The Club’s playing and coaching staff remain on full wages. To be clear, the contracts of these staff cannot be varied without agreement, and without the involvement of the Professional Footballers’ Association and the League Managers’ Association. So, reports that THFC has “chosen” not to impose wage cuts on playing and coaching staff are incorrect.

 

[Yid-ol]

The Trust have explained what the club have told them about the non playing staff, it seems we are topping up the 20% of the furloughed staff (although I haven’t seen that reported in the media) have I read that right?

CLARIFYING THE STAFFING SITUATION AT SPURS
There are 550 non-playing staff at Tottenham Hotspur. Roughly 60% of those, so around 330 staff, have been asked to agree to a 20% wage cut and to continue working from home for April and May. Some 40%, that’s around 220, have been asked to agree to join the Government’s Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme, otherwise known as being “furloughed”. They are forbidden from carrying out any work for THFC for the duration of their furlough period, which has to be for a minimum of three weeks. Under the furlough scheme, the state will pay 80% of the wages of those furloughed staff up to a total of £2,500 a month. The Club is topping up the wages of staff where 80% of their usual earnings amounts to more than £2,500 a month. None of the 550 affected staff at Spurs are earning less than 80% of their previous full wage.
The Club is continuing to pay the wages of non-furloughed staff at 80% of normal level, and is also paying the furloughed staff directly, but will claim those payments back from HMRC. The Government’s furlough scheme is currently intended to cover the months of April and May only. It is possible to recall staff from furlough at any point after an initial three-week period.
The Club’s Directors have also taken a 20% wage cut. We understand that casual and matchday-only staff are receiving payments under the furlough scheme based on projected earnings from average monthly pay packets to date.
The Club’s playing and coaching staff remain on full wages. To be clear, the contracts of these staff cannot be varied without agreement, and without the involvement of the Professional Footballers’ Association and the League Managers’ Association. So, reports that THFC has “chosen” not to impose wage cuts on playing and coaching staff are incorrect.

The club is only topping up some of the staff, only if the £2500 maximum they can claim doesn't take them to the 80%. So no one is getting 100% that's been effected and all on 80% of their original wage.

 

[coys200]

I’m just struggling to get my head round what is really gonna change in 2/3 months time. One of the UK health experts yesterday said the amount truly infected is likely single figures as a % or at most 10%. Even if that doubles by June then 80% are still vulnerable. Apart from 1/5th having immunity, People being more aware, warmer weather. I don’t see what stops another outbreak. I think any club financially seeing this as 2/3 month issue may be in for a rude awakening. Financially this could be a 12 month issue till there’s a vaccine.

 

[spursfan77]

‘Fundamentally, football is f***ed’ – what agents are doing and thinking now

The inside line on player-club wage talks, chaotic transfer plans, bargain deals, missing payments and why free agents are back in vogue…

theathletic.com

Liverpool paid £43 million to agents last year. That’s a lot of PPE equipment for the NHS. Is that money going out of the game worse than not paying your staff in full, then changing your mind about it. Liverpool getting praised for changing their approach to this yet paying out so much money to agents doesn’t sit right with me.

 

[branchie]

This ain't going away for months. In work (Local Authority) we're looking at an impact of 6 months minimum. Personally we may not start to see normality until the new year.

 

[nailsy]

Ok I now very much doubt he is helping at all, never knew he owned 200 companies (us included). with that in mind though I wouldn't be shocked if he was the one to enforce what Levy is being blamed for. if every company he owns is suffering through this virus a good chance the majority if not all of them are having to use a scheme like furloughing. if 1 company doesn't then all those that are or something similar in other countries will want the same treatment and if his industries = 0 income, then god knows how many staff worldwide would want full salary or topping up.



look I know many are not happy but like my quote above, if Lewis has told Levy to use the function, Levy has to accept. I didn't know Lewis owned or part-owned 200 companies in 15 different countries. I have heard it mentioned something about golf resorts, and hotels, and properties but had no idea how many. Levy might have no option if Lewis has made the decision

I agree with the bit in bold which is why I originally said this :

Can't disagree with thinking Lewis should be putting the money in to help the workers. If he's not willing to do it though it does force a decision on those who are actually working at the club.

By the way it wouldn't surprise me if Lewis made money out of this crisis. He made his fortune through currency trading. Buy currency while prices are low, which they are now, and then sell when prices rise again. Not saying he's wrong to do it.

I hope you are wrong also, but also I think that your comparison are totally distorted from an economic point of view at the moment.
Premier League, three quarters of the season through, that money in the bank, and by far the greatest income stream. From our point of view Champions League money earned, 3/4 of a season of sponsorship monies earned. Those games were played with full crowds. Clubs could put out a competitive PL team with no crowd. If we fulfil the TV contract we will still make profit in the 2019-20 season, and if we don't fulfil it have plenty of reserves to fall back on in short term, and rich shareholders that would have no option but invest to protect their asset, assuming football is still an ongoing business when the pandemic is over, some players contracts coming to end in less than 3 months time etc.
Clubs budget from season to season, we have already earned maybe 85% of our season's money.

Whereas Aussie Rules, not started (well 1 game behind closed doors), clubs nowhere near as dependent on the TV money as they are the spectator income in comparison, but they have had neither so far, and don't know when they will start earning at least the TV portion of it, and quite likely won't get any spectator income for the season

It all really comes down to when we can start playing again, to fulfil the TV contract and sponsorship agreements, the crowd is of secondary importance to Premier League clubs finances. Working assumption is some time, probably back-end of June this year, but we will see.

If government advice is no gatherings until say 12 months down the line, then nobody would have an issue with the club using the scheme, but still would about the wage reductions, when it is for a couple of months, it is seen as penny-pinching by clubs that are basically rolling in cash.

I would compare PL more to Baseball in respect of TV to spectator income generation percentage, just read they are planning on starting behind closed doors in May, and see no mention of players having salaries reduced.

In respect of clubs going under, I think some will (Southend and Macclesfield would be the likeliest) and if this whole situation goes to a general decrease in extortionate player wages and ridiculous transfer fees (what other business have massive balance sheet values attributed to their staff) then something worthwhile will have come out of it.

Putting aside the financial issues for a minute the thing that many people are ignoring at the moment is that you can't have games behind closed doors until it's safe for the players to do so. If people have a moral issue with taking government money for furloughed workers then there should also be a moral question mark over players risking their health for our entertainment.

 

[Phomesy]

I hope you are wrong also, but also I think that your comparison are totally distorted from an economic point of view at the moment.
Premier League, three quarters of the season through, that money in the bank, and by far the greatest income stream. From our point of view Champions League money earned, 3/4 of a season of sponsorship monies earned. Those games were played with full crowds. Clubs could put out a competitive PL team with no crowd. If we fulfil the TV contract we will still make profit in the 2019-20 season, and if we don't fulfil it have plenty of reserves to fall back on in short term, and rich shareholders that would have no option but invest to protect their asset, assuming football is still an ongoing business when the pandemic is over, some players contracts coming to end in less than 3 months time etc.
Clubs budget from season to season, we have already earned maybe 85% of our season's money.

Whereas Aussie Rules, not started (well 1 game behind closed doors), clubs nowhere near as dependent on the TV money as they are the spectator income in comparison, but they have had neither so far, and don't know when they will start earning at least the TV portion of it, and quite likely won't get any spectator income for the season

It all really comes down to when we can start playing again, to fulfil the TV contract and sponsorship agreements, the crowd is of secondary importance to Premier League clubs finances. Working assumption is some time, probably back-end of June this year, but we will see.

If government advice is no gatherings until say 12 months down the line, then nobody would have an issue with the club using the scheme, but still would about the wage reductions, when it is for a couple of months, it is seen as penny-pinching by clubs that are basically rolling in cash.

I would compare PL more to Baseball in respect of TV to spectator income generation percentage, just read they are planning on starting behind closed doors in May, and see no mention of players having salaries reduced.

In respect of clubs going under, I think some will (Southend and Macclesfield would be the likeliest) and if this whole situation goes to a general decrease in extortionate player wages and ridiculous transfer fees (what other business have massive balance sheet values attributed to their staff) then something worthwhile will have come out of it.

I agree that the pandemic hitting towards the end of the season helps with the short term cash flow. I'd argue that while the "gate receipts" matter less than the TV revenue, Spurs are more exposed because of the Stadium needing other spectator fuelled events to pay for itself (and the Club's staff) - so the pandemic affects much more than just the football side of things.

Like I said I hope I'm wrong and you're right.

And I just want to apologise for the tone and language of some of my posts - they were suppose to reflect frustration at this situation - not abuse towards you or your position. i'm not sure I succeeded at that.

 

[Lighty64]

They obviously feel that the club making the most profit in the country, should not be cutting the wages of all non-playing staff, many of them, no doubt their friends by 20%.
They feel that the club that is making the most profit in the League, and that the owners, one of them the 9th richest Briton in the world, should not be trying to "profiteer" out of the global pandemic.
They will feel that if there is a short term cashflow issue, the owners should be propping up the club, however they would be prepared to help if the club reverse their previously made decisions.
Did the owners pass the record profits back to the players/staff, no, so why should they feel compelled to help out the owners, when the owners have shown that all they care about is money ?

Our future is not under any immediate threat whatsoever, we have best balance sheet in the land, unless this thing is still here for the next 5 years, at which stage there will be no football, and the world will be in hyper-inflation and it will be survival of the fittest and battlefields on the streets.

If we have a short-term cashflow issue, ENIC need to (and will be forced to) step up and invest.

looking at last year's figures for wages paid we are talking about 14+m per month in paying wages for all staff, and that isn't taking into account the new players that are now playing for us on a lot higher wages compared to last season. with the biggest possibility that this season will not be completed until a cure and vaccine are found they can't even consider playing behind closed doors.

if this season is canceled on points per game, we won't even have Europa next season. if it's voided then officially we most probably will have to pay the TV money back, also if voided we wouldn't be entitled to PL or UEFA money which will be paid at the end of the season, plus a possibility sponsors and Nike will want something back, so how the hell do you think it wouldn't be a worry unless this thing is still here in 5yrs, but to carry on paying staff. we also have a quarter left of the home games to play this season that would mean refunding ST holders and premium members which alone is serious money. if they play behind closed doors we will still incur a bill for hosting the game.

yes I know Joe Lewis has 4+b which I very much doubt he has sat in the bank, he also has 199 other companies and as the owner of them he is responsible for paying their wages, and with us, Golf resorts and hotels across the world being closed then no sane person wouldn't take the chance to make sure their wealth is protected in some way, which with this virus he has 2 options save a small % on wages or make a lot of people redundant especially when those companies are having a zilch income.

I might have understood the anger if we knew this might be a month or 2 (because that's all it is at the moment), but know 1 has any idea when this will finish, and be safe to become a sport again.

you keep going on about ENIC making profits, but any profits made last season won't last long if we carried on paying 14+m per month without anything coming in as well as other bills coming in

 

[Dinghy]

Furlough furore over Premier League clubs ignores aim of protecting jobs | David Conn

The scheme is there to be used, as the chancellor has said, so why have Tory MPs attacked clubs?

www.theguardian.com

 

[TheRevolution]

Reports from THST link

"The club directors have also taken a 20% pay cut"

This actually turns my stomach. I was never in the Levyout crowd before this and thought he did a good job delivering the stadium and bringing us on but it now just shows that when the shit hits the fan he makes sure he is looked after and throws out the ones below.

Levy and the board could definitely have done more. 20% on their wages still leaves them paid more than any of us would ever receive in our lifetime. What sort of leadership is that!?

 

[spursfan77]

"The club directors have also taken a 20% pay cut"

This actually turns my stomach. I was never in the Levyout crowd before this and thought he did a good job delivering the stadium and bringing us on but it now just shows that when the shit hits the fan he makes sure he is looked after and throws out the ones below.

Levy and the board could definitely have done more. 20% on their wages still leaves them paid more than any of us would ever receive in our lifetime. What sort of leadership is that!?

I agree. They could use a further cut in trying to get the players to take one though?

(They won’t, but it could be a good bargaining chip).

 

[nailsy]

[

"The club directors have also taken a 20% pay cut"

This actually turns my stomach. I was never in the Levyout crowd before this and thought he did a good job delivering the stadium and bringing us on but it now just shows that when the shit hits the fan he makes sure he is looked after and throws out the ones below.

Levy and the board could definitely have done more. 20% on their wages still leaves them paid more than any of us would ever receive in our lifetime. What sort of leadership is that!?

Hasn't he also deferred the £3m bonus that he was due to collect? Not sure if that's right, but I definitely read it somewhere.

 

[coys200]

I’ve actually see sawed on this. At first I thought why not if the schemes there. Then thought it was abhorrent lol. But I might be turning again now. Just listened to a vaccine expert that said it won’t be freely available for a year and 2nd 3rd waves will be inevitable. This is clearly something with at least year long financial implications if not longer. There’s absolutely no way even big PL clubs will survive paying current player wages. Things are gonna have to dramatically change for clubs to survive.

 

[TheRevolution]

[


Hasn't he also deferred the £3m bonus that he was due to collect? Not sure if that's right, but I definitely read it somewhere.

Deferring a 3m bonus isn't exactly sticking your neck out though. The reality of the situation is that businesses are in trouble and more importantly people are in trouble.

I'm sure the directors could sacrifice their lavish lifestyle for a few months for the sake of their workers?