Damages for loss of key employee

GeordieGeorge

Thrugelmir said:

Nothing to stop an employee walking out of a job. That's life. 

Well, there’s the contract that the signed, and the precedent that an employer can sue for costs of replacement of an employee breaches it.

Yes, strictly speaking an employee can still physically leave, but that’s the same as saying that there’s nothing stopping you doing 150mph up the M1.

Manxman_in_exile

aroominyork said:

Manxman_in_exile said:

I may be wrong but I suspect the OP is not asking a real question.

I think they are really asking about the crazy world that is modern day football.

Exactly that.

It's some weird alternate universe where the normal laws of physics and economics don't apply.  I was listening last week to Sky Andrew being interviewed with Simon jordan on Talksport and agents have definitely become the ultimate predators of the football world.  Their clients seem to be as helpless as babies without their "advice"...

And they're paid by the clubs - not their clients!

aroominyork

TELLIT01 said:

A former employee can certainly be taken to court for breach of contract, and the employer can show they have suffered financial loss due to the actions of the employee.  If the new employer has already paid compensation to the former covering any loss there would seem to be little point in doing so.

But isn't the compensation paid by the new employer (the transfer fee) a different matter from the damages sought from the employee who has breached their employment contract? In law they seem different, but maybe the transfer fee is tied to a clause about "in full and final settlement of any claims against this party (ie Real Madrid) or any other party (ie the player)".

Which brings me back to the selling club having a gun pointed at their head, and the need for some remedy in law.

Manxman_in_exile

It's football
Don't try to make sense of it
It doesn't make sense
Swings and roundabouts

aroominyork

Manxman_in_exile said:

aroominyork said:

Manxman_in_exile said:

I may be wrong but I suspect the OP is not asking a real question.

I think they are really asking about the crazy world that is modern day football.

Exactly that.

It's some weird alternate universe where the normal laws of physics and economics don't apply.  I was listening last week to Sky Andrew being interviewed with Simon jordan on Talksport and agents have definitely become the ultimate predators of the football world.  Their clients seem to be as helpless as babies without their "advice"...

And they're paid by the clubs - not their clients!

Manxman_in_exile said:

It's football
Don't try to make sense of it
It doesn't make sense
Swings and roundabouts

I don't accept that it's the clubs who pay or that we should not try to make sense of it. Why? Because it is us who pay in the end - every penny comes from us. We pay the stupid transfer fees and when I see a player earning £250k a week I do not think it's funny - you and I are paying. Games are shared between Sky, BT Sport and Amazon so that people who want to see every game buy three different subscriptions; it's like when (in the old days) a band brought out a Greatest Hits album with one 'bonus' track to make sure the diehard fans bought it.

So, as a Chelsea fan, it's my pocked that was picked when we had to pay £37m extra to replace Courtois - and then buy Mendy because Arrizabalaga couldn't catch the ball.

Manxman_in_exile

Doesn't bother me - I don't watch football.  Don't have Sky, don't have BTSport.

But you're a Chelsea supporter.  Do you like football?   

[Deleted User]

If it's any consolation OP, I read somewhere on here which was far better worded and I do really believe it is true, that those who leave in this manner, often it bites them on the bum, they just can't live with the guilt that eventually trips them up and subsequently the position they leave for majority of times does not work out.

getmore4less

Going back a bit to 2008 but probably not changed much.


An article about the football dynamic and transfer fees that may help understand what is going on.

http://www.taylors.co.uk/news/newsitem059.htm



For further info google Bosman Ruling

aroominyork

getmore4less said:

Going back a bit to 2008 but probably not changed much.


An article about the football dynamic and transfer fees that may help understand what is going on.

http://www.taylors.co.uk/news/newsitem059.htm



For further info google Bosman Ruling

Very interesting article. The key bit in the context of this thread is (my italics):

"Andy Webster, a former Heart of Midlothian player, shook the foundations of football contracts when he walked out on his 4 year contract with Hearts despite having a year left to run to join Wigan Athletic. He implemented Article 17 of FIFA regulations which allows a player aged between 22-28 to unilaterally terminate his contract as long as he has served 3 years under his existing contract and a player aged 28+ 2 years or more on his current contract. The caveat was that the player would be liable to the club for compensation. However it had been assumed that this would involve an element of lost profit on the player. But the decision was that compensation should be based on the level of salary left on the player’s contract, in Webster’s case £150,000".

It is not clear exactly what is meant by "lost profit on the player" - perhaps the amount he could have been sold for. But that inches us towards where I want us to be; if the compensation was "bottom line impact to the club" then you could look at the amount Chelsea received for Courtois and paid for Arrizabalaga, taking into account the two players' true values through something like the Professional Football Compensation Committee.

Doshwaster

If the role is really "business critical" then the business should always have a continuity plan for the loss of key personnel