Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
«134

Comments

  • Options
    Who has made that decision?
  • Options
    edited April 2020
    What a mess this club is.
  • Options
    edited April 2020
    What a fucking awful club we have become. (I’m talking about the SMT).

    Almost ashamed to admit I support Charlton these days. 
  • Options
    Copied from the bonkers thread.

    Why would you pay the extra 20% if you don't have any money coming in and weren't obliged to? Nothing to read into this.
    Because it’s the right thing to do - let’s not forget how many times they have been shit upon in the past we well. 
    I get the goodwill gesture but with no money coming in can any SME business afford to be charitable? The club doesn't even make a profit.

    Staff can make up the extra 20% with no travel expenses, mortgage pauses, Sky & BT subscription pauses etc. Not saying it's perfect and I sympathize fully with anyone on furlough but I don't think any club outside the Premier League will make up the extra 20%, fair play if they do.
    We have. That said, we've also furloughed the playing staff.
  • Sponsored links:


  • Options
    Who exactly have they furloughed? 
    What consists of back room and medical? 
  • Options
    Copied from the bonkers thread.

    Why would you pay the extra 20% if you don't have any money coming in and weren't obliged to? Nothing to read into this.
    Because it’s the right thing to do - let’s not forget how many times they have been shit upon in the past we well. 
    I get the goodwill gesture but with no money coming in can any SME business afford to be charitable? The club doesn't even make a profit.

    Staff can make up the extra 20% with no travel expenses, mortgage pauses, Sky & BT subscription pauses etc. Not saying it's perfect and I sympathize fully with anyone on furlough but I don't think any club outside the Premier League will make up the extra 20%, fair play if they do.
    So why not first furlough the staff earning thousand per week instead of those on, or near, minimum wage? 
  • Options
    edited April 2020

    Correction....we haven't furloughed the playing side as rules prevent any company from doing so if employees are still 'working' (in this case it's due to the players being on personal training programmes).

    It's just the non playing staff.

  • Options
    DRAddick said:
    Copied from the bonkers thread.

    Why would you pay the extra 20% if you don't have any money coming in and weren't obliged to? Nothing to read into this.
    Because it’s the right thing to do - let’s not forget how many times they have been shit upon in the past we well. 
    I get the goodwill gesture but with no money coming in can any SME business afford to be charitable? The club doesn't even make a profit.

    Staff can make up the extra 20% with no travel expenses, mortgage pauses, Sky & BT subscription pauses etc. Not saying it's perfect and I sympathize fully with anyone on furlough but I don't think any club outside the Premier League will make up the extra 20%, fair play if they do.
    So why not first furlough the staff earning thousand per week instead of those on, or near, minimum wage? 
    Assuming you mean the playing staff I'm assuming the club are still asking the players to train at home so they would have to still pay them in full?
  • Options
    Copied from the bonkers thread.

    Why would you pay the extra 20% if you don't have any money coming in and weren't obliged to? Nothing to read into this.
    Because it’s the right thing to do - let’s not forget how many times they have been shit upon in the past we well. 
    I get the goodwill gesture but with no money coming in can any SME business afford to be charitable? The club doesn't even make a profit.

    Staff can make up the extra 20% with no travel expenses, mortgage pauses, Sky & BT subscription pauses etc. Not saying it's perfect and I sympathize fully with anyone on furlough but I don't think any club outside the Premier League will make up the extra 20%, fair play if they do.
    Yes, nobody wants to lose 20% of their income, but most people are currently spending far less than they normally do anyway, so it's not the hardship it could be otherwise.
  • Sponsored links:


  • Options
    It's in the press that Barratt London made a profit of £900m last year but it didn't stop them furloughing all staff last week.  If that is acceptable then there is no need to bash CAFC over the head for using the scheme.

    Tottenham and Liverpool did it too (though Liverpool did a u-turn following public outcry)

    Make no mistake - this Corona Virus and Charlton's ongoing owneship saga threaten the very existence of our club right now so any help we can get I fully expect us to take


  • Options
    I don't personally see the problem. Many staff still get 80% of their wages whilst not working, that's just reflecting a large portion of the UK right now. 
  • Options
    Copied from the bonkers thread.

    Why would you pay the extra 20% if you don't have any money coming in and weren't obliged to? Nothing to read into this.
    Because it’s the right thing to do - let’s not forget how many times they have been shit upon in the past we well. 
    I get the goodwill gesture but with no money coming in can any SME business afford to be charitable? The club doesn't even make a profit.

    Staff can make up the extra 20% with no travel expenses, mortgage pauses, Sky & BT subscription pauses etc. Not saying it's perfect and I sympathize fully with anyone on furlough but I don't think any club outside the Premier League will make up the extra 20%, fair play if they do.
    Yes, nobody wants to lose 20% of their income, but most people are currently spending far less than they normally do anyway, so it's not the hardship it could be otherwise.
    It's not even 20% anyway when you take into consider tax, NI, pension and any student loan deduction. More likely looking at people being around 12% down on their usual wages. 
  • Options
    bobmunro said:
    The furlough scheme is designed to protect jobs that would otherwise have been made redundant. Redundancy: work of that nature has diminished or ceased at that location.
    Why would anyone be against any organisation using a scheme to protect jobs, rather than throw people out of work? Why is a football club different to a restaurant, pub, hairdressers et al?
    We are not talking about £50k a week footballers here - these are operational staff, many of whom would not be on much more than the minimum wage.

    Because we're meant to be backed by rich owners who are ready to invest in the club. This is just further evidence that they're potless.
  • Options
    Don't have a problem with this at all Outside of the premier league. I can see most, if not all, football league clubs furloughing non playing staff.

    In fact, I think many clubs in the lower leagues will cancel playing contracts as theyll be unable to pay them, leading to lots of big legal disputes 
  • Options
    Copied from the bonkers thread.

    Why would you pay the extra 20% if you don't have any money coming in and weren't obliged to? Nothing to read into this.
    Because it’s the right thing to do - let’s not forget how many times they have been shit upon in the past we well. 
    Maybe you should try running a business during the current pandemic then you would see how utterly ridiculous that statement is.
    Maybe the people running that business should have spunked money on Range Rovers and 12k a month flats.

    I totally understand the furlough situation and agree with it. It was more a dig at Charlton than anything else. 

  • Options
    Seems like a sensible decision to me 
  • Options
    edited April 2020
    Croydon said:
    bobmunro said:
    The furlough scheme is designed to protect jobs that would otherwise have been made redundant. Redundancy: work of that nature has diminished or ceased at that location.
    Why would anyone be against any organisation using a scheme to protect jobs, rather than throw people out of work? Why is a football club different to a restaurant, pub, hairdressers et al?
    We are not talking about £50k a week footballers here - these are operational staff, many of whom would not be on much more than the minimum wage.

    Because we're meant to be backed by rich owners who are ready to invest in the club. This is just further evidence that they're potless.
    I really don't think it shows that at all.

    QPR, Derby, Millwall and I don't know how many other championship clubs furloughed staff weeks ago.

    It's the logical decision to make as a HR director has said on this thread.

    I don't think the use of the scheme in its self proves anything either way about Charlton as we far from unique.

    Not paying the 20% perhaps does but I'm not sure how that will work out as yet or what other clubs are doing.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!