Quote JINJER="JINJER"I know it's only Dave Nosey Parker but in his column today he's mentioned that the players union have been involved as a club have decided to issue players with notice of termination of contracts if the players don't improve,he seems to think it's a months notice, seems an odd thing to do, wouldn't they have to pay the players off? I'd have thought the club could be on dodgy grounds with this one. The union guy refused to name the club. I heard on Wednesday that a club not too far from here had given the very same warning but the notice was 90 days, this came from the father of one of the "warned" players.'"
I've often wondered about stuff like this, being involved in employment law and HR matters.
It's very difficult to form a definitive view without seeing the contracts that are used but on the face of it, it sounds like a difficult position to defend; you can't use redundancy, as the jobs are clearly not being made redundant, and putting people on notice for performance reasons sounds a bit whiffy. You can safely put someone on a performance review, but issuing them with notice at the start of that process rather suggests that you're pre-judging the outcome.
I wonder if what's actually happened is the latter - individuals are on some kind of performance improvement process (a PIMP!) but Nosey Parker and the Union, as Union's do, have picked up on it and portrayed it as a big bad employer acting unreasonably?
