Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Makes perfect sense, all organisations who can should take advantage of the scheme. Staff who are furloughed can volunteer for the nhs without penalty, and hopefully some will be able to.

Edited by Branston Pickle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At least they are paying the extra 20% unlike many companies with questionable morals who have furloughed staff 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Proud to read that our club is topping up the government’s 80% payment to ensure workers are not financially penalised.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The extra 20% is good but I'm extremely uncomfortable with any Premier League football clubs using this scheme. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, king canary said:

The extra 20% is good but I'm extremely uncomfortable with any Premier League football clubs using this scheme. 

It's why we pay taxes, and it's not unrealistic to expect taxes to rise after this,  the wheel must be kept spinning , even if slowly, much easier to restart than if all momentum is lost. Inertia is a difficult force to overcome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, king canary said:

The extra 20% is good but I'm extremely uncomfortable with any Premier League football clubs using this scheme. 

Why? There are many jobs in the clubs which are currently not needed and they can’t work from home. Why should other multi billion pound businesses be ok to use the scheme but not football clubs? They all employ people 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, wcorkcanary said:

It's why we pay taxes, and it's not unrealistic to expect taxes to rise after this,  the wheel must be kept spinning , even if slowly, much easier to restart than if all momentum is lost. Inertia is a difficult force to overcome.

I dont pay taxes for business who can afford to pay their staff to pass that onto the government. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, king canary said:

I dont pay taxes for business who can afford to pay their staff to pass that onto the government. 

That's the beauty of a democracy,  we don't  actually get much of a say in what is decided, as we've already decided who is making the decisions for us. The scheme launched by the govt has criteria, if NCFC meet those criteria,  so be it.  I have no idea if city have money in the bank to pay staff for an extended period . If not  then I'm glad the staff will be paid somehow.  There are bigger fish to fry at the moment  I reckon.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, wcorkcanary said:

That's the beauty of a democracy,  we don't  actually get much of a say in what is decided, as we've already decided who is making the decisions for us. The scheme launched by the govt has criteria, if NCFC meet those criteria,  so be it.  I have no idea if city have money in the bank to pay staff for an extended period . If not  then I'm glad the staff will be paid somehow.  There are bigger fish to fry at the moment  I reckon.

You're of course correct about the criteria/rules, and from a purely selfish financial perspective for the club it saves money. For me it is much more of a moral question- in my view the scheme is there to help businesses who cannot afford to pay staff and will either be forced to lay people off or go bust. We don't fall under that as far as I'm aware. 

We're certainly not as egregious an example as Spurs (pre tax profit of over £80m yet getting Government money to pay staff) and I believe there is now some pressure on the PFA/LMA for players to take a voluntary pay cut which is where this money should be coming from IMO. We'll see what happens but fundamentally the optics of a business paying players north of £20k a week asking for a Government handout to pay their lower paid non football staff isn't great.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't believe the response of most people here to this. I think it's completely unethical for the club to be using this scheme. 

I know they are allowed to use the scheme but asking for the government to pay 80% of wages for non-playing staff whilst the club (as far as we know) continues to pay the players thousands of pounds in full is disgraceful. Should ask the players to take a temporary pay cut/deferral and use that money to pay non-playing staff. 

I know in Premier League terms we are skint but compared to the rest of the football league we are well off. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we are going to use this scheme, our players/coaching/management staff should ALL be taking a hefty pay cut to go with it. If not, then morally, it looks bl00dy awful.

OTBC

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, king canary said:

You're of course correct about the criteria/rules, and from a purely selfish financial perspective for the club it saves money. For me it is much more of a moral question- in my view the scheme is there to help businesses who cannot afford to pay staff and will either be forced to lay people off or go bust. We don't fall under that as far as I'm aware. 

We're certainly not as egregious an example as Spurs (pre tax profit of over £80m yet getting Government money to pay staff) and I believe there is now some pressure on the PFA/LMA for players to take a voluntary pay cut which is where this money should be coming from IMO. We'll see what happens but fundamentally the optics of a business paying players north of £20k a week asking for a Government handout to pay their lower paid non football staff isn't great.

I agree. It doesn't sit well at all and that's not just directed at Norwich.

The money used to fund this will have to be repaid and it's unlikely that this will come solely from Higher Rate tax payers, I'd imagine it will be across the board going by the terminology used.

That effectively means that these very well paid, HR tax payers will continue to take their large, and arguably not vital salaries, and then LR tax payers will be subsidising them in refunding the G'ment. That isn't fair or ethical. IMO of course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Furlough can only pay 80% of wages up to £2500 a month....that clearly doesnt cover players wages.

.....all off field staff are employed by/paid by Norwich City FC not by the players.

Theyre doing what many businesses...who have higher turnovers than Premier League football clubs with high earning executives...will be doing over the coming weeks.

I dont see the the issue... and as previously stared the club will top up the other 20% ,so no staff will be out of pocket.

There are people getting on their soapboxes about who should/shouldnt be claiming this and what future taxes might look like?!?...people just looking for a reason to complain....about something

Edited by GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess the club would argue the amount they pay in tax on player sales etc gives them every right to claim back.

However, as a small business I was also under the impression this should only be taken up if the staff would otherwise have been laid off. I.e for those businesses who couldn't afford to pay 4 months of wages (as an example) without money coming in because they've had to close, or in our case, our customers have had to close.

We are hoping to avoid having to use the scheme by having enough work to cover us but that position wont be viable if we're in the same boat in 2 months time - we would then have to use the government scheme. I dont believe any Prem club doesnt have the ability to cover non playing staff for a few months.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can only assume this Webber quote on a podcast came before the decision to furlough staff otherwise it looks terrible.

“It is too early to ask a player to give up some of his salary when at the moment I couldn’t look him in the eye and say the reason we are doing this is because we will lose X,” said Webber, speaking on the latest edition of Guillem Balague’s Pure Football podcast. “Once we get to the point of understanding what the losses would be then it is for everyone to get together.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Must agree I don’t think this is right.

Rather than tax payer (ie us) paying I think the right thing would be for players/directors to sacrifice some off their millions to cover the non playing staff. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The players need to be taking a lead in this. It is nice that the non playing staff will not be out of pocket but I do think the players, and I am not just thinking about our club, are using social media to still promote themselves (I'm sorry, I would rather hear from Boris Johnson than Bradley Johnson) and if they are genuine then they need to be taking cuts.

Unless this happens I really fear that after this crisis, some will be demanding more and more. I have hopes that football will have a revolution but to be honest there are many foreign players in this country that have no allegiance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps the players and executives are right now pooling money from salary sacrifice to repay the government (ie you and me) once this is done and dusted?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, keelansgrandad said:

The players need to be taking a lead in this. It is nice that the non playing staff will not be out of pocket but I do think the players, and I am not just thinking about our club, are using social media to still promote themselves (I'm sorry, I would rather hear from Boris Johnson than Bradley Johnson) and if they are genuine then they need to be taking cuts.

Unless this happens I really fear that after this crisis, some will be demanding more and more. I have hopes that football will have a revolution but to be honest there are many foreign players in this country that have no allegiance.

In the Webber article on the homepage, he suggests some of the players have already come forward about doing something which is good. It seems it is mostly going through the PFA though.

I had a look earlier and the combined wage bill of Man U, Man City, Liverpool, Chelsea and Arsenal is over £1,000,000,000. Just 10% of that would more than cover both the furloughed non-player salaries and help out lower league clubs in serious financial peril.   

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, king canary said:

I dont pay taxes for business who can afford to pay their staff to pass that onto the government. 

Haha. This guy. Thinking he gets an actual say in where his taxes go!

Judging by some of your posts over time, I'm super glad you aren't in a position of making actual important decisions!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, South Sider said:

Haha. This guy. Thinking he gets an actual say in where his taxes go!

Judging by some of your posts over time, I'm super glad you aren't in a position of making actual important decisions!

Well I've clearly made an impression on you to use one of your 6 posts on this I guess...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, beardo said:

Can't believe the response of most people here to this. I think it's completely unethical for the club to be using this scheme. 

I know they are allowed to use the scheme but asking for the government to pay 80% of wages for non-playing staff whilst the club (as far as we know) continues to pay the players thousands of pounds in full is disgraceful. Should ask the players to take a temporary pay cut/deferral and use that money to pay non-playing staff. 

I know in Premier League terms we are skint but compared to the rest of the football league we are well off. 

100%

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, keelansgrandad said:

The players need to be taking a lead in this. It is nice that the non playing staff will not be out of pocket but I do think the players, and I am not just thinking about our club, are using social media to still promote themselves (I'm sorry, I would rather hear from Boris Johnson than Bradley Johnson) and if they are genuine then they need to be taking cuts.

Unless this happens I really fear that after this crisis, some will be demanding more and more. I have hopes that football will have a revolution but to be honest there are many foreign players in this country that have no allegiance.

Not just foreign players.  Who was that young English  player refusing to renew his contract at chelsea unless he got 180000+ a week like hudson odoi?  Of course players should take a wage cut, permanently if I had my way. These  wage replacement schemes are strict and complex,I'd rather the club uses it  if it needs to. Lucky is the man, firm or Club that can get through this on what they have ' in the bank' or ' under the mattress '.

Edited by wcorkcanary

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Whether it ‘sits well’ is largely irrelevant, if PL clubs are entitled to take advantage of the scheme why on earth shouldn’t they? Govt is more than capable of introducing restrictions and chose not to (probably so they could benefit friends in big business but here’s a knock-on effect of that).  The vast tax take from footballers/clubs is widely documented and the staff involved are unable to work - they fit the criteria perfectly.

The question about footballers themselves is a different one entirely - of course they should, morally, take a hit.  That is patently obvious to all.

Edited by Branston Pickle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why just football? Should we ban the BBC from applying until their front liners like Lineker agree to take a massive cut? Or entertainers like Ant & Dec?

The government has introduced a plan to save the jobs of the lowest paid - for people like Sadiq Khan (salary over £152,000 per annum or £3,000 per week, similar perhaps to a top League One player) to criticise is somewhat hypocritical unless he is also taking a hit.

The government set the self-employed help limit at £50,000 so presumably everyone is taking their salary down to that level, otherwise they can't really criticise others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Branston Pickle said:

Whether it ‘sits well’ is largely irrelevant, if PL clubs are entitled to take advantage of the scheme why on earth shouldn’t they? Govt is more than capable of introducing restrictions and chose not to (probably so they could benefit friends in big business but here’s a knock-on effect of that).  The vast tax take from footballers/clubs is widely documented and the staff involved are unable to work - they fit the criteria perfectly.

The question about footballers themselves is a different one entirely - of course they should, morally, take a hit.  That is patently obvious to all.

Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should do it.

You're right the government could have put in greater criteria/restrictions. However I'm reasonably sympathetic to them having to draw up a huge piece of legislation somewhat on the fly and they may not have considered every angle. I believe in situations like this it isn't too much to ask for organisations to make a moral decision on something like this.

This crisis has highlighted a number of cases of shoddy corporate behaviour. While we're far from the most egregious,  I am disappointed we're in the same boat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, beardo said:

Can't believe the response of most people here to this. I think it's completely unethical for the club to be using this scheme. 

I know they are allowed to use the scheme but asking for the government to pay 80% of wages for non-playing staff whilst the club (as far as we know) continues to pay the players thousands of pounds in full is disgraceful. Should ask the players to take a temporary pay cut/deferral and use that money to pay non-playing staff. 

I know in Premier League terms we are skint but compared to the rest of the football league we are well off. 

Absolutely this!

Even at Norwich I’d imagine some of the highest earners on the playing staff, earn more a week than some of the non playing staff earn a year!

It is a moral issue and the first people to be taking cuts in any business should be the high rollers, before such business look to government assistance and lay off those on the shop floor!

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very simple system been put in place here. If you've lost your job or work if self employed, through covid 19  . You fill in a simple 1 page form. Those received by last thursday were paid €350 yesterday.This is guaranteed for next 12 weeks/ payments, everybody gets 12 , reviewed  by scheme end. Employers needing help already have it   ,  my daughter ,who works in a pub,  now closed, has already been assured and paid by her employer  who has in turn been assured that she will receive 12xweeks help initially to be  reviewed  before it runs out. We dont even have an elected govt and theyve put stuff in place already to ease people's  transition to the new future. 

Is it true that joe average in uk will get nothing for at least 5 weeks through universal  credits?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...