SMC groundsmen gone

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
originallambrettaman said:
I once spent a six figure sum on a legal action action at the High Court, the case was proven in my favour, but I was awarded nothing by way of compensation or costs, despite it being completely obvious that I was entirely in the right. The law regularly fails to deliver justice.
Click to expand...


So, which justice have you broken lately? I do hope this does not come as a surprise, but any court is only interested in the law.

Back on topic, a sorry mess all round.
 
  • Like
Reactions: howdentiger
Bit of rough justice here . OK , they were technically wrong , but any ethical employer would have given a warning at worst . Have these groundsmen found new employment as I feel no job would mean crap Christmas .
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kempton
Citygirl said:
Bit of rough justice here . OK , they were technically wrong , but any ethical employer would have given a warning at worst . Have these groundsmen found new employment as I feel no job would mean crap Christmas .
Click to expand...
I think that Ehab would revel in them having a crap Xmas.
 
Citygirl said:
Bit of rough justice here . OK , they were technically wrong , but any ethical employer would have given a warning at worst . Have these groundsmen found new employment as I feel no job would mean crap Christmas .
Click to expand...
They weren't technically wrong. They were defrauding the company they worked for.
How can you give a warning for something they categorically denied doing?
 
  • Like
Reactions: howdentiger
Chazz Rheinhold said:
They weren't technically wrong. They were defrauding the company they worked for.
How can you give a warning for something they categorically denied doing?
Click to expand...
They were ****nically wrong though weren't they, Chazz.

Why on earth do you insist on ignoring these glaring facts?

HowdenTiger liked your post though.

Lol...
 
Last edited:
Kempton said:
They were ****nically wrong though weren't they, Chazz.

Why on earth do you insist on ignoring these glaring facts?

HowdenTiger liked your post though.

Lol...
Click to expand...

Ignoring facts.....like the fact that an independent tribunal judge found that what the groundsmen had done was a sackable offence??

If you worked for someome else without permission while you where supposed to be at work, then lied to your boss about it, would you be sacked? I know I would
 
Last edited:
howdentiger said:
Ignoring facts.....like the fact that an independent tribunal judge found that what the groundsmen had done was a sackable offence??

If you worked for someome else withoit permission while you was supposed to be at work then lied to your boss about it, would you be sacked? I know I would
Click to expand...
No I wouldn't be sacked. Why would I be sacked? I work for a very good company, who value my skills.

I'm very good at what I do. Just as these lads were.
 
Kempton said:
No I wouldn't be sacked. Why would I be sacked? I work for a very good company, who value my skills.

I'm very good at what I do. Just as these lads were.
Click to expand...

You could work for the best company in the world and be the best at your job but if you where caught and then lied about it you would be sacked....the allams are ****s, they way they went about the sacked was ****ish, but the fact remains they where caught red handed and lied about it hence why they where sacked and why an independent judge agreed with the allams sacking them...... They should have held their hands up and admitted what they had done and a verbal or written warning would have been enough.
 
Last edited:
Kempton said:
No I wouldn't be sacked. Why would I be sacked? I work for a very good company, who value my skills.

I'm very good at what I do. Just as these lads were.
Click to expand...

And as to why you would be sacked.....if you where caught moonlighting on your main employments time and pay, and then lied about it and wasn't sacked, it would leave the company open to all sorts legaly if another employee was sacked for braking rules but you weren't. Your company might not want to sack you, they may even apologise for sacking you, but they unfortunately would have to.
 
howdentiger said:
You could work for the best company in the world and be the best at your job but if you where cought and then lied about it you would be sacked....the allams are ****s, they way they went about the sacked was ****ish, but the fact remains they where cought red handed and lied about it hence why they where sacked and why an independent judge agreed with the allams sacking them...... They should have held their hands up and admitted what they had done and a verbal or written warning would have been enough.
Click to expand...

I've been caught doing wrong many times, fella. But as I said, my employers know I'm good for them and they know that's a good thing. They have basic business sense you see.
 
howdentiger said:
And as to why you would be sacked.....if you where caught moonlighting on your main employments time and pay, and then lied about it and wasn't sacked, it would leave the company open to all sorts legaly if another employee was sacked for braking rules but you weren't. Your company might not want to sack you, they may even apologise for sacking you, but they unfortunately would have to.
Click to expand...
You clearly don't have a clue :emoticon-0138-think
 
Kempton said:
You clearly don't have a clue :emoticon-0138-think
Click to expand...

Nope no clue at all..... Being a director of a worldwide company and having been involved in fair few disciplinary hearings mean sod all I suppose, trust me on this one if the company you work for have caught you, doing wrong many of times and your still there either shows they are extremely stupid or extreamly naive. If they sack someone one day for "doing wrong" but have let you get away with it multiple times then they will be opening themselfs up to a whole can of legal worms in an employment tribunal

That's not me sticking up for the allams or me not having a clue or even just arguing with you because I think your a bellend. It's me just living in the real world

And by the sounds of it they have no business sense Tbf
 
The simple fact is the groundsmen were not defrauding anyone. One of them had worked for Hull FC for over a decade whilst working for Hull City. Being allowed to do so was part of his contract of employment until he signed the new contract, and whether permission to work for Hull FC ended then isn't entirely clear from the press reports.

Did the new contract cover the existing arrangements? Was that an explicit term of the new contract? Was the new contract explained to the groundsmen when it was presented to them for signature? Was anything said about working for Hull FC? Was he told to stop it?

By choosing to lie about working for Hull FC on that day made them appear guilty of wrong doing in the eyes of the Tribunal. However a more truthful approach may, and I say may, have resulted in a different result.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Newland Tiger, Asterix, howdentiger and 1 other person
Strong with the weak, weak with the strong.

El Mohamedy took his ball home for most of 2015/2016 only turning up when the Twin Towers and another season in the PL were beckoning.

Shame they never dug him out for robbing the club of many more thousands than the groundsmen could ever dream of.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Evington and Edelman
Obadiah said:
The simple fact is the groundsmen were not defrauding anyone. One of them had worked for Hull FC for over a decade whilst working for Hull City. Being allowed to do so was part of his contract of employment until he signed the new contract, and whether permission to work for Hull FC ended then isn't entirely clear from the press reports.

Did the new contract cover the existing arrangements? Was that an explicit term of the new contract? Was the new contract explained to the groundsmen when it was presented to them for signature? Was anything said about working for Hull FC? Was he told to stop it?

By choosing to lie about working for Hull FC on that day made them appear guilty of wrong doing in the eyes of the Tribunal. However a more truthful approach may, and I say may, have resulted in a different result.
Click to expand...

It probably wasn't explained to them, but a very harsh life lesson, never sign anything unless you fully understand and can comply with what your signing. If you don't understand it fully then seek advice
 
  • Like
Reactions: Asterix
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back