I think you will find that as the Chief Executive Officer for the Club AA was legally obliged to hear the appeal. My guess is Assem would rather someone else had for just this reason. However, following the laid down protocols we are where we are. NB now has the opportunity (legal right) to take up the matter outside of the company through a tribunal or the courts. Until the CEO has heard the case within the company NB could not refer it to a tribunal. They would have referred it back. It just so happens that in this case the CEO is the father of the Director responsible. Just Legal Protocols.
and when did Bullard complain to the PFA about his sacking. look at Barton's current case - they will help in his appeal against the 12 match ban. BUT Bullard as far as I can recall has not involved the PFA in an appeal against his sacking/unfair dismissal - which if my recollection is correct means BULLARD KNOWS DEEP DOWN THE HULL HEARING WAS CORRECT AND HE HAS NO GROUNDS FOR APPEAL whereas Barmby does appear to have a case for an appeal at the very minimum. We all know you disliked Barmby from the moment him and your darling Bullard had that altercation in front of the WI
Bullard did go to the PFA it was widely reported at the time. It's the first point of contact for players in that situation, they then advise on what the protocols are and what further action can be taken. The fact that even with them behind him he failed says everything you need to know about his case!
Where have you got that info from? I understood that employers could write their own disciplinary procedures. I have seen no statute to say what am employer must do. All that I have seen is the ACAS Code of Practice in respect of disciplinary procedures. Paragraph 26 states that an appeal should be dealt with impartially and, wherever possible, by a manager who has not previously been involved in the case. No mention of CEO at all
The PFA were involved in Jimmy's case, though I don't think they fancied supporting him all that much.
i actually meant that comment for the 'fly on the wall' thread but since it's been merged it looks as though i'm involving myself in this thread as i didn't put his quote in. I tend to stay out of these types of threads whilst still reading them, i like to be informed but i'm not sure people are interested in my uneducated opinion of these matters, i have next to no knowledge of employment law etc thanks anyway
"It goes without saying that I am very disappointed that there wasn't a favourable outcome to my appeal against my dismissal as manager of Hull City AFC, I was surprised that the club did not appoint an independent person to hear the appeal and I am now considering the outcome in detail and will consult with the LMA's legal team before deciding on any further action. "Whatever the future holds, I want to reiterate my thanks to the fans, players and staff for the support they gave me during my seven years service to the club. I sincerely hope that next season brings success both on and off the field." so thats it ? all this hoohaa for the last couple of weeks and for what ? im of the opinion his "Appeal" was solely that ..... an appeal ,
We don't and I doubt we never will as it will be settled out of court and Nick will be gagged, if that is the case most people will favour the Allam's version, so unless Nick opens his mouth we will never know the truth will we? You can say whatever you like about people not knowing the truth but as usual there are 2 sides to every story and if Nick goes for a settlement I will look at it that he must be in the wrong, so it is put up or shut up time for all.
Indeed, though Nick is not the type to be gagged, so I do expect that at some point everyone will get to hear the other side of the story.
I love how everybody becomes a lawyer in cases like this. I think we've all realised that the Allams' disciplinary process is deeply flawed. I imagine Barmby will quietly get paid off and both sides will "leak" that they're pleased with the settlement.
