It is this sort of misinformation that causes these sort of issues. I can recall reading an article that both the club and McCammon went through a remediation process and other such things before it came to court, these things take time. Hopefully I will be able to dig out a source
I have thought long and hard before posting today regarding this issue, I refuse to believe that my team is inheritantly racist, as just one example let’s just think about the respect shown by the club and the fans to Iffy Onuora, (just one of many). But whilst I cannot disguise the fact McCammon was a massive disappointment as a player something has gone severely wrong within our management for there to even be a case to be heard. I just hope that this is a one off and that we don’t get others coming out of the woodwork. The impact for the club could be massive I expect the FA / FL will come down on us like a ton of bricks and I have a feeling that we will get a significant points reduction (at least 9), Hessenthalers part in this should result in his sacking but I wonder what sanction the league may take against Scally, and this will surely impact on our ability to attract players.
I have no idea what to say about this... is the fine going to be that large? Point deductions? Could this affect PS' role as owner not just chairman?
i'm not willing to comment on this matter anymore, there is alot of anger around and difference of opinion is obviously at the forefront and i don't want to say anything i'll regreat...so will leave it at that ! i have my thoughts on the issue, but i'm not willing to get wound up because others don't agree with whats right or wrong...end of !
I really hope what ever happens that a points deduction is not given out, that would be a disaster and we would have to kiss good bye to promotion.
Have a read of this article. I think its well written http://www.footballfriendsonline.co...est-barrier-on-player-power.html#.UBbtvfXRinc
That is interesting, I agree with that article, some players play the racial card, I think someone else has already said what I was thinking. If this was a white player who was supposedly racially abused by a black player/manager/owner then nothing would happen, this law does not seem to cover both sides which is wrong.
nothing to do with being black, he was a lazy total useless waste of space.He has milked the political system and must be laughing his balls off,filling his back pocket .He has got to be the most hated gills player ever(not that he will give a F.)
Will be gutted if the Hess,an absolute gills legend,got the push for this person(BEST NAME I COULD THINK OF WITHOUT GETTING IN TO TROUBLE).Its all wrong.
Lets try and be objective. If you read between the lines, it's clear that MM's contract wasnt sorted properly (i.e we forgot to add the 15% deduction but applied it anyway). The very fact that an employee raises this needs to generate an appropriate response. We almost certainly dont have an HR manager. We almost certainly havent documented details properly. We have almost certainly just thought that MM will lose without properly investigating and most importantly, SHOWING that we have properly investigated. Go into court without that sort of evidence, and you stand a good chance of being defeated. An appeal must show that the judge did not consider the legal aspects appropriately, and has not considered the appropriate evidence. I suspect that for once, MM has seized upon an opportunity here and actually taken it, unlike his "performances" which by the way, have absolutely no bearing on the legal side of things, it just makes it all the more frustrating. ps, cannot see a points deduction, that would be a v unusual precedent.
Tom, firstly I want to say I am not having a go but just expressing a different outlook on it. My understanding is as soon has an employee registers a formal grievance or complaint and regardless of management opinion it has to be followed through formally and to the letter of employment law. Failure to do so can have serious implications. We have no way of knowing the course of events in this situation, however, in that Guardian article it states... quote: "Mr McCammon raised a legitimate complaint of race discrimination, which the tribunal found that [the Gillingham chairman, Paul Scally] had discounted from the start as being without merit. "Mr Scally did not bother to investigate the complaint and ultimately dismissed him because of it. End quote. So putting a sense of humour if one may to a very serious matter, Houston we have a problem. But expanding my knowledge of media reports and when it comes to message boards, one that has probably slipped everyone's memory...http://www.kentonline.co.uk/kentonline/news/2011/march/14/gills_legal_battle.aspx (Monday 14th March 2011). No suggestions, just saying what I know. I even remember the posting back in December 2010 but that is as much has I am prepared to divulge.
Rothmans - welcome to the forum. It's a pity you join us at a sad period in our history. I am curious as to the advice of the mediator - prior to the matter going to tribunal -he/she would have 'evidence' before them and would have given an indicator of the likely outcome. The club could have been able to compromise and ' pay off ' Mr. McCammon without any acceptance of racism - and it is this aspect of the situation that is most damning. I am struggling to accept that the tribunal could see that the ' treatment ' that Mr.McCammon received was racially motivated. I can understand that Scally & Hess have not acted appropriately in terms of man management ( can't tell you how angry this makes me, because of the humiliating publicity ) -but I cannot believe that any racial discrimination ever entered their thoughts.
Suarez was fined £40k for a racist remark repeated a number of times. This seems to be racism over a prelonged period. I don't think there will be a points deduction but expect a big fine, not sure whether that will go the perpetrators or the club, this will obv be in addition to civil damages which will be loss of earnings + distress damages. All the negative comments about the player are disappointing. He is a proven victim of a crime, you wouldn't go up to someone who has been mugged and say they are rubbish!
The comments about the player are nothing to do with this case, they are a truthful assessment of the performances of the highest paid player in the clubs history make your own mind up on a centre forward playing 52 matches in 3 seasons and scoring five goals. That was £7500 for each time he actually made it on to the pitch or £78000 for each goal scored.
Well it's going to be costing us a heck of a lot more money than that now, dependent on any appeal... Can any one remember precisely how long McCammon had remaining on his contract? for payment of that period. Our legal fees McCammon's legal fees Then any damages/distress caused for the racial victimisation. I do not know in employment law whether that is capped or unlimited? and all that just for starters.
can't be exact - but seem to remember it was about 3 months. I think it was in the Springtime rather than the usual 30 June. So it would be at least £ 30,000 in wages - rising to about £ 60,000 if he had 6 months left, and all the 'extras' on your list before the FA crucify us- happy days !
And now for more misery What do you think might be going through the minds of the 2 black skinned (ex) players with whom Mr.McCammon shared accomodation during the 'snow' episode..... well you would have nothing to lose by trying.
I think the difference here is we dismissed him did we not? back to my earlier quote from the Guardian: "Mr McCammon raised a legitimate complaint of race discrimination, which the tribunal found that [the Gillingham chairman, Paul Scally] had discounted from the start as being without merit. "Mr Scally did not bother to investigate the complaint and ultimately dismissed him because of it' Simple rule is you follow up every complaint, even if it is just putting a few words to paper. Any failure to even get the basics right is worrying but then to quote...ultimately dismissed him because of it.
brb - it seems that if we had a HR employee @ the Club, they might have stopped Scally making a cock up in sacking McCammon in the aforementioned ( at the tribunal )manner. It seems that Scally was unable to foresee the fall out that has occured - when someone at HR would have seen it from the more dangerous viewpoint - and told him to go about things in a less politically incorrect way. Scally should have easily been able to dismiss McCammon on the grounds of performance and injury history - but chose to get it all wrong when he, ( in my opinion ) got upset with McCammon because he dared to offend his ( Scally's ) mate - Hess. ps - the other players I eluded to in my post # 57 could still claim 'constructive' dismissal.
HR would assist in getting the basics right at the very least. The only problem is with HR in my opinion, some of them (not including the club), think they are lawyers, which they are not. That is until an employer ends up in a tribunal and are ripped apart. However, the club would have sought professional legal advice, so they must have seriously thought they was going to win this case, otherwise any lawyer would have told you to settle out of court. I respect that you have a club reputation to protect but if you had any clue that this was ending up where we are now, financial damage limitation would have been a must. One can only assume we followed EVERY aspect of our legal teams advice. I expect to see an appeal (based on that opinion I have just expressed).
