Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

longboard

Keith Mason's Action

61 posts in this topic

No wonder Huddersfield have struggled to become one of the top clubs with decision making like this. Giving Mason a 4 year contract!!! Paying him £95k a year!!!! Sacking him for very spurious reasons!!!!

 

Gee, some smart management there!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why should it count on Huddersfields cap?

Unless he's going to be in the Giants squad.

If it doesn't count then what's to stop a certain club just sacking a player who isn't cutting it, to get them off the cap knowing full well they just need to pay him off at the tribunal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No wonder the game is broke paying 95k for an average prop.

...and yes should count on cap. Sets a dangerous precident otherwise

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It will count on the cap, but spread across the length of his original playing contract.

The figure may yet be higher than reported as it is going to be "at least" £167,000 - the judge will now consider the original value of Mason's contract and offset what he can reasonably expect to earn elsewhere within that same timescale and award an amount which brings his earnings back into line with the original contract. Plus there may be compensatory awards on top of the loss of earnings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if it counts to the salary cap, then maybe it salary. if its salary,then logically, Mason will have to pat tax and NI.  if he doesn't , then maybe its not salary, so not part of the cap. Anyway, there is sure to be an appeal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

if it counts to the salary cap, then maybe it salary. if its salary,then logically, Mason will have to pat tax and NI.  if he doesn't , then maybe its not salary, so not part of the cap. Anyway, there is sure to be an appeal.

I'm almost certain that there will not be an appeal against the decision. Unlike other areas of law, Employment Tribunal decisions can only be appealed on very narrow points of law criteria - i.e. you have to demonstrate that the judge applied the law incorrectly and specifically identify how they did so. Less than 1% of Employment Tribunal appeals are successful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It will count on the cap, but spread across the length of his original playing contract.

The figure may yet be higher than reported as it is going to be "at least" £167,000 - the judge will now consider the original value of Mason's contract and offset what he can reasonably expect to earn elsewhere within that same timescale and award an amount which brings his earnings back into line with the original contract. Plus there may be compensatory awards on top of the loss of earnings.

I'd have thought it would be lower.  Isn't it normally for the loss of earnings part that the tribunal panel look at what they'd award minus what they're earning now within the contract period, this is to reflect that they're still earning and he's not really losing the entire contract value in real terms, undue enrichment is the term I believe.  If I'm unfairly sacked from a £100k job but get another straight away for £90k then I'm normally awarded £10k per year for the relevant period claimed.

 

Then they look at compensation, if there's malice or even clear arrogance in the dismissal then compensation can stretch but not beyond £60k or so, even without malice there'll probably be a smaller payout of some kind.

 

I'm used to seeing employment tribunals be stingy, even in open and shut cases, essentially telling people to get on with it and get a job with under a year's payout.  The case must have been pretty devastating for him to be given the full whack without credit being applied for his current earnings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good point, a good D&O polocy would have this covered.

 

Not necessarily as D&O policies wouldnt respond to this.

 

They would need EPL cover (Employment Practices Liability) which would provide the cover they would need for a claim such as this.  

 

Some D&O policies now throw in an element of EPL cover, usually a percentage of the D&O limit itself, but this isnt yet standard across all insurers and should really be something that is taken out specifically rather than hoping that its thrown in as an extension to a D&O policy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not necessarily as D&O policies wouldnt respond to this.

They would need EPL cover (Employment Practices Liability) which would provide the cover they would need for a claim such as this.

Some D&O policies now throw in an element of EPL cover, usually a percentage of the D&O limit itself, but this isnt yet standard across all insurers and should really be something that is taken out specifically rather than hoping that its thrown in as an extension to a D&O policy.

I'm sure everyone else finds this really interesting...

Was aware of that, done a bit of D&O and EPL broking in the past.

Point was it is a fairly common insurance that would cover this, albeit one that is generally undervalued and surprisingly frequently not bought. Hope they didn't decide against it in a cost cutting exercise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the door is open now for every player released mid contract to seek financial recompense from his club. he got fixed up with a club that takes other clubs rejects (ben davies, jamie ellis) so he should be happy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Moved from the wrong thread where I probably confused people by posting it:

 

At least the poor lawyers have been compensated for their efforts, £35k awarded as costs against Huddersfield.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I'd have thought it would be lower.  Isn't it normally for the loss of earnings part that the tribunal panel look at what they'd award minus what they're earning now within the contract period, this is to reflect that they're still earning and he's not really losing the entire contract value in real terms, undue enrichment is the term I believe.  If I'm unfairly sacked from a £100k job but get another straight away for £90k then I'm normally awarded £10k per year for the relevant period claimed.

 

Then they look at compensation, if there's malice or even clear arrogance in the dismissal then compensation can stretch but not beyond £60k or so, even without malice there'll probably be a smaller payout of some kind.

Mason had 37 months left to run on a contract worth £95k per year, which works out at £293k potential earnings. Since then he has been employed by Castleford on a contract worth ~£42k per year. It is only a 1 year deal, but assuming he earned the same for the next 2 years then his earnings would be £126k for the period of his original Huddersfield contract. Therefore, £293k less £126k equals the £167k quoted figure.

But that is just the loss of earnings part. The judge then has the option of awarding additional amounts for the actual unfair dismissal and extra compensation if he believes the claimant was victimised or discriminated against.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Mason had 37 months left to run on a contract worth £95k per year, which works out at £293k potential earnings. Since then he has been employed by Castleford on a contract worth ~£42k per year. It is only a 1 year deal, but assuming he earned the same for the next 2 years then his earnings would be £126k for the period of his original Huddersfield contract. Therefore, £293k less £126k equals the £167k quoted figure.

But that is just the loss of earnings part. The judge then has the option of awarding additional amounts for the actual unfair dismissal and extra compensation if he believes the claimant was victimised or discriminated against.

Ah OK, I didn't know he was on that low a salary at Cas.  It's not exactly a lot for someone in a position as physically demanding as prop and with a fairly short career.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah OK, I didn't know he was on that low a salary at Cas.  It's not exactly a lot for someone in a position as physically demanding as prop and with a fairly short career.

 

£42k is still way over the top for Keith Mason. If I had to have him in my team, I'd be reluctant to pay anything in excess of the statutory minimum wage!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah OK, I didn't know he was on that low a salary at Cas.  It's not exactly a lot for someone in a position as physically demanding as prop and with a fairly short career.

Have you ever seen Mason play? He usually gives three penalties away in the first twenty minutes, tries to pick on someone half his size, gets belted by someone twice his size and then skulks off with a face like a smacked ######.

42k is plenty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you ever seen Mason play? He usually gives three penalties away in the first twenty minutes, tries to pick on someone half his size, gets belted by someone twice his size and then skulks off with a face like a smacked ######.

42k is plenty.

Just for putting yourself out on the field in Super League week-in week-out is worth far more than £42k.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just for putting yourself out on the field in Super League week-in week-out is worth far more than £42k.

 

What???  :shout: Compared to the guts and bravery involved in being a shiny ar*e who sits in front of a screen for a living...........?  ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you ever seen Mason play? He usually gives three penalties away in the first twenty minutes, tries to pick on someone half his size, gets belted by someone twice his size and then skulks off with a face like a smacked ######.

42k is plenty.

I bumped into Luke Robinson in Manchester on grand final day last year, and asked him about mason, as wire had played them just before the play offs. Mason knocked on several times and spent the day tryin to offer all our forwards out at every scrum. Robbo reckoned all his team mates were proper ###### at him.

"Keith I've just done 32 tackles, you can sod off if you think I'm helping you in a fight"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, IIRC, the Giants are well under the Salary cap, having left space to sign a halfback...since they haven't done that they will be fine

As for if its in or out of cap - surely it ultimately depends on how HMRC view the award

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the door is open now for every player released mid contract to seek financial recompense from his club. he got fixed up with a club that takes other clubs rejects (ben davies, jamie ellis) so he should be happy.

Did Widnes coach ben davies from a kid or did they take him on from another club? you know like another clubs reject for example?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure everyone else finds this really interesting...

Was aware of that, done a bit of D&O and EPL broking in the past.

Point was it is a fairly common insurance that would cover this, albeit one that is generally undervalued and surprisingly frequently not bought. Hope they didn't decide against it in a cost cutting exercise.

 

Appreciate that, I was probably going a bit too far but basically my point being (as you also mentioned) that many buy D&O but not many buy EPL, so it could be a very expensive lesson to the Giants, and a warning to other clubs!

 

What would you rather pay, £1,000 for insurance or £167,000 in compensation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Appreciate that, I was probably going a bit too far but basically my point being (as you also mentioned) that many buy D&O but not many buy EPL, so it could be a very expensive lesson to the Giants, and a warning to other clubs!

What would you rather pay, £1,000 for insurance or £167,000 in compensation.

True that. I remember several of my clients having a similar penny pinching attitude. Trying to explain it wasn't a money spinner for me (it made us next to nothing) but something that would be really useful was met with incredulity from supposedly intelligent people quite often.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, IIRC, the Giants are well under the Salary cap, having left space to sign a halfback...since they haven't done that they will be fine

As for if its in or out of cap - surely it ultimately depends on how HMRC view the award

HMRC hacve nothing to do with it as it's an RFL rule.

 

Whether it causes a problem may depend on how the rule is enforced - if  the whole £170K is all put on this year I'd guess there will be a problem, if it's spread across the length of Mason's contract, then maybe not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually it's everything to do with the HMRC

If they don't treat it as income then the RFL can't overrule the law...

As I said, it's not going to be too much of an issue

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, the court has ruled that he was done out of £170K of income by by the club, so it has ruled that he must be paid the income he was done out of..What would you call it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



League Express - Mon 10th April 2017

Rugby League World - April 2017