The club cannot going running to the media in a case like this, surely you should know that ? These two are bleating that they have been publicly sacked etc but it is them who have invited the media into their argument, not the club. This is an internal matter and should have been handled the correct way. If they have a genuine case then take it to ACAS, which would cost them nothing. But it seem that the verdict has already been reached by a lot of people who know nothing of the case, only what these two have chosen to let you know.
No verdict has been reached, they're just raising money so they're in a position to get one, have you not read the statement, they've already gone to ACAS?
I thought they had been dismissed following an appeal ? So what are they raising money for ? Also if they have gone to ACAS why hasn't their case been taken on? The legal advice is ( from those not touting for the case) that ACAS is the route to take.
The appeal process is a waste of time, it's heard by Ehab ffs. The case has been taken on, read the statement.
They have!!! That doesn't mean there won't be a tribunal, which they are raising money to pay for I would say that the chances of ACAS convincing Ehab to reinstate them is non existent so that's their next step
It seems strange they say they went to acas straightaway but didn't mention it in the press release. The club say no contact has been made by acas. If the club lie about that they would be in big trouble, I would imagine. Acas once hearing the groundsmen side would contact the club pretty much immediately. Hmm
Also,if they have gone to acas, the three month deadline for a tribunal claim is paused. So that's wrong in the statement.
As far as I se it. The Groundsmen have to go to ACAS before they can go to a Tribunal. This they have done. Whilst hoping for ACAS to give them their jobs back they have to prepare for being turned down by the SMC. They don't have the funds to pursue the case and need to crowdfund, which they have done. The lesson of all this is, as Chazz rightly says, join a trade union.
Right, as I see it, the media, mainly the BBC were asking the club to comment, so they issued a statement. I read it as a straight forward statement with nothing in it that implicated either of these two sacked employees. They didn't comment on the case or give any reasons because I'm sure they are bound by law not to do so ? But I'm not a solicitor ?
It want a straightforward statement though They could have simply said two were sacked and no furtr comment It was the, that brought up ACAS and criticised the sacked people for being premature
