Players Wages announcement

A good, clear, concise statement from Akerron today regarding an agreement in principle with the PFA over unpaid wages and how to pay them.

Clear it is, but not fair to players and staff alike, while other people, contacts, and consultants involved with the club get paid in front of these people. It sounds no different than Heaney's solution to the wage bill, and I would guess that running up such a debt and taking an age to pay it off was always Ridsdale's plan, to produce a million or two out of thin air to pay back the money men of Mastpoint and Ticketus etc. Heaney helped out for a while gladly taking the flack, and now the Brent/PCC bid can mop up as was always anticipated.
That the staff etc fell for it is their look out ... what a shame they didn't have good experienced representation initially... a modern example of what will happen more and more if workers don't get a little more real and stand up for themselves.

If I were an employee who had been treated badly by this bunch, and I could still afford to eat, I would still in principle personally hold out for better terms and make Brent go back to the money men to take a bigger hit. I suspect one or two upset players will certainly try this route and it is their right to do so. I for one will not be happy if Pasoti Trust has anything to do with outing any individual players for not playing ball... that would be an absolute disgrace.
Still, it's very fortunate that the strike leaders have been bought off with a promotion upstairs. It won't do either of them any good as there is no reason to assume their capabilities are any better than Reid's. The administrators and club are not popular at all with some high profile employees.
C'est la vie.

17% when the deal is done, 7% a year for the next 5 years and after that the balance is paid. One doesn't agree then the deal is off.

No pressure then.

Pete, if true, that's an appalling deal .. appalling... especially with inflation letting rip.
Now we can really see what was at stake for the last 9 months... it was meant to be dragged out this long. Paying the staff this year or paying back the money men. I'm livid .. if that's true, it's outeageous... and to pit one employee up against the rest ... well. If I were a player or a member of staff, I would tell 'em to stick it ... I'd rather eat crumbs, and have done in my life ... we all only live once. I so hope there are a few that say no.

And ... what happens if the club go belly up again in 2 or 3 years with the money men having been paid off ? It's not right and should be resisted. Are P and A going to be paid over 5 or 6 years ? Something similar was envisaged with Ridsdale being in charge. What was he planning to do with the £4.2m he was going to receive to pay the staff with ? ... outrageous..

This is what I was told by a member of staff and have no reason to think they weren't being truthful. Oh and the council was at Home Park measuring up today as well.

The issues are very real PP and am certain that the pressure is certainly on to agree the deal. I wouldn't want to be in the staffs' shoes at the minute, but then again I certainly wouldn't of stuck it out for this long without the possibility of being paid.

Pete1886 wrote:

17% when the deal is done, 7% a year for the next 5 years and after that the balance is paid. One doesn't agree then the deal is off.

No pressure then.

Is the Trust actually supporting this?

They'll support anything that gives them their Saturday fix .. they publicly supported BIL, and they are supporting a very similar deal under Brent. They're not into really taking on the money men where it matters. Can someone tell me the difference for the staff between BIL and Brent ?

And after 5 years > ...oh, we can't afford to pay your balance, how do you feel on another 5 year deal for the remaining half.

I understand the idea of staged payments, and with the amount owed this seems a sensible idea. But spread over 5 years? Are you serious?

Brent is better then liquidation, but I cant say I am too excited about the prospect of him owning the club. I think he is going to have the shock of his life when he realises how crazy the world of football really is.

I'd be pissed off with anything less than 50% NOW and the rest within a year.

No doubt the staff will blindly go along with it though. Again.

Looks like the bucketeers are still in business

Looks like we're faced with years and years of austerity measures in order to balance the books and therefore years and years of utter shite on the pitch. Now watch the ever dwindling number of fans drift away even more. But I suppose as long as that tiny band of superfans have still got their non league Argo to support is all that matters. Very grim times ahead.

Ere Sad Act........... I was perusing some information on the Rame Peninsula yesterday and I noticed a beach/place named Freathy. Is that where you got your username ?
Love Ginger Pubes

Tis indeed, Ginge!

Practically grew up there. Parents still own a place at Freathy which I use to 'summer' (if you can call it 'summer'). Still think that stretch of coastline from Rame to Looe is one of the most beautiful in Britain.

Love Sad Act

I know that Brent isn't to blame for our situation or is legally obliged to pay the staff every penny that they are owed on the nail, but it really should be that if he wants the club and the other perks, that he pays up the full amount on the day that he takes over, it should have been a part of the deal.

If nothing else it leaves a bit of a stench that such a wealthy man with such a wealthy company is not prepared to pay out a few bob in wages. If the Trust have just a hint of a stomach they would be asking and negotiating for more!


Anyway, when will PCC and the Council Tax payers start building our new Phase 2, 3 and 4?

Freathy wrote:

Tis indeed, Ginge!

Practically grew up there. Parents still own a place at Freathy which I use to 'summer' (if you can call it 'summer'). Still think that stretch of coastline from Rame to Looe is one of the most beautiful in Britain.

Love Sad Act

Yes......... beautiful. My family, on my mother's side are Looe people and so far they have been traced back to 1605 in the area. Family name Pengelly............ now there's a surprise.
I also love the coastline to the east of Plymouth, the South Hams I believe.

Freathy wrote:

Tis indeed, Ginge!

Practically grew up there. Parents still own a place at Freathy which I use to 'summer' (if you can call it 'summer'). Still think that stretch of coastline from Rame to Looe is one of the most beautiful in Britain.

Love Sad Act

It reminds me of the word 'Frothy' every time your predictions come good.

I've no reason to doubt the figures given yesterday by Pete, but would be more than surprised if the same formula was applied to the "ordinary" staff, surely it can't.

If that was to be the case I'm not sure how our Trust Chair could live with his conscience. He has done remarkably well...at least in raising his profile...whilst exorting all and sundry to not ask difficult questions before he can get "the Brent deal over the line". Would he be happy for his CWU colleagues to accept such a deal? I think not.

Frankly I'm amazed the PFA endorsed it.

The Herald are quoting the same figures in the 'nitty gritty' story on their website this morning. Can't make it load at the moment to recheck the story but I don't recall it mentioning a distinction between staff and players.

Fag packet maths based on the 17 percent figure quoted is this, but if someone was working, say, in the shop, and is on 18Kpa, they'd get a little over 2K in wages owed if/when Brent completes the deal.

Which is a bloody disgrace in my opinion.

I will try to cover off the points raised in this thread but it will no doubt cause yet more accusations.

Firstly to Nick – The staff/players will get all they are owed – over a period of time. The details of this have not been shared with the Trust other than they will all be paid in full.

PP – Please don’t play petty games by claiming the Trust supported BIL. We did so in the Cp statements because if we didn’t then Heaney could have had a legal challenge against us / James Brent for the collapse of his bid. In short we had to tactically call him out. We did that, he’s gone and as far as I am concerned its job done. I know you like to re-write history but to intimate that anyone else than JB has had Trust support is laughable. And to reiterate our support for JB was based on the knowledge that in reality the others could never deliver and that he was the ONLY option between us and liquidation.

Claims that the trust should be pushing hard and that JB should give the staff a % than players. This is exactly what he wanted to do but FL rules and the PFA refused to allow anything other than an even % payment. If anyone thinks that the Trust just blindly goes along thinking that this is all rosy then quite frankly I give up. We have pushed hard and will continue to do so post takeover to assist the staff.

It is a horrible situation but here are the facts – If JB had got the Club in May when he originally bid then all staff would have been paid on day 1, 100%. The delays have increased the debt hugely and there is no more money to put in.

Those calling for him to take money off the other creditors – he has already more than done that. JBs offer to the staff is EXACTLY the same as heaneys was planned to be. That shows he was shaved ALL the money off other creditors.

There is fault here – and it sits firmly at the doorstep of Heaney and the Administrator.

James Brent’s deal is a rescue of Plymouth Argyle. It is that or liquidation. As simple as that.

Charlie Wood – Why do you see fit to bring my day job into this? Since you asked I will tell you my feelings on the staff situation from my own personal view. It is and has been a total disgrace. What would I have called for? Probably strike action within a week of not being paid.

But I am not their representative and they have chosen another path.

We will do everything possible to help the staff.

There is no fault here on the Trust – we have played a part in saving Argyle.

There is no fault here on the staff – they have played a huge part in saving Argyle

There is no fault here on James Brent – he stands between us and liquidation.

It you guys cannot see who the real enemy is then I can do nothing about that,

A horrific situation and I know that James Brent is personally disgusted at what the staff have been through.

Our aim will be to work our backsides off to ensure that the staff get their monies as quick as possible.

Chris

Chris,

yes, well aware the staff and players will get everything that's owed to them in the end. Was referring to the initial lump sum being paultry for the staff, and obviously bad for the players too but I would imagine in most cases that 17% would be a considerably larger chunk of money.

However, I wasn't aware that the FL/PFA have prohibited the staff initially being given a greater percentage of what they're owed than the players (I've either overlooked that or it hasn't been communicated). So it's still a bloody disgrace, but on the part of the FL/PFA.

Nick wrote:

Chris,

yes, well aware the staff and players will get everything that's owed to them in the end. Was referring to the initial lump sum being paultry for the staff, and obviously bad for the players too but I would imagine in most cases that 17% would be a considerably larger chunk of money.

However, I wasn't aware that the FL/PFA have prohibited the staff initially being given a greater percentage of what they're owed than the players (I've either overlooked that or it hasn't been communicated). So it's still a bloody disgrace, but on the part of the FL/PFA.

Fair enough mate - yes that is the case. I guess the PFA will say they are representing their members.

Difficult one though isn't it and like I said we must remember that Stapleton, Todd, Heaney and co have made this situation - not James Brent, the staff, players or supporters.

That really is a bloody disgrace!

Chris, how about pressure on the FL and PFA, or is it a case that some stupid law or legislation is preventing the staff from getting what they are owed immediately? Either way, this should be screamed out as loud as it was for the club to be saved, it's disgusting!

GOB wrote:

That really is a bloody disgrace!

Chris, how about pressure on the FL and PFA, or is it a case that some stupid law or legislation is preventing the staff from getting what they are owed immediately? Either way, this should be screamed out as loud as it was for the club to be saved, it's disgusting!

It is a FL rule mate. I am more than happy to lobby etc but its a double edged sword. More delays could kill Club. Just a horrible situation GOB.

Chris

I appreciate that you might not want to answer this but how much influence do you think the players' threat to strike had on P and A pulling the plug on Heaney? If as I suspect it is what forced the issue, do you believe that had the threat come earlier it would have speeded up the process?

This isn't meant as a criticism of the staff/players, I do however fell they have been horribly advised and had their loyalty abused whilst others played games with the club's future.

Chris Webb wrote:

I will try to cover off the points raised in this thread but it will no doubt cause yet more accusations.

Firstly to Nick – The staff/players will get all they are owed – over a period of time. The details of this have not been shared with the Trust other than they will all be paid in full.

PP – Please don’t play petty games by claiming the Trust supported BIL. We did so in the Cp statements because if we didn’t then Heaney could have had a legal challenge against us / James Brent for the collapse of his bid. In short we had to tactically call him out. We did that, he’s gone and as far as I am concerned its job done. I know you like to re-write history but to intimate that anyone else than JB has had Trust support is laughable. And to reiterate our support for JB was based on the knowledge that in reality the others could never deliver and that he was the ONLY option between us and liquidation.


Chris

Hi Chris

I am not speaking on behalf of PP (and I am sure he will have his say), but in my humble opinion this is why some people have got the hump with the trust.

The action that you have taken against Heaney is clearly the correct one. But we didn't know what you were doing at the time. And I dont just mean us dissidents on ATD. I am sure you could write a book on the cloak and dagger shenanigans that have on over the last few months. But those outside the inner circle have been clueless to it. Don't get me wrong, I understand why there has been secrecy, but we are taking about perceptions here. Like you say above, you did support him publicly. If we had worked out what you were up to, then surely Heaney would of as well?

That is not meant as a criticism as even with hindsight there is no perfect solution.

For me personally I am never going to trust anyone involved in Argyle again. I will always question their actions and their motives. That is not because I am a git, it is because I am not going to be taken for a fool again. Despite what you may think, (and what we may say at times) we know that you, Ian, the GT's and (almost) everyone else has Argyle's best interests at heart. But a few years ago I would have said the same about Stapes, Todd, Gill and even Guilfoyle.

We have to learn from the mistakes of the past. We almost left it too late before people woke up and realised what was happening.*

Love Frank




*Apart from Tring. He may have mentioned it once or twice

avignon green wrote:

Chris

I appreciate that you might not want to answer this but how much influence do you think the players' threat to strike had on P and A pulling the plug on Heaney? If as I suspect it is what forced the issue, do you believe that had the threat come earlier it would have speeded up the process?

This isn't meant as a criticism of the staff/players, I do however fell they have been horribly advised and had their loyalty abused whilst others played games with the club's future.

I think the strike threat put pressure on P&A but to release money from the ST sales not to dump Heaney.

I think the culmination of the strike, time, fans pressure, media and lots of other things brought the BIL bid to a head.