Bradford in need of a new beginning after sorry story of mismanagement

Putting Edin on gardening leave would work for me, his services are no longer required at the club.

 

17,000 Bradford City fans could put a very good case together why he should go.

 

Directors are classed as employees in limited companies - they have limited liabilities for example when the business goes into liquidation.

 

I think a lack of capability shouldn't be too difficult to prove

 

Whilst I like what you've written it is also guess work unless she has one of those involved in the committee as a source.

 

You can be both mate. Directors are usually on salaries and if they hold equity they get dividends if there's a profit made. Directors are usually employees

 

Yer but the problem with that is that a tribunal expects you to have set clear expectations and manged the person against those for a period of time. Objectives for senior employees are notoriously difficult to set as they tend to be more longer term so in the end most senior departures tend to be via a collective agreement or by forcing the person to take gardening leave.

To come to our scenario, no one will have managed Edin's performance and he doesn't want to leave or feels like he's being pushed out therefore i believe we'd be looking at a settlement figure of around double his notice period. In this instance it's a good job Rupp has got some money otherwise this would definitely rumble on for a year or so.

 

They have limited liabilities. Not sure they would have an employment contract.

I'm a shareholder in a business. I am classed as self employed and I don't have an employment contract.

Confused.

 

You're right, she should have let you run through her initial draft piece. It would have been far better with your editing.

 

What starting posts off without a capital letter.

 

I honestly don’t know why ppl are being overly critical of Katie; please don’t shoot the messenger. Clearly there has been an inaccuracy, but she is still new and a big step up from blogging. Calling her lazy is harsh, let’s face it journalists do research on social media. It’s like wanting the ‘old days’ back.

 

I read somewhere on here on an earlier post , that she has a minesweeping style to her writing.
What does this mean ?

 

I'm a director and owner of my bar and business, but I'm also employed as "bar manager" and have a contract (and monthly salary) for that. If I left my position as bar manager, I would continue to have shares in my business, pay myself dividends, but would not draw a monthly salary, and would be unemployed.

Perhaps Edin is just going to be relieved of his "Head of Football" position, and will leave the club in an employment sense, and just sit as a non active member of the board, not part of any decision making, and drawing dividends owed to him as and when.

Rupp could broker a deal with Edin to fully remove him from the board, but then I suppose Edin is going to ask for the value of his shares, plus potential loss of dividends.

As we've seen, Rupp seems pretty flippant with his investment, and some on here say he could even have written off his plan as small change. If that's the case, then maybe he'll just pay off Edin from his own part of the business and take a hit. I think he's starting to understand that we're going to need a hefty investment in January to make sure the club stays in this division and grows upwards instead of falling downwards. I also suspect he's been pretty shocked how much Edin has mismanaged, and how his reputation from hero to zero happened so quickly. I don't think he wants to follow suit.

I'd like to hear a bit more from Rupp. He seems an interesting character. Maybe we write him off as meek because Edin has taken all the limelight, but my inkling is that he's got a decision making character in him that we don't know much about, and I'm interested to see what colours he shows now he has to step up to the plate.

 

In relation to Edins rights as a director, as a minority share holder he doesn’t have any.
As a limited company Edin will have a contract of employment, as a board director he will have certain obligations set down at companies house. So firstly he has to resign or be relieved of his duties as a board director. This has nothing to do with owning shares or having a contract of employment.
As a private limited company, not a public limited company, Rupp can legally pay himself a dividend and not Edin or not pay any dividend at all as the clubs majority owner he can do what he wants as long as it’s within the law. In other words, if he chooses not to buy out Edin, he can just leave him in the cold, Edin would in theory be free to sell his shares, but why would anyone other than Rupp want to buy them?
In fact unless someone came along and wished as an ego project to buy the whole club 100% in theory Rupp could sell his 75% to a new owner who could take full control and Edin would be powerless to do anything! A 25% stake in a limited company is pretty worthless if the majority owner wants to play hardball.

 

Perhaps my message was a little vague/rushed - it is what meant in the the case of Rahic and directors providing a contracted service and taking remuneration that directors are treated as an employees.

 

Really?

 

Can a new investor buy his share and get rid of him quickly that way?