-
Latest Posts
-
By sanddancer · Posted
The fact they didn’t train is simply they hadn’t implanted a risk and migration. Lots of alternatives to train. We where not down to only 10 players as there were several who could have played. What it does highlight is that a sick player is better then those not in the team selection or sat on the bench. Hell if that’s the case we are dire trouble. It matters not because the onus was on us which is what I’m implying and as I stated my opinion, we are a inconsistent team doing well. -
-
-
By DanFromDownSouth · Posted
@ScarBoro I think they've (Gov website) published Employment Tribunals decisions upto 15th Jan. So we have a few days to wait but it'll be interesting to read the initial full decision. -
The two are at least partly linked though. If you are dismissed, the dismissal may be unfair because legislation doesn’t allow for dismissal in those circumstances (e.g. because if you are dismissed for getting pregnant or undertaking trade union activities) or because your employment contract doesn’t allow for it. Alternatively, the dismissal may be unfair because although the end result was correct, the employer didn’t follow the rules correctly (e.g. you didn’t get the chance to appeal or the timescales in your contract weren’t followed). In these cases the tribunal can decide you were correctly dismissed but award compensation for the company not following the rules correctly - but the compensation in these cases will be pretty small. Given the amount the tribunal awarded, they are saying the dismissal should not have happened I.e. Derby had no legal grounds for dismissing him for the “offence”
-