Suppose it depends on if they're offering severance or not, which isn't clear from Crafton's article. If they're truly going "voluntary resignation" without compensation, yeah you probably shouldn't.
> Employees have been given until June 5 to decide whether to take what the club describe as “voluntary resignation”, although some employees, who wished not to be named when discussing confidential emails, argued it looked a lot more like a voluntary redundancy programme.
From the article. Again, Crafton doesn't give too many details on what the program is. If it is a true voluntary resignation like you say, you'd be silly to resign unless you were about to resign anyway.
If it isn't, and there's instead some compensation attached to it, then you gotta weigh up your choices.
UK employment law - there will be a severance package and it'll be better than when the involuntary redundancies come around after. This sort of thing CAN work out perfectly for people who were thinking of leaving in the near/mid term.
During the pandemic I was offered voluntary redundancy, I grabbed the chance with both hands I was going to resign a month later as I was moving overseas
It happened to me as well, I was going to get terminated because the account that I worked under was terminated and moved to another company, so they terminated all my workmates, and had to pay severance, however, in my case it didn't work because I'm on medical leave due to my spinal disease, but was somehow hoping they would overlook (had they done so I was entitled to a very significant financial package) it seemed they were about to pull the trigger but when I was about to enter into discussions they must've come to their senses and just transferred me to a different account. Which was a bloody shame because I could've really used that money. About 35 thousand in my local currency.
Yeah i think this is has got lost in translation in the leaks, surely. I’ve been through voluntary redundancies before and it’s a shitty situation but it does allow people who want to leave (or are close to retirement) the opportunity to go with a good package.
The upside is if they then go into redundancy mode and make compulsory cuts the package is usually worth less, the down side is if you have any type of redundancy insurance cover that 9 times out 10 won’t pay out on voluntary
I got "terminated by mutual consent" in November; it involved them making an offer of some amounts of money that *just happened* to include the amount they'd be legally required to pay me if I was being made redundant (and an additional month's pay on top).
It's redundancy by the back door. If you make someone redundant in the UK you're not allowed to rehire for the same position for six months afterwards, and the company went to great lengths to make sure that at no point in the process was it ever to be described as a redundancy.
Yep, i think this same in every country.. but how big it is can be different for each company, depends on how strong their financial. One company at my country offers like 3-5 years salary as severance.
Can tell you for certain it's not like this for most sectors in the USA. Only ones with strong unions, like the United Auto Workers would get something like this. Most companies can kick you to the curb, however a lot of layoffs these days at big companies do come with some form of severance to help maintain good relations and help negate the bad press.
A lot of companies also do voluntary resignation packages to offer an exit for employees that simply do not like their jobs. It's not really something you can say in a letter offering the package, but it's understood to work quite well because it incentivizes people that already want to move on. When making this decision its important to know your legally guaranteed severances etc, because the voluntary package may be worth more - and is immediately available.
It's hard to say without really knowing whats planned, they've already done a lot of capital costs cutting, so layoffs may be next to meet their goals for expenses and PSR. Or they're simply trying to do a cultural reset and want to weed out unmotivated employees.
It depends, this is not always the best advice. My Dad was offered voluntary redundancy and got a nice payout, more then if he had been fired/made redundant normally.
This is not necessarily true ( we have workers rights in the EU ) . In my company they offered voluntary redundancy which was a package basically the same as if they fired you , it was 7 weeks wages per year you worked at the company plus some other things
**Contd :**
**All staff except for men’s team, women’s team and academy staff have been told they have till June 5 to decide if they want to leave their jobs in order to receive their annual bonuses which would ordinarily be paid later in the year.**
[https://x.com/AdamCrafton\_/status/1795513700368998871](https://x.com/AdamCrafton_/status/1795513700368998871)
It represents latest INEOS attempts to drive down costs and change culture at Old Trafford, but staff stunned to be invited en masse to resign today. Voluntary resignation sounds a lot like voluntary redundancy…
[https://x.com/AdamCrafton\_/status/1795513702138994963](https://x.com/AdamCrafton_/status/1795513702138994963)
**No, before everyone makes this joke, the manager has not received this email**
https://x.com/AdamCrafton\_/status/1795514414348529717
> It represents latest INEOS attempts to drive down costs and change culture at Old Trafford, but staff stunned to be invited en masse to resign today. Voluntary resignation sounds a lot like voluntary redundancy…
Yeah this won't go down well so I do sympathise with the employees put in this situation meanwhile the higher ups will undoubtedly not face any consequences. That said INEOS aren't going to fuck around with a bloated employee count and this sort of ruthlessness is how companies (and specifically the rich businesspeople at the top) make their money.
It sucks for employees, but benefits the finances for the club I suppose. The new owners won't care if it makes them look like the bad guys but at the same time having owners who are cunts in a business way is the lesser evil than cunts in the sportswashing way that we could have had.
> meanwhile the higher ups will undoubtedly not face any consequence
yeah, they only sacked like a lot of executives. Arnold, Murtough, Patrick Stewart, Baty (CFO), these are just the ones I can name from memory, lol
It's different because that's part of a restructuring that comes alongside takeovers where roles are altered, shifted, dissolved or whatever you want to call it.
Right now under the new structure I'm pretty confident that it won't be those calling the shots who take pay cuts out of the kindness of their own hearts, they'll be taking money out of the lowest levels of employees while giving it to themselves. Happens in every company that goes through cost cutting.
Brailsford works for Ineos' sports division not United.
Barreda, Wilcox, and Ashworth haven't even finished their gardening leave. Do you expect them to take a pay cut before they even arrive?
They're the ones that will be making the calls.
How to live the high life as a top executive while also "trimming the fat": getting rid of a bunch of people with average salaries while continuing to pay yourself millions in bonuses and wages
It's despicable and there should be laws in place to prevent it. Look at Warner Brothers under Zaslav, laying off thousands of people to try and clear billions of debt meanwhile giving himself a pay rise.
It should be a requirement that if costs need to come down then the higher ups who make the real millions are where the first cuts should come from, which would probably be worth at least thousands of the lower level employees put together and they'd still have millions left over anyway. But it won't be because that's just not the way the world works unfortunately.
There are laws. That's why no one is being laid off to cut costs or because they are not coming back to work but rather asking them to voluntarily resign if they no longer wish to continue working there.
There is also an argument about getting people back to work from the office if you have committed or already invested in office space and facilities, but then there's no one to utilise all the space and if you are paying rent etc, then it doesn't make sense to have people not come back to work. There are definitely arguments for remote work as well so yeah.
The actual statistics show that the most desirable employees are the ones a company loses when they require employees to return to office. The simple explanation is, the employees with leverage because they're at the top of their field or perform especially important tasks are the most valuable to the company and therefore can find a new job that fits their preference to work from home. The employees lost in return to office mandates are proven to be the employees that are in relative terms the most important employees to keep.
In my opinion this return to office mandate by Ratcliff is a huge red flag that he's the type of leader to do things that are proven to be a mistake, and I'm worried that type of cavalier attitude will bleed over into footballing decisions. Leave footballing to football experts. The new hired CEO, DOF, etc can't get in soon enough
Cal Newport (a productivity author) had a good post about how it was a red flag that Ratcliffe relied on a drop in the number of emails at INEOS to decide against work from home. In Newport's view, that's foolish because it isn't clear whether the drop was actually a drop in productive emails or just busy work emails. Kind of concerning that Ratclifffe seems to be reliant on misleading statistics to drive his decisions.
Mad that some of the weekly wages of some players that play shit week in week out or are just injured for a whole season would pay 2-3 annual salaries of normal folk. Hopefully the player wage structure is sorted out soon as that’s our biggest fuck up at the mo
Obviously they will do that, but it's harder because different contracts.
It's why it was briefed that 80% of the squad is up for sale.
It's why Rashford and Bruno are far from "unsellable" they both earn close to or over 300K a week.
>You really think we’d sell Bruno?
*everyone* has a price. No one will pay that figure to get bruno, but if saudi threw 200 million at us he'd he gone.
Of course but if Real Madrid offers even 150 million, it can be hard to keep him. Most players wanna go to real madrid already. Now this is a hypothetical scenario. Let's say Bruno does extremely well in the Euros. Leading Portugal to the cup as the tournament's best player and top scorer, I'm sure we will see offers coming in from real and co.
Zero chance real madrid or any European team get close to 150m (he turns 30 in september and madrid have long since moved away from signing expensive galactico type players over their mid 20s)
Most we get from a European club I'd say would be 70 or 80m and is hard to think even of a club in current climate that can afford that for a player fast approaching 30. Also don't think we would sell our captain and best player for that.
So I think only sale that could happen would be saudi bid of 100m + and for him to request the move. Seems incredibly unlikely that a. They bid enough to tempt us and b. That he would want to go
Every player HAS a price, but not every player has potential suiters that would pay that price
If PIF came in to sign him for 9 figures I don’t know how you turn that down in our current state. He is 29, has played a ton of football and at some point the wheels will come off. Love Bruno, would never want him to be sold even considering that but we have real financial considerations given how much we have continually spent and how little we sell anyone for.
Because United was cruising on revenues from it's past glories, 10 years later the revenue growth has slowed enough to allow the debt and interests to catch up to it. So yeah I guess he saved people's jobs by borrowing them from the future.
The salary part isn’t even the biggest issue, it’s that when companies usually do this it leads to the best people leaving because they know they can get a new job with more money. The ones who stay are usually the news ones and the ones who aren’t the top performers. So suddenly you turn around and all your colleagues are the ones you cause extra work for you. To fix that you’re going to have to spend even more money to convince new talented people to come in since the old ones won’t and will be telling everyone how terrible you are. This is such a short sighted move.
I've personally been in situations similar to this. Survived a huge layoff as I was the only person who knew a certain tech stack. I gtfo within 3 months because people I liked were let go, stress levels went up, and I sensed job security and rewards were trending down.
Exactly what we predicted when they shifted the mandatory policy to return to office.
Fucking cunts want to make people quit so they don’t have to pay severance. Would honestly hope those who want to quit actually try to get fired so they can maybe get severance pay if this would entail them to it. Pathetic move on the everyday man yet again.
Honestly outside of football appointments, Jim has been a cunt all the way with the policy changes and all. Typical billionaire boomer cunt. And the recent seeming snub of ETH. Yeah fuck off.
Moving to a hybrid work system would have been better. To play devil's advocate, I'd imagine all departments of this club are rampant with folks putting in a half-ass shift into their work knowing there is not a demand to be world-class at your job. Low standards and expectations, just keep attention off ya and keep your job. That type of culture is rampant in old legacy style big companies and I bet that is what was trickling down through the departments from the Galzers lack of leadership and demands.
I could be totally wrong, but I bet some of this is trying to shift the culture and mindset. It is mostly to cut costs and fat but still.
Certain industries and companies can be completely virtual and WFH. I don't think a football club is one of them. To each their own though. This club need a genuinely drastic change throughout all departments. The mindset should be to have world-class teams from nutrition to marketing to scouting etc.
The INEOS model has literally been to buy companies they think they could extract value, cut costs massively (and sometimes standards), increase value, then flip the business.
They've got some shady practices including some anti union stuff.
Also it's worth remembering the London and Manchester offices aren't big enough to fit all staff. And that a lot of back office roles will just be...back office roles that can be done remotely.
And you can just go on Glassdoor and see the average rating and themes of staff reviews for INEOS, then look at Manchester City, Liverpool FC and even us. Making the club a worse place to work for people doesn't result in high performance.
It's not realistic or even necessary in certain departments tho. You aren't going to get best-in-class talents in non-football related roles in general in football clubs, as they usually underpay compared to other industries. Other than passion for the club, why would you work there compared to oil & gas, finance or semiconductor sectors?
Agree. I just don't understand his insistence on ending WFH. His argument is he is trying to (re)build a culture and that is not possible when no one is present in person. I disagree...
There is lots and lots of data to back up that the most desirable employees are the ones who leave the most, because they can more easily find a job that fits their preferences. These mandates are counterproductive
Did anyone expect anything different? During the bidding process there was a narrative that Jim and INEOS were good guys because they were up against Qatar, but it was never the case. INEOS have their own skeletons in the closet.
They're only good guys in that they aren't the aren't the absolute embodiment of evil like the slaver. But Sir Jim is still a petro-billionare that pushed for brexit. But at least he's from the area and geniuene fan.
Still better then slavers & murderers. One is a certified jerk, trying to snub people of money anywhere he can. The other literally has skeletons in their closet.
I called this at the start. I worked for INEOS in the past, the only thing they know is extreme cost cutting and headcount reduction, they are doing it at United where it’s not even needed. It’s all they know how to do.
I don’t have access to the financials, what I meant is that the vast majority of the salary overheads come from the players, this stinks of them cutting staff just because it’s all they know.
They're also looking to move on the players tbf.
Almost everyone is for sale based on the reports.
United was almost a billion in debt not too long ago. We absolutely need to start cutting costs.
If we assume the average salary is 60k (which I highly doubt particularly the level of people they are trying to cut) that’s 173 people could be employed a year on that type of money.
Sad day for a lot of people.
This is true. But it's the way of the world.
The other truth is that 75k people do not spend their money to show up every week to watch Bob in accounting run a spreadsheet.
Supply and demand.
We pass you over to our commentary team led by Peter Drury.
Lining up for his full office debut tonight, Bob from accounting, the quiet maestro of the office, stands over his keyboard like a conductor ready to lead a symphony. Focused on cell B14, moving the mouse with an elegance reminiscent of a ballet dancer on the grandest stage. He feins pressing the enter key, but fakes out, no one was expecting it, he clicks his custom macro key, the code executing flawlessly... the tension is palpable... it's a new quarterly high! CAN YOU BELIEVE IT. Office legends are born in moments like these!
THIS IS BOB'S DAY! THIS IS ACCOUNTANCY'S DAY! MANCHESTER UNITED'S QUARTERLY SHIRT SALES REPORT WILL REMEMBER *THIS DAY*! THE SCHUMANN OF THE SPREADSHEETS, THE ELGAR OF EXCEL, DOES WHAT HE DOES BEST!
There is a time and place for this kind of comment mate.
As much as you hate the guy, he is under a contract with the club. A contract that was signed before Ineos.
This kind of comment undermines the issue with employees of the club with the ongoing cost reduction. The only individuals you need to be blamed for are these suits cost cutting for profits - not Anthony.
The bonus would've been discretionary and linked to group performance, and have enough caveats that they could pull something like this.
Office-based staff aren't going to get bonuses based on revenue growth, profits etc.
Guy was pro Brexit and promised to build a factory in the UK to bring back/create jobs.
He then decided to move to Monaco to save billions on taxes and built his factory in France right after he got his knighthood.
It's a precursor for layoffs (redundancies I believe is the UK term?). Pretty common move these days, companies ask for people to be voluntarily laid off prior to doing any layoffs to reduce the number of unvoluntary ones.
Last time the organization I work for did it, they advertised very clearly what the termination package would be. It was pretty darn good if you chose to take it...
mmm yeah though you risk losing good ones if you do blanket stuff like this + forced RTO, but idk, we'll see what happens I guess. Hope the severance is good at least.
When we did ours, you had to "apply" for it and not everyone's application got accepted because of that risk. My boss at the time had applied because he was within a year or two of retirement and our package included a retirement "buy-up" on top of the severance pay. He got denied and just retired on his own six months later.
That said, I believe they went back at a later date to the people who were "denied" and offered it to them directly at the start of another round of cuts.
The termination package here is just that you get your year end bonus. Absolutely no one should take it.
The longer they wait the more redundancy they have to pay anyway. Squeeze what you can is always the mantra.
SJR is not doing it to line his pockets mate, they are doing this because the club staff is bloated, it has been run like shit and costs need to be cut.
Failing organisation needs a root and branch review and then action taken to course correct based on said review.
I don't work for United so I don't have a clue what it's like, whether it's bloated, whether it runs like a well oiled machine. We aren't privy to their findings so conjecture about a supposed lower level role being put under undue duress by corporate overlords just seems hyperbole.
None of us know if the steps INEOS want to take will work. We might lose some great people, we might not.
I think it is fair to consider the stress and anxiety currently on good people who work at the club who may fear what happens to their jobs. That sucks. You never want to see good people go through something tough like a job loss. If, and a big IF, that is what happens. Again, we don't know. All I've seen so far is them announce an end to the work from home policy and then offer a bonus earlier for those who don't wish to return to an office if they agree to leave.
This thread reads like Crafton has got a pissed off employee leaking info to him and a bunch of people are speculating the worst based on their perceived ideology to a party, social class, or policy.
Ineos are very quickly losing all my respect. The way they've treated staff since the takeover has been nothing short of disgraceful. These aren't superstars on 250k a week, they're ordinary people on average and even below average salaries. What's the point of getting a billionaire in charge if they can't afford to pay people a decent redundancy package while making them unemployed in a shitty job market? Literally deemed the world's most valuable football club earlier in the month but telling literally all staff that we want to get rid of them on the cheap?
The cuts are not being made because we've been brilliant over the past 10 years, are they?
The club has been a shambles, it's time to take responsibility.
People aren't comfortable with harsh realities. They want United to "trim the fat" and "work like a proper footballing club" but no one seems to have understood that that means more than not giving Martial a new contract.
Yeah. A lot of folks here played it as black and white situation, while reality is always grey area.
Of course there will be cuts here and there when any mergers / acquisitions occur because they spent wads of money to enforce their system/process. Thats just how corporates work.
Difficult to swallow but it is what it is.
Indeed. They honestly believe that SJR will sack people that would actively contribute to an elite club? People tend to forget that United is supposed to be one of the top clubs in the world and that position comes with certain standards and a whole lot of pressure.
Plenty of bosses would get rid of lower-paid people who actively contribute as a dick-swinging move to demonstrate they are cost-cutting without knowing what the actual consequences of those people leaving will be. I don't know enough about these people's jobs to comment on this specific scenario but don't automatically assume competence on managements part. I've never come across really senior managers who know what the fuck people at a certain tier actually do in their working day. At a certain level of abstraction their jobs are just numbers and cutting them is a good way to show you're doing *something*. You're not sure what, but expenses have gone down so... must be good right?
That's absolutely true but let me ask you this. Have you worked in an elite environment like United? One that strives to be at the top echelon of their trade?
I haven't worked in the football industry. I work for a large institution I won't name that does have pretensions of being a world leader in its field (which it isn't). Thing is, all these institutions have people doing clerical/admin/support work which is just pretty much in line with what happens in any similarly sized organisation. Like, the payroll staff are just going to be doing similar tasks as they would do at any similar sized organisation. The IT guys are just going to be doing generic IT support tasks. The 'top echelon of their trade' thing doesn't really apply to these jobs as much. They'll either do them competently or they won't. If you're good at them it's not really noticed, if you're bad at them it's also not noticed unless that directly affects management. Their jobs do not directly affect the standing of the institution, they just lubricate the wheels of the machine that support the jobs that do.
The irony here. You pretend to know the real world but think that higher ups won't get rid of high-performers? Perhaps you've never experienced redundancies or lay-offs at your companies, but they aren't perfect. They aren't going through the entire club with a microscope, name by name, and removing those that aren't 'elite'. Plenty of excellent people, fantastic at their jobs, will likely leave as a result of this.
im pretty sure they will have package if they volunteer to leave. They use the term voluntarily resign but it is usually a decent severance package. People are not stupid and lots of laws to protect employees.
I feel like most of the negative comments here have never worked at a bloated company before. It's not about money at all but process. I have friends (mainly in tech) where they've sacked the entire staff, then they all have to reapply. Most of them get their job back if they want it.
What tends to happen is a person who is incredible at their job leaves, and they hire someone to replace them but they can't perform to the same level, so they hire someone else to help. You can end up with 2/3/4 people doing one persons job. Over decades this can make every day things (in terms of a football club) like catering, cleaning, logistics etc take an inordinate amount of time for decisions to be made, and everything falls apart eventually.
It's terrible people have to lose jobs at any time, but United stinks of a business without any real structure.
Was probably the plan, was reported early they wanted severe cuts and were even bringing in outside consultants. Firing people is a PR and legal nightmare, forcing people to quit is a standard tactic in the corporate world especially in acquisitions
What would these people be likely to be earning? I guess in pounds it’s going to be around the 20-30k mark. Imagine being at a football club like United and basically being told you’re the problem on your absolute pittance wage while there are guys earning 6 or 7 times what you earn a year in a week.
Love the double standards on here as usual.
Crying for new, ruthless ownership and then crying when they get it.
It is blindingly obvious Ineos are trying to bring in a lean, committed workforce and raise standards.
It's what any sensible owner would do in order to compete in the modern era.
If you can't be fucked coming into the office to contribute and collaborate with your colleagues in order to move the club forward, or want to toss it off in the civil service with no targets or pressure, then on your way.
If the review that's been carried out says 'unnecessary employees are at the club in position X' should we keep them around or what? What's the point of carrying out reviews if you don't act on it?
We dont have a CHOICE,
If you consider FFP and just transfers alone.. we can lose $35m a year or $105m in three years.
Lets imagine we want to sell Maguire and Antony, thats easily more than $105m lost - which would mean we cant sign ANY player for THREE years, we have to cut costs and bring in more revenue.
This is on the Football board for not listening to Head Scout, Head of Global Scouting, Mou, Ole, LVG, Ralph and many others and thinking they know better.
Yes Antony was on the manager, but for Years the Football Board have been refusing to listen to our scouts and managers, we are in a terrible position with FFP
The club has been a jolly up for decades, it's time to trim the shite down to what is required. No slack, get back to work. Now sack EtH, fix the roof (short term fix) and build a new 100k seater stadium and a fully rebuild the area within 20 miles within the new stadium. Also, build a new training complex.
Expected, underperforming club wants to reduce underperforming staff on all fronts
It’s not all on the glaziers
We see it all over the place, fan content is 2nd tier compared to rival clubs, set pieces are a shambles so likely set piece coach isn’t doing well, so many injuries so something is wrong there etc etc etc
I was very much pessimistic about Ratcliffe and I do not like people losing jobs. It makes it even worse when those that aren’t at risk are those on exorbitant salaries however if I was to take a positive view on this I hope what they are doing is identifying a bloated workforce that is just too large. I hope the intention is to have a smaller organisation that is of a higher quality, one that can then be more effective in collaborating together and move the club in a better direction faster.
I am of course being very very optimistic here so as I say…. I hope this is the case and not something else.
I also hope the voluntary resignation means redundancy and therefore some people will br supported in leaving and finding work that fits their career ambitions and life better.
Likely going to take the hate on this one but we have to be realistic here.
Everyone wants us to perform better on the field but don't think corporately leaning up is a consequence of the change every united fan wants. Unfortunately, whether you like it or not, this is part of the change we wanted and asked for. INEOS' job is to ensure we are run well, companies that are run well are lean and things like this are a common occurrence.
I was ambivalent towards the working back in the office stuff (been back in for over 2 years myself, its a pain sorting the kids out but it was like that pre 2020 anyway), but this seems unbelievably shitty. Trying to get people to resign instead of making them redundant feels like some victorian era misery.
The difference now is that Ineos want to see something for that £1.25 billion. The Glazers never put a penny in and therefore haven’t really cared about the normal staff or the details.
Unfortunately the Glazers still own the club and now have a billionaire Rottweiler too.
They need to be treating people right and getting staff onside. It can't be good for the atmosphere around the club if they're making regular people redundant for some marginal financial gain that makes little difference compared to the money spent on transfers and player wages. I'm excited to see what he does football wise but I don't like Ratcliffe himself
Voluntary resignation for early payout of a bonus you'd get anyway or return to office and get a redundancy. I think he's using this to end WFH and get rid of people on one. If you can't return to office you'll be fired the day after this offer expires.
How does maintaining an office unit for more people coming in cuts costs? You pay more for electricity water internet and other services, i understand players and coaches chefs ets are needed there but why tf would you need everyone… whats wrong with these billionaires
I hope this is the energy Ineos show when it comes to trimming the squad of players who are not showing up, and have poor performances. They have already shown this ruthlessness when it came to cutting out executives such as Murtough. It is sad that people are losing their jobs. Hopefully the packages offered are decent and give people a bit of breathing room to look for alternative jobs.
Wow. Ineos have done nothing to the squad and I’m already disliking them.
This is going to be rough. It’s the sort of corportate culture I rail against and actively avoid and make fun off.
This is going to be tough
I’d rather the club didn’t turn into a soulless corporation thanks. Was proud the club kept all staff during Covid on full pay
What would Jim have done ….
[удалено]
Suppose it depends on if they're offering severance or not, which isn't clear from Crafton's article. If they're truly going "voluntary resignation" without compensation, yeah you probably shouldn't.
[удалено]
> Employees have been given until June 5 to decide whether to take what the club describe as “voluntary resignation”, although some employees, who wished not to be named when discussing confidential emails, argued it looked a lot more like a voluntary redundancy programme. From the article. Again, Crafton doesn't give too many details on what the program is. If it is a true voluntary resignation like you say, you'd be silly to resign unless you were about to resign anyway. If it isn't, and there's instead some compensation attached to it, then you gotta weigh up your choices.
UK employment law - there will be a severance package and it'll be better than when the involuntary redundancies come around after. This sort of thing CAN work out perfectly for people who were thinking of leaving in the near/mid term.
During the pandemic I was offered voluntary redundancy, I grabbed the chance with both hands I was going to resign a month later as I was moving overseas
It happened to me as well, I was going to get terminated because the account that I worked under was terminated and moved to another company, so they terminated all my workmates, and had to pay severance, however, in my case it didn't work because I'm on medical leave due to my spinal disease, but was somehow hoping they would overlook (had they done so I was entitled to a very significant financial package) it seemed they were about to pull the trigger but when I was about to enter into discussions they must've come to their senses and just transferred me to a different account. Which was a bloody shame because I could've really used that money. About 35 thousand in my local currency.
Good for you that's awesome! I've never taken it myself but have had friends and colleagues who have done very well from it.
From Jamie Jackson’s guardian article, it is only an early payment of an annual bonus.
Yeah i think this is has got lost in translation in the leaks, surely. I’ve been through voluntary redundancies before and it’s a shitty situation but it does allow people who want to leave (or are close to retirement) the opportunity to go with a good package. The upside is if they then go into redundancy mode and make compulsory cuts the package is usually worth less, the down side is if you have any type of redundancy insurance cover that 9 times out 10 won’t pay out on voluntary
I got "terminated by mutual consent" in November; it involved them making an offer of some amounts of money that *just happened* to include the amount they'd be legally required to pay me if I was being made redundant (and an additional month's pay on top). It's redundancy by the back door. If you make someone redundant in the UK you're not allowed to rehire for the same position for six months afterwards, and the company went to great lengths to make sure that at no point in the process was it ever to be described as a redundancy.
Most voluntary exit packages offer severance though, no? Otherwise yes that would be insanely stupid to wall for nothing.
Unless they’re facing bankruptcy, there’s going to be very good severance packages.
Yep, i think this same in every country.. but how big it is can be different for each company, depends on how strong their financial. One company at my country offers like 3-5 years salary as severance.
Can tell you for certain it's not like this for most sectors in the USA. Only ones with strong unions, like the United Auto Workers would get something like this. Most companies can kick you to the curb, however a lot of layoffs these days at big companies do come with some form of severance to help maintain good relations and help negate the bad press.
A lot of companies also do voluntary resignation packages to offer an exit for employees that simply do not like their jobs. It's not really something you can say in a letter offering the package, but it's understood to work quite well because it incentivizes people that already want to move on. When making this decision its important to know your legally guaranteed severances etc, because the voluntary package may be worth more - and is immediately available. It's hard to say without really knowing whats planned, they've already done a lot of capital costs cutting, so layoffs may be next to meet their goals for expenses and PSR. Or they're simply trying to do a cultural reset and want to weed out unmotivated employees.
No dough, no go.
From other reports coming out, sounds like they're offering payouts and early payment of an annual bonus
What's the "trick"? Sounds like a pretty straight forward and honest interaction.
It depends, this is not always the best advice. My Dad was offered voluntary redundancy and got a nice payout, more then if he had been fired/made redundant normally.
Well, yeah. I think you're severely underestimating people here.
This is not necessarily true ( we have workers rights in the EU ) . In my company they offered voluntary redundancy which was a package basically the same as if they fired you , it was 7 weeks wages per year you worked at the company plus some other things
**Contd :** **All staff except for men’s team, women’s team and academy staff have been told they have till June 5 to decide if they want to leave their jobs in order to receive their annual bonuses which would ordinarily be paid later in the year.** [https://x.com/AdamCrafton\_/status/1795513700368998871](https://x.com/AdamCrafton_/status/1795513700368998871) It represents latest INEOS attempts to drive down costs and change culture at Old Trafford, but staff stunned to be invited en masse to resign today. Voluntary resignation sounds a lot like voluntary redundancy… [https://x.com/AdamCrafton\_/status/1795513702138994963](https://x.com/AdamCrafton_/status/1795513702138994963) **No, before everyone makes this joke, the manager has not received this email** https://x.com/AdamCrafton\_/status/1795514414348529717
> It represents latest INEOS attempts to drive down costs and change culture at Old Trafford, but staff stunned to be invited en masse to resign today. Voluntary resignation sounds a lot like voluntary redundancy… Yeah this won't go down well so I do sympathise with the employees put in this situation meanwhile the higher ups will undoubtedly not face any consequences. That said INEOS aren't going to fuck around with a bloated employee count and this sort of ruthlessness is how companies (and specifically the rich businesspeople at the top) make their money. It sucks for employees, but benefits the finances for the club I suppose. The new owners won't care if it makes them look like the bad guys but at the same time having owners who are cunts in a business way is the lesser evil than cunts in the sportswashing way that we could have had.
> meanwhile the higher ups will undoubtedly not face any consequence yeah, they only sacked like a lot of executives. Arnold, Murtough, Patrick Stewart, Baty (CFO), these are just the ones I can name from memory, lol
Have to wonder if Stewart refused to go through with this and was sacked/resigned as a result.
It's different because that's part of a restructuring that comes alongside takeovers where roles are altered, shifted, dissolved or whatever you want to call it. Right now under the new structure I'm pretty confident that it won't be those calling the shots who take pay cuts out of the kindness of their own hearts, they'll be taking money out of the lowest levels of employees while giving it to themselves. Happens in every company that goes through cost cutting.
Brailsford works for Ineos' sports division not United. Barreda, Wilcox, and Ashworth haven't even finished their gardening leave. Do you expect them to take a pay cut before they even arrive? They're the ones that will be making the calls.
who would take the paycut? Brailsford ? SJR? what shot callers should be taking the cut? what are you talking about?
Wow they are cunts
How to live the high life as a top executive while also "trimming the fat": getting rid of a bunch of people with average salaries while continuing to pay yourself millions in bonuses and wages
It's despicable and there should be laws in place to prevent it. Look at Warner Brothers under Zaslav, laying off thousands of people to try and clear billions of debt meanwhile giving himself a pay rise. It should be a requirement that if costs need to come down then the higher ups who make the real millions are where the first cuts should come from, which would probably be worth at least thousands of the lower level employees put together and they'd still have millions left over anyway. But it won't be because that's just not the way the world works unfortunately.
That's capitalism baby
There are laws. That's why no one is being laid off to cut costs or because they are not coming back to work but rather asking them to voluntarily resign if they no longer wish to continue working there. There is also an argument about getting people back to work from the office if you have committed or already invested in office space and facilities, but then there's no one to utilise all the space and if you are paying rent etc, then it doesn't make sense to have people not come back to work. There are definitely arguments for remote work as well so yeah.
The actual statistics show that the most desirable employees are the ones a company loses when they require employees to return to office. The simple explanation is, the employees with leverage because they're at the top of their field or perform especially important tasks are the most valuable to the company and therefore can find a new job that fits their preference to work from home. The employees lost in return to office mandates are proven to be the employees that are in relative terms the most important employees to keep. In my opinion this return to office mandate by Ratcliff is a huge red flag that he's the type of leader to do things that are proven to be a mistake, and I'm worried that type of cavalier attitude will bleed over into footballing decisions. Leave footballing to football experts. The new hired CEO, DOF, etc can't get in soon enough
Cal Newport (a productivity author) had a good post about how it was a red flag that Ratcliffe relied on a drop in the number of emails at INEOS to decide against work from home. In Newport's view, that's foolish because it isn't clear whether the drop was actually a drop in productive emails or just busy work emails. Kind of concerning that Ratclifffe seems to be reliant on misleading statistics to drive his decisions.
Mad that some of the weekly wages of some players that play shit week in week out or are just injured for a whole season would pay 2-3 annual salaries of normal folk. Hopefully the player wage structure is sorted out soon as that’s our biggest fuck up at the mo
Obviously they will do that, but it's harder because different contracts. It's why it was briefed that 80% of the squad is up for sale. It's why Rashford and Bruno are far from "unsellable" they both earn close to or over 300K a week.
You really think we’d sell Bruno? I can’t imagine any realistic scenario where we would.
>You really think we’d sell Bruno? *everyone* has a price. No one will pay that figure to get bruno, but if saudi threw 200 million at us he'd he gone.
I did also say realistic. I don’t think Bruno is the type to go to Saudi (yet….?)
Of course but if Real Madrid offers even 150 million, it can be hard to keep him. Most players wanna go to real madrid already. Now this is a hypothetical scenario. Let's say Bruno does extremely well in the Euros. Leading Portugal to the cup as the tournament's best player and top scorer, I'm sure we will see offers coming in from real and co.
Zero chance real madrid or any European team get close to 150m (he turns 30 in september and madrid have long since moved away from signing expensive galactico type players over their mid 20s) Most we get from a European club I'd say would be 70 or 80m and is hard to think even of a club in current climate that can afford that for a player fast approaching 30. Also don't think we would sell our captain and best player for that. So I think only sale that could happen would be saudi bid of 100m + and for him to request the move. Seems incredibly unlikely that a. They bid enough to tempt us and b. That he would want to go Every player HAS a price, but not every player has potential suiters that would pay that price
I dont think he would agree to go so he wouldn't be gone.
Same reason why Barca sold Neymar, they had a 200M release clause they never thought anyone would go for. But PSG did...
If PIF came in to sign him for 9 figures I don’t know how you turn that down in our current state. He is 29, has played a ton of football and at some point the wheels will come off. Love Bruno, would never want him to be sold even considering that but we have real financial considerations given how much we have continually spent and how little we sell anyone for.
Do you think we're going to sell them and magically find top players to come and earn less?
For all of Ed Woodward's faults, it seems like he was pretty darn good at protecting people's jobs.
Protecting the working class. Bless his soul.
Because United was cruising on revenues from it's past glories, 10 years later the revenue growth has slowed enough to allow the debt and interests to catch up to it. So yeah I guess he saved people's jobs by borrowing them from the future.
We had very little debt until the Glazers turned up with their scam!
It's not an top executive Its sir Jim who's more than happy with this
He did just drop about over a billion to purchase the club and then another 200m to help clear debts and finance facility improvements
from his own pockets? nah.
In, fire 30% of the workforce, new logo, boom! Out. You are now a fully trained management consultant.
Legit - if there are people doing jobs which are not required, why should they not let people go?
The salary part isn’t even the biggest issue, it’s that when companies usually do this it leads to the best people leaving because they know they can get a new job with more money. The ones who stay are usually the news ones and the ones who aren’t the top performers. So suddenly you turn around and all your colleagues are the ones you cause extra work for you. To fix that you’re going to have to spend even more money to convince new talented people to come in since the old ones won’t and will be telling everyone how terrible you are. This is such a short sighted move.
I've personally been in situations similar to this. Survived a huge layoff as I was the only person who knew a certain tech stack. I gtfo within 3 months because people I liked were let go, stress levels went up, and I sensed job security and rewards were trending down.
Good for you. Glad you got out quickly. Hope your new company is a much better place for you.
You forgot the step where you leave before everything falls apart, making it look like you were a genius holding the ship together.
INEOS seem horrible to work for
Exactly what we predicted when they shifted the mandatory policy to return to office. Fucking cunts want to make people quit so they don’t have to pay severance. Would honestly hope those who want to quit actually try to get fired so they can maybe get severance pay if this would entail them to it. Pathetic move on the everyday man yet again. Honestly outside of football appointments, Jim has been a cunt all the way with the policy changes and all. Typical billionaire boomer cunt. And the recent seeming snub of ETH. Yeah fuck off.
Moving to a hybrid work system would have been better. To play devil's advocate, I'd imagine all departments of this club are rampant with folks putting in a half-ass shift into their work knowing there is not a demand to be world-class at your job. Low standards and expectations, just keep attention off ya and keep your job. That type of culture is rampant in old legacy style big companies and I bet that is what was trickling down through the departments from the Galzers lack of leadership and demands. I could be totally wrong, but I bet some of this is trying to shift the culture and mindset. It is mostly to cut costs and fat but still. Certain industries and companies can be completely virtual and WFH. I don't think a football club is one of them. To each their own though. This club need a genuinely drastic change throughout all departments. The mindset should be to have world-class teams from nutrition to marketing to scouting etc.
The INEOS model has literally been to buy companies they think they could extract value, cut costs massively (and sometimes standards), increase value, then flip the business. They've got some shady practices including some anti union stuff. Also it's worth remembering the London and Manchester offices aren't big enough to fit all staff. And that a lot of back office roles will just be...back office roles that can be done remotely. And you can just go on Glassdoor and see the average rating and themes of staff reviews for INEOS, then look at Manchester City, Liverpool FC and even us. Making the club a worse place to work for people doesn't result in high performance.
It's not realistic or even necessary in certain departments tho. You aren't going to get best-in-class talents in non-football related roles in general in football clubs, as they usually underpay compared to other industries. Other than passion for the club, why would you work there compared to oil & gas, finance or semiconductor sectors?
Agree. I just don't understand his insistence on ending WFH. His argument is he is trying to (re)build a culture and that is not possible when no one is present in person. I disagree...
He has the power to tell the underperformers to take a choice. You'd do the same.
There is lots and lots of data to back up that the most desirable employees are the ones who leave the most, because they can more easily find a job that fits their preferences. These mandates are counterproductive
this was the man who shut down strikes on an oil rig in scotland with the threat of unemployment, it’s all very brutal
So much bootlicking in this thread and I wonder why people do.it for a man who's clearly a scumbag
Did anyone expect anything different? During the bidding process there was a narrative that Jim and INEOS were good guys because they were up against Qatar, but it was never the case. INEOS have their own skeletons in the closet.
no one said they were the good guys, they were always the lesser evil.
Yeah let’s just say the sentiment was far from this balanced
But he's got a knighthood? Everyone who has ever been knighted is surely a good guy? Right? Right!?!
They're only good guys in that they aren't the aren't the absolute embodiment of evil like the slaver. But Sir Jim is still a petro-billionare that pushed for brexit. But at least he's from the area and geniuene fan.
Still better then slavers & murderers. One is a certified jerk, trying to snub people of money anywhere he can. The other literally has skeletons in their closet.
Welcome to the corporate world
You can tell which people in the thread have never worked in a corporate structure. Either that or they're the directors who make the layoff decisions
Despite being against their WFH policy, why so? If they are spotting staff doing non jobs, then why shouldn't they cut them?
I called this at the start. I worked for INEOS in the past, the only thing they know is extreme cost cutting and headcount reduction, they are doing it at United where it’s not even needed. It’s all they know how to do.
Intrigued by your comment "they are doing it at United where's it's not even needed." What're your thoughts on / analysis of the financial situation?
I don’t have access to the financials, what I meant is that the vast majority of the salary overheads come from the players, this stinks of them cutting staff just because it’s all they know.
They're also looking to move on the players tbf. Almost everyone is for sale based on the reports. United was almost a billion in debt not too long ago. We absolutely need to start cutting costs.
Aren't United bloated in the staffing department though. That's what was reported so again it's not needed may not be accurate
I guess all these people salaries combined cost club less than yearly salary of Antony. I don't like it at all
If we assume the average salary is 60k (which I highly doubt particularly the level of people they are trying to cut) that’s 173 people could be employed a year on that type of money. Sad day for a lot of people.
More likely around 30k
346 people then, which makes it even sadder. At the very least it reinforces how sure you need to be when putting someone on that type of money.
This is true. But it's the way of the world. The other truth is that 75k people do not spend their money to show up every week to watch Bob in accounting run a spreadsheet. Supply and demand.
There were quite a few weeks this year I think I would have enjoyed that more tbh.
We pass you over to our commentary team led by Peter Drury. Lining up for his full office debut tonight, Bob from accounting, the quiet maestro of the office, stands over his keyboard like a conductor ready to lead a symphony. Focused on cell B14, moving the mouse with an elegance reminiscent of a ballet dancer on the grandest stage. He feins pressing the enter key, but fakes out, no one was expecting it, he clicks his custom macro key, the code executing flawlessly... the tension is palpable... it's a new quarterly high! CAN YOU BELIEVE IT. Office legends are born in moments like these!
THIS IS BOB'S DAY! THIS IS ACCOUNTANCY'S DAY! MANCHESTER UNITED'S QUARTERLY SHIRT SALES REPORT WILL REMEMBER *THIS DAY*! THE SCHUMANN OF THE SPREADSHEETS, THE ELGAR OF EXCEL, DOES WHAT HE DOES BEST!
There is a time and place for this kind of comment mate. As much as you hate the guy, he is under a contract with the club. A contract that was signed before Ineos. This kind of comment undermines the issue with employees of the club with the ongoing cost reduction. The only individuals you need to be blamed for are these suits cost cutting for profits - not Anthony.
What a weird time to be a lefty football fan (all the time)
I fucking hate capitalism man. Sucking the soul out of everything
Even worse to see all the bootlickers in the thread cheering on the layoffs
Acting as if sir Jim pays their rent. It's disgusting
It’s wild seeing people cheering for a billionaire
Always remember - there are no good Billionaires. You become a billionaire by being ruthless, this is just one example of it. There’ll be more to come
Not even ruthless, just exploitative
What a wonderful invitation. Are they offering any incentive for this other than a bonus that they were already entitled to?
The bonus would've been discretionary and linked to group performance, and have enough caveats that they could pull something like this. Office-based staff aren't going to get bonuses based on revenue growth, profits etc.
Jeez, Jimbo's a right cunt isn't he?
Guy was pro Brexit and promised to build a factory in the UK to bring back/create jobs. He then decided to move to Monaco to save billions on taxes and built his factory in France right after he got his knighthood.
Holy shit that is a different level of shitty
You only just realised?
This seems like a stupid move.
It's a precursor for layoffs (redundancies I believe is the UK term?). Pretty common move these days, companies ask for people to be voluntarily laid off prior to doing any layoffs to reduce the number of unvoluntary ones. Last time the organization I work for did it, they advertised very clearly what the termination package would be. It was pretty darn good if you chose to take it...
Yeah, my mother has just gone through similar. They asked for volunteers and offered a severance package. My mum took it as it suited her to.
mmm yeah though you risk losing good ones if you do blanket stuff like this + forced RTO, but idk, we'll see what happens I guess. Hope the severance is good at least.
When we did ours, you had to "apply" for it and not everyone's application got accepted because of that risk. My boss at the time had applied because he was within a year or two of retirement and our package included a retirement "buy-up" on top of the severance pay. He got denied and just retired on his own six months later. That said, I believe they went back at a later date to the people who were "denied" and offered it to them directly at the start of another round of cuts.
Yea the term is the same over here, for what you're describing too - voluntary redundancy
The termination package here is just that you get your year end bonus. Absolutely no one should take it. The longer they wait the more redundancy they have to pay anyway. Squeeze what you can is always the mantra.
[удалено]
SJR is not doing it to line his pockets mate, they are doing this because the club staff is bloated, it has been run like shit and costs need to be cut.
This is literally the INEOS model that got him rich
yes, but with the Club he is not doing it to line his pockets, you don't make money on football clubs, terrible investment
Why? A company reducing its expenses when it is not performing is not unheard of. Why should they keep people in jobs for the sake of it?
Failing organisation needs a root and branch review and then action taken to course correct based on said review. I don't work for United so I don't have a clue what it's like, whether it's bloated, whether it runs like a well oiled machine. We aren't privy to their findings so conjecture about a supposed lower level role being put under undue duress by corporate overlords just seems hyperbole. None of us know if the steps INEOS want to take will work. We might lose some great people, we might not. I think it is fair to consider the stress and anxiety currently on good people who work at the club who may fear what happens to their jobs. That sucks. You never want to see good people go through something tough like a job loss. If, and a big IF, that is what happens. Again, we don't know. All I've seen so far is them announce an end to the work from home policy and then offer a bonus earlier for those who don't wish to return to an office if they agree to leave. This thread reads like Crafton has got a pissed off employee leaking info to him and a bunch of people are speculating the worst based on their perceived ideology to a party, social class, or policy.
Ineos are very quickly losing all my respect. The way they've treated staff since the takeover has been nothing short of disgraceful. These aren't superstars on 250k a week, they're ordinary people on average and even below average salaries. What's the point of getting a billionaire in charge if they can't afford to pay people a decent redundancy package while making them unemployed in a shitty job market? Literally deemed the world's most valuable football club earlier in the month but telling literally all staff that we want to get rid of them on the cheap?
The cuts are not being made because we've been brilliant over the past 10 years, are they? The club has been a shambles, it's time to take responsibility.
People aren't comfortable with harsh realities. They want United to "trim the fat" and "work like a proper footballing club" but no one seems to have understood that that means more than not giving Martial a new contract.
Yeah. A lot of folks here played it as black and white situation, while reality is always grey area. Of course there will be cuts here and there when any mergers / acquisitions occur because they spent wads of money to enforce their system/process. Thats just how corporates work. Difficult to swallow but it is what it is.
Those people haven't been anywhere near a real life job scenario, they're 12 years old.
Indeed. They honestly believe that SJR will sack people that would actively contribute to an elite club? People tend to forget that United is supposed to be one of the top clubs in the world and that position comes with certain standards and a whole lot of pressure.
Plenty of bosses would get rid of lower-paid people who actively contribute as a dick-swinging move to demonstrate they are cost-cutting without knowing what the actual consequences of those people leaving will be. I don't know enough about these people's jobs to comment on this specific scenario but don't automatically assume competence on managements part. I've never come across really senior managers who know what the fuck people at a certain tier actually do in their working day. At a certain level of abstraction their jobs are just numbers and cutting them is a good way to show you're doing *something*. You're not sure what, but expenses have gone down so... must be good right?
That's absolutely true but let me ask you this. Have you worked in an elite environment like United? One that strives to be at the top echelon of their trade?
I haven't worked in the football industry. I work for a large institution I won't name that does have pretensions of being a world leader in its field (which it isn't). Thing is, all these institutions have people doing clerical/admin/support work which is just pretty much in line with what happens in any similarly sized organisation. Like, the payroll staff are just going to be doing similar tasks as they would do at any similar sized organisation. The IT guys are just going to be doing generic IT support tasks. The 'top echelon of their trade' thing doesn't really apply to these jobs as much. They'll either do them competently or they won't. If you're good at them it's not really noticed, if you're bad at them it's also not noticed unless that directly affects management. Their jobs do not directly affect the standing of the institution, they just lubricate the wheels of the machine that support the jobs that do.
The irony here. You pretend to know the real world but think that higher ups won't get rid of high-performers? Perhaps you've never experienced redundancies or lay-offs at your companies, but they aren't perfect. They aren't going through the entire club with a microscope, name by name, and removing those that aren't 'elite'. Plenty of excellent people, fantastic at their jobs, will likely leave as a result of this.
im pretty sure they will have package if they volunteer to leave. They use the term voluntarily resign but it is usually a decent severance package. People are not stupid and lots of laws to protect employees.
5 days later... UNITED NEW SEASON IN JEOPARDY !! 97% OF MANCHESTER UNITED STAFFS RESIGNED EN MASS!
I feel like most of the negative comments here have never worked at a bloated company before. It's not about money at all but process. I have friends (mainly in tech) where they've sacked the entire staff, then they all have to reapply. Most of them get their job back if they want it. What tends to happen is a person who is incredible at their job leaves, and they hire someone to replace them but they can't perform to the same level, so they hire someone else to help. You can end up with 2/3/4 people doing one persons job. Over decades this can make every day things (in terms of a football club) like catering, cleaning, logistics etc take an inordinate amount of time for decisions to be made, and everything falls apart eventually. It's terrible people have to lose jobs at any time, but United stinks of a business without any real structure.
From my very limited experience of the stadium tour, I can tell that the administrative side of things at the club is piss poor
Yup. Lack of success means all options should be on the table
Was probably the plan, was reported early they wanted severe cuts and were even bringing in outside consultants. Firing people is a PR and legal nightmare, forcing people to quit is a standard tactic in the corporate world especially in acquisitions
This is normal for restructure / lean organize
And there's your true motivation for the return to office mandate. Trying to push employees to resigning.
What would these people be likely to be earning? I guess in pounds it’s going to be around the 20-30k mark. Imagine being at a football club like United and basically being told you’re the problem on your absolute pittance wage while there are guys earning 6 or 7 times what you earn a year in a week.
Bloody hell.
Love the double standards on here as usual. Crying for new, ruthless ownership and then crying when they get it. It is blindingly obvious Ineos are trying to bring in a lean, committed workforce and raise standards. It's what any sensible owner would do in order to compete in the modern era. If you can't be fucked coming into the office to contribute and collaborate with your colleagues in order to move the club forward, or want to toss it off in the civil service with no targets or pressure, then on your way.
People want ruthless owners selling players on 350k a week, not sacking a bunch of random staff on 40k a year….
They're planning on doing both
Should do both.
What people are complaining for? Go back to work outside? Pathetic lol
New owners are scummy aswell then
If the review that's been carried out says 'unnecessary employees are at the club in position X' should we keep them around or what? What's the point of carrying out reviews if you don't act on it?
We dont have a CHOICE, If you consider FFP and just transfers alone.. we can lose $35m a year or $105m in three years. Lets imagine we want to sell Maguire and Antony, thats easily more than $105m lost - which would mean we cant sign ANY player for THREE years, we have to cut costs and bring in more revenue. This is on the Football board for not listening to Head Scout, Head of Global Scouting, Mou, Ole, LVG, Ralph and many others and thinking they know better. Yes Antony was on the manager, but for Years the Football Board have been refusing to listen to our scouts and managers, we are in a terrible position with FFP
Honestly none of know here just how fat the cat is. All we do know is the fucking roof is leaking and someone should have fixed it. Start again.
did they include Dan the Man in the group address? cause he might bcc Newcastle again
The club has been a jolly up for decades, it's time to trim the shite down to what is required. No slack, get back to work. Now sack EtH, fix the roof (short term fix) and build a new 100k seater stadium and a fully rebuild the area within 20 miles within the new stadium. Also, build a new training complex.
Have you ever considered voluntary redundancy? No. Have you ever considered involuntary redundancy?
Expected, underperforming club wants to reduce underperforming staff on all fronts It’s not all on the glaziers We see it all over the place, fan content is 2nd tier compared to rival clubs, set pieces are a shambles so likely set piece coach isn’t doing well, so many injuries so something is wrong there etc etc etc
I was very much pessimistic about Ratcliffe and I do not like people losing jobs. It makes it even worse when those that aren’t at risk are those on exorbitant salaries however if I was to take a positive view on this I hope what they are doing is identifying a bloated workforce that is just too large. I hope the intention is to have a smaller organisation that is of a higher quality, one that can then be more effective in collaborating together and move the club in a better direction faster. I am of course being very very optimistic here so as I say…. I hope this is the case and not something else. I also hope the voluntary resignation means redundancy and therefore some people will br supported in leaving and finding work that fits their career ambitions and life better.
People want change and to mold United into a proper structure/club, then get mad when someone comes along and does it. Wake up people.
The issue wasn't with Bryan and Gemma in Marketing, was it? Come on, have a word with yourself.
i mean...did we not just fire every single top executive as well?
Jesus fucking christ.INEOS are just as bad
Ten Hag cc'd
Likely going to take the hate on this one but we have to be realistic here. Everyone wants us to perform better on the field but don't think corporately leaning up is a consequence of the change every united fan wants. Unfortunately, whether you like it or not, this is part of the change we wanted and asked for. INEOS' job is to ensure we are run well, companies that are run well are lean and things like this are a common occurrence.
I was ambivalent towards the working back in the office stuff (been back in for over 2 years myself, its a pain sorting the kids out but it was like that pre 2020 anyway), but this seems unbelievably shitty. Trying to get people to resign instead of making them redundant feels like some victorian era misery.
I'd let them sack me tbf.
Sack me SJR 👁️👄👁️
INEOS is much better than the alternative would have been, but that doesn't take away from the fact that they're scuzzy capitalists.
Jesus, we can't have nice things. Literally 3 days after we win the cup final, bad stories are leaking again.
The difference now is that Ineos want to see something for that £1.25 billion. The Glazers never put a penny in and therefore haven’t really cared about the normal staff or the details. Unfortunately the Glazers still own the club and now have a billionaire Rottweiler too.
They need to be treating people right and getting staff onside. It can't be good for the atmosphere around the club if they're making regular people redundant for some marginal financial gain that makes little difference compared to the money spent on transfers and player wages. I'm excited to see what he does football wise but I don't like Ratcliffe himself
Isn't the non-playing staff mostly part of the Glazers territory still? Does this have anything to do with Ineos?
Voluntary resignation for early payout of a bonus you'd get anyway or return to office and get a redundancy. I think he's using this to end WFH and get rid of people on one. If you can't return to office you'll be fired the day after this offer expires.
This is pretty shit. Just make them redundant and be done with it.
Capitalist pig
r/antiwork join the chat
I hate INEOS. They seem unbelievably toxic
How does maintaining an office unit for more people coming in cuts costs? You pay more for electricity water internet and other services, i understand players and coaches chefs ets are needed there but why tf would you need everyone… whats wrong with these billionaires
the biggest club in the world and this is what the staffs are going through. Ineos can go fuck themselves
Now that i think about it.Self made billionaires might be the worst of them.
I hope this is the energy Ineos show when it comes to trimming the squad of players who are not showing up, and have poor performances. They have already shown this ruthlessness when it came to cutting out executives such as Murtough. It is sad that people are losing their jobs. Hopefully the packages offered are decent and give people a bit of breathing room to look for alternative jobs.
Welcome to the corporate world
Ineos goona be a more involved Glazers with incompetent decisions
Wow. Ineos have done nothing to the squad and I’m already disliking them. This is going to be rough. It’s the sort of corportate culture I rail against and actively avoid and make fun off. This is going to be tough
Fuck off then if you don't want an efficiently run club.
I’d rather the club didn’t turn into a soulless corporation thanks. Was proud the club kept all staff during Covid on full pay What would Jim have done ….
I was downvoted to hell a few weeks ago but next step is redundancies - this is a bully tactic to minimise costs later on when they'll need to pay out
Ah, yes, the sweet fruits of capitalism
100m on Antony now we’re laying off normal people trying to make ends meet.
Well, yes