ray 105 Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 Hve known Fraser for some 20 years and he is very rarely right.....and this is not an out and out liquidation scenario.Of course employees may decide to accept a newco's offer of employment, they cannot be forced to. In scenarios where an employer company is wound up by the court on the grounds that it is unable to pay its debts, TUPE Regulations 4 and 7 will not apply. On the granting of a winding-up order, an employee’s employment contract is deemed to have been terminated and NIF insolvency and redundancy payments shall be due to such employeesI still can't figure out why we didn't use the Ken Bates escape route. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
b1972 12 Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 Ally has been magnificent as a spokesman for our club, however I still think that he would have been sacked (and deservedly so) if it was not for administration. He lost a 15 pt lead and put out of 4 cup competitions before it.I hope that when we recover from this that he is a director of football or a fans rep on the board. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
elephants stoned 2,994 Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 Ally has been magnificent as a spokesman for our club, however I still think that he would have been sacked (and deservedly so) if it was not for administration. He lost a 15 pt lead and put out of 4 cup competitions before it.I hope that when we recover from this that he is a director of football or a fans rep on the board.Why even bring that up right now? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricky_ 893 Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 Of course employees may decide to accept a newco's offer of employment, they cannot be forced to. In scenarios where an employer company is wound up by the court on the grounds that it is unable to pay its debts, TUPE Regulations 4 and 7 will not apply. On the granting of a winding-up order, an employee’s employment contract is deemed to have been terminated and NIF insolvency and redundancy payments shall be due to such employeesI still can't figure out why we didn't use the Ken Bates escape route.is the oldco actually wound up though? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricky_ 893 Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 Ally has been magnificent as a spokesman for our club, however I still think that he would have been sacked (and deservedly so) if it was not for administration. He lost a 15 pt lead and put out of 4 cup competitions before it.I hope that when we recover from this that he is a director of football or a fans rep on the board.fuck off you moron Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ray 105 Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 is the oldco actually wound up though?The transfer to newco has been completed oldco is a shell with the alleged payment for assets in the account. BDO will complete the liquidation process, they have far reaching powers that can have a look at the legality of the asset sale along with everything else. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
boss 1,941 Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 In scenarios where an employer company is wound up by the court on the grounds that it is unable to pay its debts, TUPE Regulations 4 and 7 will not apply. On the granting of a winding-up order, an employee’s employment contract is deemed to have been terminated and NIF insolvency and redundancy payments shall be due to such employeesThis isn't the situation we are in though. We are not being wound up by the court. The sale of the business and assets was from an administration, not a liquidation. If you quote regulations, make sure they are in point. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OneDavidCooper 2,505 Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 Ally has been magnificent as a spokesman for our club, however I still think that he would have been sacked (and deservedly so) if it was not for administration. He lost a 15 pt lead and put out of 4 cup competitions before it.I hope that when we recover from this that he is a director of football or a fans rep on the board.Piss off Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricky_ 893 Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 The transfer to newco has been completed oldco is a shell with the alleged payment for assets in the account.technically it's not 'wound up' though, is it? isn't it still in administration, and likely to be until a few court cases are resolved? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
boss 1,941 Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 is the oldco actually wound up though?You are right to challenge ray on this as oldco isn't even in liquidation never mind wound up. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reservoir Dug 5 Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 oh right u know better that legal advice huh. Mibbe your peeved someone posted an article before you lolApparently he must know better because he is right, unfortunate as it is. TUPE does allow you to stay with your old employer if there is still a job for you. In an admin/liquidation event there is no old employer but you still have the right not to transfer to the newco. Its entirely up to you, once u agree to transfer the terms and conditions stay the same BUT YOU DO NOT HAVE TO GO Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smile 26,606 Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 I read TUPE and spoke to a PFA rep, players or any employee cannot be forced to cross over to newco, it is a liquidation event not an administration one, the law is clear unfortunately for us, the newco doesn't have a leg to stand on.Its not about being forced it about Loyalty to Rangers.I dont see your angle at all in this post no ones disputing the law only the loyalty of players that Rangers have made very wealthy men. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dexiboy 157 Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 best statement ever. challenge the players were it hurts.has anyone actually seen a statement from aluko hes rejected ?I thought aluko was out of contract Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
whytes3 254 Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 Great statement from AllyPeople are either with us 100% or they can GTFI've no interest in player sob stories Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reservoir Dug 5 Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 Yes a great statement from Ally as always, its the Green requote at the bottom thats just shite. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ray 105 Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 This isn't the situation we are in though. We are not being wound up by the court. The sale of the business and assets was from an administration, not a liquidation. If you quote regulations, make sure they are in point. The point is very simple and straight forward liquidators appointed by HMRC are doing what HMRC appointed them to do and will continue to do so, they have the power to overturn sales and recover property and assets. The liquidation is forced on us by HMRC, hiding from the fact won't make it go away or alter the fact that TUPE does not apply irrespective of what Charlie or D&P claim, both having been found to be economical with the truth on previous occasions.Just how economical with that truth may become a lot clearer after the irrelevant one makes his position known. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
b1972 12 Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 It is just my view. Outstanding Rangers Man, but I think the managers job might just be a bit much for him in terms of leading us back to the top of the SPL. Sorry for having an opinion! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OneDavidCooper 2,505 Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 its the Green requote at the bottom thats just shite.In what way? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reservoir Dug 5 Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 In what way?hes got the TUPE thing all wrong, see my (and others) previous posts in this thread Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gary2006 123 Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 The point is very simple and straight forward liquidators appointed by HMRC are doing what HMRC appointed them to do and will continue to do so, they have the power to overturn sales and recover property and assets. The liquidation is forced on us by HMRC, hiding from the fact won't make it go away or alter the fact that TUPE does not apply irrespective of what Charlie or D&P claim, both having been found to be economical with the truth on previous occasions.Just how economical with that truth may become a lot clearer after the irrelevant one makes his position known.in your opinion what can whyte do now i thought a newco removed him from the picture? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ray 105 Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 Its not about being forced it about Loyalty to Rangers.I dont see your angle at all in this post no ones disputing the law only the loyalty of players that Rangers have made very wealthy men.You would really have to read my posts on loyalty then wouldn't you. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OneDavidCooper 2,505 Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 hes got the TUPE thing all wrong, see my (and others) previous posts in this thread Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ray 105 Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 in your opinion what can whyte do now i thought a newco removed him from the picture?Fuck knows he is one devious clued up motherfucker, whatever he does it will be to his advantage and profit, not ours or anyone else's/ Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ray 105 Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 You would really have to read my posts on loyalty then wouldn't you. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ray 105 Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 Its not about being forced it about Loyalty to Rangers.I dont see your angle at all in this post no ones disputing the law only the loyalty of players that Rangers have made very wealthy men.Ally and Charlie are disputing the law. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.