Should the players take a pay cut, so the non-playing staff do not have to?

[Mike - True Blue Tinter]

When we went into administration 18 years ago, I believe the players took a pay cut and/or a big deferral so that the non-playing staff could keep their jobs.

It is absolutely mindless that the PFA can hold clubs to ransom and insist they pay full wages of £80,000 a week to non-playing players, whilst the cleaners, groundsmen, office staff etc, are laid off and their £500 a week is reduced to £400 a week, or even worse to benefits only.

I am sure that if all our players gave up just 10% of their salaries it would cover the wages of all the staff, well maybe not the manager and the CEO!

The really decent thing would be if Top and King Power guaranteed the wages, and the players gave 10% of their salaries to our local foodbanks and hospitals.

If the PFA come up with some poxy small deferral scheme that means eventually the players get the full worth of their contract, I hope our players rebel and say no.

 

[Skitzo]

The board should take a pay cut if the players do, I’m sure the players will be willing so the non playing staff don’t lose out but we may not need them to

 

[Lako42]

Yes they should.

Any footballer who cannot sustain a reduction on that amount because they are living that close to their wage is a complete **** who doesn't deserve the wage.

 

[big_mac4824]

Our players have a morale duty to take a pay cut, what is happening at clubs like Spuds and Norwich is disgraceful!

 

[Miles Away]

Everyone talking about the players but it starts with the owners and executives.

Of course the players should defer some wages, but the people that cut those cheques are the ones that the focus should be on first. And those people are using the players to deflect the attention away from their own monstrous greed.

Further, let’s remember all this when transfer fees start sloshing around again.

 

[Blue Maniac]

Relevant.
https://www.football.london/tottenh...hettino-effect-tottenham-finally-one-18023808

 

[pork pie fox]

 

[Miles Away]

Relevant.
https://www.football.london/tottenh...hettino-effect-tottenham-finally-one-18023808

Exactly. He’s vile.

 

[Jeff]

According to The Guardian:

The club have carried on paying all employees as normal so far. No decision has been made about casual matchday staff who have not been able to work since the league’s suspension.

 

[Graz]

Yes, the players should definitely be taking pay cuts before support staff do.

Seeing what's happening at clubs like Spurs makes me feel physically sick, and is a step too far for me in supporting the game.

Football has an awful lot wrong with it but I love the game in spite of it. But this is too much for me to defend it... If rich footballers continue to get paid full whack while clubs abuse the government's system for supporting people and businesses who can't afford to support themselves otherwise during this crisis, then I think my love of football could be dead.

 

[fitz]

Yes, the players should definitely be taking pay cuts before support staff do.

Seeing what's happening at clubs like Spurs makes me feel physically sick, and is a step too far for me in supporting the game.

Football has an awful lot wrong with it but I love the game in spite of it. But this is too much for me to defend it... If rich footballers continue to get paid full whack while clubs abuse the government's system for supporting people and businesses who can't afford to support themselves otherwise during this crisis, then I think my love of football could be dead.

That's where I'm at.

 

[Brown Nose]

I agree that clubs that are asking lower paid staff to take cuts whilst higher paid ones don't is wrong. However, they are playing the hastily created system in exactly the same way that almost every other business will do. It's easy to pick on football as it is so well monitored but much worse stories will come to light eventually. That's capitalism for you.

However, in general terms, I don't see why footballers should have a greater pressure to withhold their earnings than any other wealthy person. If a club agreed to a contract why should they be morally expected to sacrifice part of what they're entitled to? It's the clubs responsibility to manage their players contracts and many include clauses and wage reductions based on results. If the players of a club see that the club is struggling and choose to support them by temporarily reducing their wage, as many of our players did when we were in administration, credit to them. But players from any club run by cash rich billionaires (like ours) have no reason to expect such a gesture.

At the same time as taking this view, I also take the view that players wages are abhorrent. They are far too high and I truly hope that there is a reshaping of values that takes place following this period where we reward those more that are working now for all our benefits and reward those less that can juggle toilet rolls in mansions.

 

[fitz]

I agree that clubs that are asking lower paid staff to take cuts whilst higher paid ones don't is wrong. However, they are playing the hastily created system in exactly the same way that almost every other business will do. It's easy to pick on football as it is so well monitored but much worse stories will come to light eventually. That's capitalism for you.

However, in general terms, I don't see why footballers should have a greater pressure to withhold their earnings than any other wealthy person. If a club agreed to a contract why should they be morally expected to sacrifice part of what they're entitled to? It's the clubs responsibility to manage their players contracts and many include clauses and wage reductions based on results. If the players of a club see that the club is struggling and choose to support them by temporarily reducing their wage, as many of our players did when we were in administration, credit to them. But players from any club run by cash rich billionaires (like ours) have no reason to expect such a gesture.

At the same time as taking this view, I also take the view that players wages are abhorrent. They are far too high and I truly hope that there is a reshaping of values that takes place following this period where we reward those more that are working now for all our benefits and reward those less that can juggle toilet rolls in mansions.

I think the fury (Especially in my case) comes from those clubs telling some to sacrifice some of their salary where players continue to get paid in full. If the minions continue to get 100% of their salary then I've no problem with the players getting full wages. When they're asking people earning relatively **** all to take the hit then they can **** off.

 

[Graz]

I think the fury (Especially in my case) comes from those clubs telling some to sacrifice some of their salary where players continue to get paid in full. If the minions continue to get 100% of their salary then I've no problem with the players getting full wages. When they're asking people earning relatively **** all to take the hit then they can **** off.

Agree with this too.

I'd hope footballers would have the decency - like some have, it should be pointed out - to realise they don't need their full wages right now and can help their clubs and others by taking a cut.

But it's the clubs cutting off pay to their lowest paid workers to abuse the government schemes while their execs and players continue to be paid ridiculous amounts that I find abhorrent.

 

[Graz]

I agree that clubs that are asking lower paid staff to take cuts whilst higher paid ones don't is wrong. However, they are playing the hastily created system in exactly the same way that almost every other business will do. It's easy to pick on football as it is so well monitored but much worse stories will come to light eventually. That's capitalism for you.

However, in general terms, I don't see why footballers should have a greater pressure to withhold their earnings than any other wealthy person. If a club agreed to a contract why should they be morally expected to sacrifice part of what they're entitled to? It's the clubs responsibility to manage their players contracts and many include clauses and wage reductions based on results. If the players of a club see that the club is struggling and choose to support them by temporarily reducing their wage, as many of our players did when we were in administration, credit to them. But players from any club run by cash rich billionaires (like ours) have no reason to expect such a gesture.

It is the clubs' responsibility, but for me that's why it makes me so angry - the clubs are trying to pass that off and abuse the system, and that is what I find disgusting.

If the clubs don't do it then I'd hope the players act with decency to take it upon themselves. But it's the clubs who are acting in this disgusting way right now.

If the clubs are too scared to ask their players to take 20% pay cuts to help the future of the club and those staff who support it, then it really shows the disgusting level player power has been able to get to.

You're also right that it's easy to look at football for this since it's always under a giant microscope, but this doesn't stop at football for me.

Billionaires like Richard Branson asking governments for bailouts while their pockets stay full is just as bad. The only difference to me that is I'm not going out and investing my time in cheering on Virgin Trains.

 

[Miles Away]

I think the fury (Especially in my case) comes from those clubs telling some to sacrifice some of their salary where players continue to get paid in full. If the minions continue to get 100% of their salary then I've no problem with the players getting full wages. When they're asking people earning relatively **** all to take the hit then they can **** off.

But that’s my point. It’s a deliberate move by the owners to offset the focus onto the players and away from themselves.

 

[M17TT C]

Serious question but can the players be furloughed themselves seeing as their role has been completely null and voided currently?

Assume not as I can't imagine they get paid through the PAYE system like us plebs?

Would be a nice wake up call for a lot of them to live on £2.5k a month before tax.

 

[Lako42]

I think the fury (Especially in my case) comes from those clubs telling some to sacrifice some of their salary where players continue to get paid in full. If the minions continue to get 100% of their salary then I've no problem with the players getting full wages. When they're asking people earning relatively **** all to take the hit then they can **** off.

Yep, this is quite simple.

 

[Graz]

Serious question but can the players be furloughed themselves seeing as their role has been completely null and voided currently?

Assume not as I can't imagine they get paid through the PAYE system like us plebs?

Would be a nice wake up call for a lot of them to live on £2.5k a month before tax.

Surely they have to get paid through PAYE?

I assume that yes, they could be furloughed - but my guess is any club is too scared to do it by themselves without them all doing it.

Not sure they'd suffer that much on the £2.5k per month - they've all got plenty of cash already! If it was only for a few months they'd probably barely even notice.

 

[Miles Away]