Nathan Byrne - Joined Charlotte FC

[Sparkle]

8 minutes ago, Elwood P Dowd said:

If it is Business and Assets then TUPE would apply. 

Yet not everything transfers under TUPE as in many cases access to the original pension scheme continues and why should a players registration be ripped up without agreement of all parties. This one will need to go to court if the players pursue it unless the EFL/FA dig out another little rule. 

[PistoldPete]

3 hours ago, alram said:

good luck to him.

 

the guy is quality and gave us a great service.

 

if the club have been extending contracts without players consent then do you blame them for being off? 

The player agreed to a contract which gave derby the option to extend his contract , which they have exercised. If he wants to leave then if he is that good someone will pay a fee for him. 

[Ram-Alf]

3 hours ago, Sparkle said:

I agree in that there is no point keeping him but we need money for his transfer of registration as we have to replace him and we have to do that in a restricted business plan - not easy 

Surely we must have his player registration or the EFL has, So in essence Buchannan/Byrne will be stuck in limbo until the clubs in receipt of said player either settle in monetary terms  or FIFA/UEFA/EFL sanction these moves ?‍♀️   

[Sparkle]

1 minute ago, Unlucky Alf said:

Surely we must have his player registration or the EFL has, So in essence Buchannan/Byrne will be stuck in limbo until the clubs in receipt of said player either settle in monetary terms  or FIFA/UEFA/EFL sanction these moves ?‍♀️   

I agree - it would be nice to know wouldn’t it 

[Elwood P Dowd]

6 minutes ago, Sparkle said:

Yet not everything transfers under TUPE as in many cases access to the original pension scheme continues and why should a players registration be ripped up without agreement of all parties. This one will need to go to court if the players pursue it unless the EFL/FA dig out another little rule. 

I have no idea about the registration issue but outside the football world a Business and Asset purchase would trigger TUPE.

[Amberram]

https://m.facebook.com/rikmayallappreciation/videos/and-good-riddance-to-bad-rubbish/2870899946512459/

[SuffolkRam]

TUPE is only an issue for the extensions that have been triggered, could a player rip up a contract if it ran for a further 2 years anyway without clauses?

[Sparkle]

39 minutes ago, SuffolkRam said:

TUPE is only an issue for the extensions that have been triggered, could a player rip up a contract if it ran for a further 2 years anyway without clauses?

Why not? 

[Norwichram2]

TUPE applies when there is a change of employer as a result of an acquisition of all or part of an undertaking. I am not clear whether Clowes purchase of DCFC has resulted in a change in the employing company but I cannot see why it would. As such the contracts of employment of all staff will be unaffected by the acquisition. This includes those on fixed term contracts which include an agreed option to extend. In other words I believe that both Buchanan and Byrne are in breach of contract. Probably more important however is the fact that EFL appear to be supporting us regarding player registrations. Hopefully we will get us  some compensation because neither player is going to wear a Rams shirt again.

 

 

[SuffolkRam]

15 minutes ago, Sparkle said:

Why not? 

Yeah, that’s my poorly put question.  Could players with contracts that run beyond the takeover also rip them up?
 

if that’s the case Derby have a big fight on their hands that affects the whole of football.  
 

This is another example of footballers wanting it every which way.  Take the extension you signed on for and we can sell you if it’s not possible to persuade you to stay.

[TooFarInToTurnRed]

5 minutes ago, SuffolkRam said:

Yeah, that’s my poorly put question.  Could players with contracts that run beyond the takeover also rip them up?
 

if that’s the case Derby have a big fight on their hands that affects the whole of football.  
 

This is another example of footballers wanting it every which way.  Take the extension you signed on for and we can sell you if it’s not possible to persuade you to stay.

I thought this but didn’t post for fear of alerting players to this, I think by training/playing it could be considered they accepted the transfer as they have in effect “worked” for the new employer. Concerned that Bielik might try it as not sure what is happening with him. 

[Norwichram2]

23 minutes ago, TooFarInToTurnRed said:

I thought this but didn’t post for fear of alerting players to this, I think by training/playing it could be considered they accepted the transfer as they have in effect “worked” for the new employer. Concerned that Bielik might try it as not sure what is happening with him. 

My point exactly. I don't believe the employer has changed as a result of Clowes acquisition of DCFC. TUPE therefore doesn't apply As a result Beilik Bird Sibley et al are still DCFC employees and can't walk away. Similarly Buchanan and Byrne have had their contract term extended legitimately by their employer and are in breach of contract having walked away.

[Elwood P Dowd]

 

TUPE is not triggered when a company is purchased by another company by way of a share purchase.

This may have changed but under more recent TUPE regulation changes but in the TUPE 2006 regulations TUPE is only triggered when there is an asset purchase

Under the TUPE regulation, employees have the legal right to transfer to their new employer under their existing T&Cs 

However Employees can refuse to transfer depending on the circumstances of the case.

I have no idea what set of circumstances would allow an employee not to Transfer but it would be interesting to find out. 

This is interesting reading 

https://www.foxwilliams.com/2021/02/25/a-short-guide-to-ma-for-hr-professionals-your-key-employment-law-faqs-answered-and-some-practical-tips/

Edited July 10, 2022 by Elwood P Dowd

[Tyler Durden]

9 minutes ago, Elwood P Dowd said:

 

TUPE is not triggered when a company is purchased by another company by way of a share purchase.

This may have changed but under more recent TUPE regulation changes but in the TUPE 2006 regulations TUPE is only triggered when there is an asset purchase

Under the TUPE regulation, employees have the legal right to transfer to their new employer under their existing T&Cs 

However Employees can refuse to transfer depending on the circumstances of the case.

I have no idea what set of circumstances would allow an employee not to Transfer but it would be interesting to find out. 

This is interesting reading 

https://www.foxwilliams.com/2021/02/25/a-short-guide-to-ma-for-hr-professionals-your-key-employment-law-faqs-answered-and-some-practical-tips/

You don't have to give a reason why you are not accepting the TUPE transfer, all you have to do is state in writing that you are not accepting the transfer. 

It's every employees prerogative but by the same token by doing so they thereby waive any compensation or redundancy rights.

Think you are getting too bogged down in the minutiae. If TUPE applies in this case then any player just has to submit in writing that they do not wish to accept this therefore their employment ends on the date of the TUPE transfer. 

If that's the case with Byrne then it's irrelevant whether we hold his registration or not, he no longer is an employee of the club.

[Big Trav]

The odd thing here is if we still hold the registrations for the players they legally cannot play for another club otherwise the other club is in serious breach of FIFA rules. The players can leave and join new clubs but can’t play. So pay us for their registration rights or they ain’t playing. It’s no burden on us as they aren’t contracted to us so costs us 0. Effectively we could charge whatever we want. More than likely it’ll go to compensation or a tribunal type of agreement 

[Carl Sagan]

15 hours ago, angieram said:

The EFL are supporting us in this.

Whilst the TUPE regulations are law of the land, they surely weren't written with footballers in mind! 

We have already seen that the EFL aren't above applying their own rules above the law when it suits them. I think this is one such example.

I might be being hopeless (not for the first time) but I can't find any evidence the EFL is supporting us on this. Is there a link anywhere? Ta v much.

[PistoldPete]

7 hours ago, Tyler Durden said:

You don't have to give a reason why you are not accepting the TUPE transfer, all you have to do is state in writing that you are not accepting the transfer. 

It's every employees prerogative but by the same token by doing so they thereby waive any compensation or redundancy rights.

Think you are getting too bogged down in the minutiae. If TUPE applies in this case then any player just has to submit in writing that they do not wish to accept this therefore their employment ends on the date of the TUPE transfer. 

If that's the case with Byrne then it's irrelevant whether we hold his registration or not, he no longer is an employee of the club.

Ok maybe you are right , I had read that you have the right to object.. but if that extends to a right to refuse  then the old contracts may have ended.

This wasn’t a problem for Wigan who did the same thing  as us. I do think the player registration is a major deal and the reason why Byrne hasn’t signed for anyone else. 
 

Much as I mistrust the Efl, I do believe they will back us on this and not transfer player registrations to another Efl club. 

[Sparkle]

6 hours ago, Carl Sagan said:

I might be being hopeless (not for the first time) but I can't find any evidence the EFL is supporting us on this. Is there a link anywhere? Ta v much.

I haven’t seen a comment from the EFL as yet either which is unusual because they comment even when it’s not relevant as we know.

[Sparkle]

8 hours ago, Tyler Durden said:

You don't have to give a reason why you are not accepting the TUPE transfer, all you have to do is state in writing that you are not accepting the transfer. 

It's every employees prerogative but by the same token by doing so they thereby waive any compensation or redundancy rights.

Think you are getting too bogged down in the minutiae. If TUPE applies in this case then any player just has to submit in writing that they do not wish to accept this therefore their employment ends on the date of the TUPE transfer. 

If that's the case with Byrne then it's irrelevant whether we hold his registration or not, he no longer is an employee of the club.

It is relevant if Derby county holds his registration if he wants to continue in his occupation as a professional footballer 

[Ram-Alf]

9 hours ago, Elwood P Dowd said:

However Employees can refuse to transfer depending on the circumstances of the case.

I have no idea what set of circumstances would allow an employee not to Transfer but it would be interesting to find out. 

 

There's a multitude of reasons, Religious beliefs, Ethical beliefs, Geographical...ie new company moves further away, And so on, There's no law that I'm aware of forcing you to move over, The only recourse is resign before the move is finalised