The People's Hero Posted 20 April 2007 Posted 20 April 2007 When would his rolling contract have expired?
Zingari Posted 20 April 2007 Posted 20 April 2007 a one year rolling contract will probably mean in a years time from the date he was sacked; or are you being ironic
The People's Hero Posted 20 April 2007 Author Posted 20 April 2007 a one year rolling contract will probably mean in a years time from the date he was sacked; or are you being ironic Ironic/Moronic. Yes. I really still don't get what Franck Rolling's contract had to do with it anyway, RK didn't even sign him.
Zingari Posted 20 April 2007 Posted 20 April 2007 Ironic/Moronic. Yes.I really still don't get what Franck Rolling's contract had to do with it anyway, RK didn't even sign him.
Geo V Posted 20 April 2007 Posted 20 April 2007 I think the deal was that if RK saved us from relegation last season he would get awarded one of these http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/VERY-NICE-VICTORIAN-...1QQcmdZViewItem
Guest Posted 20 April 2007 Posted 20 April 2007 On a serious note, a well drafted rolling contract would allow for a review and a get out clause.
Jon the Hat Posted 20 April 2007 Posted 20 April 2007 On a serious note, a well drafted rolling contract would allow for a review and a get out clause. It's a pointless concept. All you actually need is a get out clause stating the amount of compensation to be paid in the event of termination.
Guest Posted 20 April 2007 Posted 20 April 2007 It's a pointless concept. All you actually need is a get out clause stating the amount of compensation to be paid in the event of termination.I don't disagree. The way that this club goes about things, at times, seem pretty pointless though.
Jon the Hat Posted 20 April 2007 Posted 20 April 2007 I don't disagree. The way that this club goes about things, at times, seem pretty pointless though. Yep. An excellent example of the ever so slightly nonsensical approach the last administration took to just about everything in fact.
The People's Hero Posted 20 April 2007 Author Posted 20 April 2007 It's a pointless concept. All you actually need is a get out clause stating the amount of compensation to be paid in the event of termination. Agreed.
Guest Posted 20 April 2007 Posted 20 April 2007 Yep. An excellent example of the ever so slightly nonsensical approach the last administration took to just about everything in fact.I sometimes get the impression that someone gets their mits on the latest management manual, and thinks that it's the next best thing. Whatever happened to keeping it simple?
Webbo Posted 20 April 2007 Posted 20 April 2007 It's a pointless concept. All you actually need is a get out clause stating the amount of compensation to be paid in the event of termination. Surely that amount would be a years salary.
00rawat Posted 20 April 2007 Posted 20 April 2007 I sometimes get the impression that someone gets their mits on the latest management manual, and thinks that it's the next best thing. Whatever happened to keeping it simple? You don't get keeping it simple with Leicester they allways do things the hard way.
The People's Hero Posted 20 April 2007 Author Posted 20 April 2007 You don't get keeping it simple with Leicester they allways do things the hard way. Ain't that the truth.
Leicfox Posted 20 April 2007 Posted 20 April 2007 Surely that amount would be a years salary. Thats what i would of thought, if it was a rolling contract it could only be terminated with a years salary.
Guest Posted 20 April 2007 Posted 20 April 2007 Thats what i would of thought, if it was a rolling contract it could only be terminated with a years salary. Like I said, it's all in the drafting.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.