Re: Cross & Burgess... Get us out of here : Mon Jun 20, 2011 8:19 am  

G1 wrote:

Nail on the head.

Burgess had no intention of signing. He's gone. If GH lets Burgess dangle him around for a few months and we miss out on a replacement the same experts on this forum criticising GHs style would be having a pop at him for "taking his eye off he ball".

I see Sal has moved on from comparing Burgess to Ellis to comparing him with Sinfield now.

I'd just like to remind everyone this is LUKE we're talking about, not SAM. Calm down,

Gareth - surely every employee has the right to be treated equally - whether you are the CEO or a cleaner - hence the comparison to Sinfield - he runs the playing side doesn't he? I am not comparing his abilities to either Ellis or Sinfield nor his importance to the side just his entitilement to the same treatment as those two and Lee Smith.

You seem to think because he is fringe player his rights should reflect that - bizarre way of thinking - his importance should be reflected in the quality of the offer not timescale for acceptance.

Re: Cross & Burgess... Get us out of here : Mon Jun 20, 2011 8:53 am  

Sal Paradise wrote:

Gareth - surely every employee has the right to be treated equally - whether you are the CEO or a cleaner - hence the comparison to Sinfield - he runs the playing side doesn't he? I am not comparing his abilities to either Ellis or Sinfield nor his importance to the side just his entitilement to the same treatment as those two and Lee Smith.

You seem to think because he is fringe player his rights should reflect that - bizarre way of thinking - his importance should be reflected in the quality of the offer not timescale for acceptance.

With all this talk of employment rights, I think I'm missing something. I tend to work on fixed term contracts. When those contracts end, my employer can either extend it, offer me another on different terms, or just say 'ta ta' to me. On the flip side, I am free to resign at any point, but at the end of my contract I can walk away if I'm fed up, want a change or have a better offer elsewhere.

How the end of that period is handled by the employer will tend to reflect my perceived worth to the organisation.

How different is this situation? Luke Burgess was/is not a permanent employee, after all.

Re: Cross & Burgess... Get us out of here : Mon Jun 20, 2011 9:57 am  

El Diablo wrote:

With all this talk of employment rights, I think I'm missing something. I tend to work on fixed term contracts. When those contracts end, my employer can either extend it, offer me another on different terms, or just say 'ta ta' to me. On the flip side, I am free to resign at any point, but at the end of my contract I can walk away if I'm fed up, want a change or have a better offer elsewhere.

How the end of that period is handled by the employer will tend to reflect my perceived worth to the organisation.

How different is this situation? Luke Burgess was/is not a permanent employee, after all.

Indeed. I'd be interested to know exactly what employment rights it's though have been infringed.

And I concur completely with Brisbane's last post as well.

Re: Cross & Burgess... Get us out of here : Mon Jun 20, 2011 9:57 am  

El Diablo wrote:

With all this talk of employment rights, I think I'm missing something. I tend to work on fixed term contracts. When those contracts end, my employer can either extend it, offer me another on different terms, or just say 'ta ta' to me. On the flip side, I am free to resign at any point, but at the end of my contract I can walk away if I'm fed up, want a change or have a better offer elsewhere.

How the end of that period is handled by the employer will tend to reflect my perceived worth to the organisation.

How different is this situation? Luke Burgess was/is not a permanent employee, after all.

I would think the only similarity between your contract and that of Burgess is the fact of two parties? I doubt Burgess could just walk away without a penalty e.g. Eastwood!! you will have a 3 month notice period? - these contract will not have a notice period if things don't work out.

I have no objection to how Burgess has been treated provided the treatment is consistent and that is where you end up with issues. As I said compare the 3 days he was given to make a decision compared to how long Sinfield will have been allowed to make his decision. It could be Sinfield was also given three days but I would suggest that is unlikely.

I assume the contract offer will need legal verification - Sinfield doesn't have an agent he uses a solicitor to review his contracts - this will take time and a good solicitor will need clarity on certain points.

The value to an employer will be recognised in the quality of the contract e.g. Sinfield's contract will have been of a significantly higher value than that offered to Burgess - quite correctly.

Re: Cross & Burgess... Get us out of here : Mon Jun 20, 2011 10:04 am  

People might take you, and the point you're struggling to make, more seriously if you hadn't, predictably, singled out Sinfield as your example.

How do you think the time period for Burgess's new contract compares to the time period for McGuire?

I bet McGuire was given much longer than 3 days? And so he should. Because

1. He's a million times better player than Burgess
2. He'd be much, much harder to replace than Burgess
3. He'd be much more in demand from other clubs than Burgess
4. Unlike Burgess, he probably hadn't made clear his intentions to leave at the end of his contract

It's called negotiation David and, I've got news from you, not all employees are treated the same in any organisation. Do you think the investment bankers at Barclays are dealt with the same as the cleaners when it comes to contract negotiations?

Re: Cross & Burgess... Get us out of here : Mon Jun 20, 2011 10:28 am  

You see, I negotiated rather harder for my current job than I did for the last one. Partly because my last contract was a project that looks proper mint on my CV, so I'm a more attractive (not physically like) prospect now. But also because I knew the competition was far less for this one, so the chances that they could just tell me to stuff it and find someone of the same calibre cheaper were much reduced.

Re: Cross & Burgess... Get us out of here : Mon Jun 20, 2011 10:35 am  

Wheels wrote:

On Ali : Being left with 16 fit players for 75 minutes of the game?

Oh.

Re: Cross & Burgess... Get us out of here : Mon Jun 20, 2011 10:36 am  

Sal Paradise wrote:

I would think the only similarity between your contract and that of Burgess is the fact of two parties? I doubt Burgess could just walk away without a penalty e.g. Eastwood!! you will have a 3 month notice period? - these contract will not have a notice period if things don't work out.

I have no objection to how Burgess has been treated provided the treatment is consistent and that is where you end up with issues. As I said compare the 3 days he was given to make a decision compared to how long Sinfield will have been allowed to make his decision. It could be Sinfield was also given three days but I would suggest that is unlikely.

I assume the contract offer will need legal verification - Sinfield doesn't have an agent he uses a solicitor to review his contracts - this will take time and a good solicitor will need clarity on certain points.

The value to an employer will be recognised in the quality of the contract e.g. Sinfield's contract will have been of a significantly higher value than that offered to Burgess - quite correctly.

I would say my contract has more similarity than 2 parties. As I said, we also share a fixed-term time limit on the contract. I suspect there are differences in what happens if either party decides to terminate the contract before the end. I can terminate it any time without penalty with 3 months written notice. It is, actually, slightly harder for them to do the same (because I'm a fixed term employee rather than a contractor at the moment, otherwise that wouldn't be the case) but (and here you will notice more parallels between the two situations) there can always be negotiation on this. If they terminated it, I'd be asking for a pay-off. If I terminate it, I can probably negotiate an early release if they feel it won't damage business operations too much.

Whether they chose to offer a time limit in which to accept the contract or walk away is entirely up to the employer. When I got to the end of my last contract, I was offered an extension on slightly improved terms (which suited me as it neatly bridged the gap between that contract and my current one) but a colleague employed on the same contract for the same project was 'allowed' to leave. The difference was the perceived value of my contribution. Not blowing my own trumpet - she was just a bit rubbish really. The fact remains that our contract negotiations were not carried out in anything like the same way. Welcome to real life, in the world of fixed-term contracting.

[Wheels]

Re: Cross & Burgess... Get us out of here : Mon Jun 20, 2011 11:21 am  

Russell Crowe's twitter wrote:

@SamBurgess8 hey, you pumped about Biffa?

Sam Burgess' twitter wrote:

@russellcrowe mate Absolutley over the moon. Great stuff...

Looks like Luke's en route to the Bunnies...

Re: Cross & Burgess... Get us out of here : Mon Jun 20, 2011 12:20 pm  

Wheels wrote:

Looks like Luke's en route to the Bunnies...

Grand Final winner to NRL reserve grader, that's a career decline Karl Pratt would have been proud of...