Eva Carneiro fights back

[Wooders]

Also most constructive dismal cases don't happen on national television

[Dameerto]

Just to damp down some of the excitable comments made on the thread about Chelsea not wanting to go to court, I'd wager that they would. However for practical reasons it's very unlikely either side would want to see this case before an employment tribunal.

Constructive or unfair dismissal is notoriously difficult to prove in court. For the most part, employers even in cases they don't think they will lose, will settle just before the court date if the cost of lawyers fees is likely to be greater than the award (which it almost always is).

In this case, Eva Carneiro also appears to have bit the bullet very quickly after the incident which in my experience tells me several things which would fundamentally undermine the claim.

1: It seems highly unlikely that any attempt at reconciliation was made before she walked. Normally the employer would provide a dispute resolution process such as grievance procedure and/or arbitration. Unless she has proof that she submitted a complaint in writing and Chelsea failed to respond, her case is dead in the water immediately on this point.

2: The point about the male physio and female physio being treated differently isn't grounds for constructive dismissal. There is no proof that she was treated differently, the fact is she was the senior employee in that situation and therefore it's easy to argue that the punishment was deemed appropriate given the relative seniority of the employees. Regardless what the punishment was and whether it was disproportionate and/or discriminatory, the burden is upon her to prove it, and that would be impossible.

3: finally, an employment tribunal can only order certain outcomes, none of which result in significant payouts beyond the actual financial loss of income incurred. Compensation is not within the scope of an employment tribunal.

This is media manipulation by Carneiro's legal team, nothing more, nothing less. She will almost certainly get a settlement from Chelsea along with appropriate non disclosure clauses, not because they fear they will be discredited in the media, but because a settlement will be cheaper than going to court even if the case is found in their favour. Nobody will ever hear about this story again.

She's protecting her legal position so that the three month window of opportunity doesn't expire, and to apply some pressure to Chelsea - settlement remains by far the most likeliest outcome.
Mourinho is on record saying her role at the club changed as a direct result of naivety in her actions during the match - she will argue she wasn't given the opportunity to defend herself as publicly as she was accused (resulting in damage to her professional reputation) and that she was under the direction of the referee and her hippocratic oath with a duty to check on the player. It seems very black and white to me.
Maybe she is insisting on some kind of apology or club statement that she was just doing her job as a doctor and head of the matchday medical team as a part of any settlement which might be slowing down or blocking any offer from the club though.

[Dunnylad]

I also heard this morning that she was told not to go onto the pitch quickly until they'd worked out if it was a serious injury or not - if she disobeyed orders then it weakens her case considerably - would there be this much fuss if it was a male Dr?

[Foreverinbluedreams]

I also heard this morning that she was told not to go onto the pitch quickly until they'd worked out if it was a serious injury or not - if she disobeyed orders then it weakens her case considerably - would there be this much fuss if it was a male Dr?

Didn't the ref signal for the medical team to come on? If this is the case then any instruction from Mourinho is irrelevant.

[DoomMerchant]

I also heard this morning that she was told not to go onto the pitch quickly until they'd worked out if it was a serious injury or not - if she disobeyed orders then it weakens her case considerably - would there be this much fuss if it was a male Dr?

Didn't the ref signal for the medical team to come on? If this is the case then any instruction from Mourinho is irrelevant.

that's what i saw at the time and has been replayed over and over. i'd have to watch it again but i'm pretty sure that's what went down.

i don't think this case had anything to do with her gender until Mourinho became a little prick and lashed out like a cunt. If you're asking would he have acted like he did post-match if two male physios ran out instead? I think he would have and he would have just had a different offensive fuckface rant. He takes whatever is in front of him and destroys it as soon as he needs to. He's toxic.

cheers

[WhyAlwaysMe?]

I also heard this morning that she was told not to go onto the pitch quickly until they'd worked out if it was a serious injury or not - if she disobeyed orders then it weakens her case considerably - would there be this much fuss if it was a male Dr?

Didn't the ref signal for the medical team to come on? If this is the case then any instruction from Mourinho is irrelevant.

Michael Oliver's first request for the physios to tend to Eden Hazard was ignored... So, he then blew the whistle a 2nd time... Therefore, Mourinho should have been sanctioned, for purposely ignoring the ref's direct requests for the physios to immediately attend to Hazard & move him off the pitch, so the match could continue.

Eva Carneiro has also questioned how the FA could have made their decisions, considering they never bothered to officially question her, as to what happened. With the FA failing to interview her, it helps her case against Chelsea.

Here are more photos of Michael Oliver requesting the Chelsea physios to enter the pitch:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/ ... ow-6247623

[Plain Speaking]

BBC's Richardson suggested a senior Chelsea player said to him he would rather lose than win under Mourinho. I wonder if this is related to his treatment of the physios? There were rumours Eva had relationships with senior Chelsea players.

[Dameerto]

BBC's Richardson suggested a senior Chelsea player said to him he would rather lose than win under Mourinho. I wonder if this is related to his treatment of the physios? There were rumours Eva had relationships with senior Chelsea players.

Fuck rumours bring me facts.

[Nigels Tackle]

BBC's Richardson suggested a senior Chelsea player said to him he would rather lose than win under Mourinho. I wonder if this is related to his treatment of the physios? There were rumours Eva had relationships with senior Chelsea players.

Fuck rumours bring me facts.

when jose was giving his post match press conference eva would strip naked and all the chelsea lads wank over her. they are all gutted she's gone...

[Dameerto]

BBC's Richardson suggested a senior Chelsea player said to him he would rather lose than win under Mourinho. I wonder if this is related to his treatment of the physios? There were rumours Eva had relationships with senior Chelsea players.

Fuck rumours bring me facts.

when jose was giving his post match press conference eva would strip naked and all the chelsea lads wank over her. they are all gutted she's gone...

That's case closed then.

[Tokyo Blue]

BBC's Richardson suggested a senior Chelsea player said to him he would rather lose than win under Mourinho. I wonder if this is related to his treatment of the physios? There were rumours Eva had relationships with senior Chelsea players.

Fuck rumours bring me facts.

So much for Plain Speaking.

[Plain Speaking]

BBC's Richardson suggested a senior Chelsea player said to him he would rather lose than win under Mourinho. I wonder if this is related to his treatment of the physios? There were rumours Eva had relationships with senior Chelsea players.

Fuck rumours bring me facts.

Another possible reason Chelsea and Eva won't want the case going to court? Cross examination to see if unprofessional behaviour? Not in anyone's interest, other than the tabloids, to have such rumours converted to facts.

[Dameerto]

She should be treated in the same way a male would in the exact same circumstances and the 'rumours' should play no part in anything, they certainly have nothing to do with her grievance.

[patrickblue]

She should be treated in the same way a male would in the exact same circumstances and the 'rumours' should play no part in anything, they certainly have nothing to do with her grievance.

It won't happen in the PC world we live in nowadays.

[WhyAlwaysMe?]

Eva Carneiro has now filed a personal victimisation lawsuit against Jose Mourinho, rather than suing Chelsea & Roman... A very wise move, considering Jose is entirely at fault for her dismissal. Eva has now been offered a job by Charlton Athletic, after her case is settled:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/sports ... erson.html

Jose has also been given a 1 match stadium ban, after his ref rants, following the West Ham loss... The new Specialist in Scandals & 3rd Season Failure!
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footba ... -rant.html

The cherry to top all the Chelsea cheer, is that they have lost the most matches from a winning position, this season:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footba ... e-win.html

[Dameerto]

Purely guesswork from me, but she might have separated out any demand for an apology or statement of blamelessness to shift it over to Mourinho inorder to make Chelsea more likely to settle the other case of constructive dismissal.

[foreverblue]

It seems Chelsea blinked big time. What was she going to say to make them settle? Can't see how a tribunal would award more than Chelsea's offer of 1.2M.

[Dameerto]

It seems Chelsea blinked big time. What was she going to say to make them settle? Can't see how a tribunal would award more than Chelsea's offer of 1.2M.

It seemed as clearcut a case to me as they come and Chelsea would have known that. Her professional integrity was on the line and I don't believe money was the motivating factor for her in this. I'm curious to know what the settlement was. (There's already an expression of regret and confirmation of her professionalism from Chelsea that's been issued).

[foreverblue]

It seems Chelsea blinked big time. What was she going to say to make them settle? Can't see how a tribunal would award more than Chelsea's offer of 1.2M.

It seemed as clearcut a case to me as they come and Chelsea would have known that. Her professional integrity was on the line. I'm curious to know what the settlement was. (There's already an expression of regret and confirmation of her professionalism from Chelsea that's been issued).

Is Mourinho covered by the deal or is it just Chelsea? Will she still sue him in court?

[Dameerto]

It seems Chelsea blinked big time. What was she going to say to make them settle? Can't see how a tribunal would award more than Chelsea's offer of 1.2M.

It seemed as clearcut a case to me as they come and Chelsea would have known that. Her professional integrity was on the line. I'm curious to know what the settlement was. (There's already an expression of regret and confirmation of her professionalism from Chelsea that's been issued).

Is Mourinho covered by the deal or is it just Chelsea? Will she still sue him in court?

This seems to be the club only (which was a claim of constructive dismissal). Not sure how this leaves her claim against Mourinho.