The mancityfans.net football forum

I put this in the Mourinho thread but on reflection it deserves a thread of its own. Eva Carneiro is pursuing a claim of constructive dismissal. If it went to a Tribunal hearing the media would have a field day with Mourinho required to attend. Chelsea surely have to grovel and settle to avoid this.

I can't see how Chelsea could hope to defend themselves, so settling would seem like the thing to do. 10 years salary plus a fee for her 'inconvenience' (with a silence clause inserted in very large print).

She was summoned onto the field by the referee to do her job. She then got relegated from first team duties. That surely is constructive dismissal. In addition Mourinho referred to her as a secretary on the bench which is surely sexist.

blues2win wrote:She was summoned onto the field by the referee to do her job. She then got relegated from first team duties. That surely is constructive dismissal. In addition Mourinho referred to her as a secretary on the bench which is surely sexist.

Either Hazard was faking injury to timewaste, or she was reprimanded for doing her job. No good way out of this for Chelsea now. The solution was apologising immediately after the match, heat of battle etc, whereas his arrogance has made it worse. Ah well

Regardless of what was said she was doing her job, and to ignore the referee while also failing to check on the condition of a player with an unknown injury would have been insane.

Here's one of many links about the news of her legal action against Chelsea.

http://www.theguardian.com/football/201 ... sea-doctor

This is rather strange. As others have said it is so obviously against Chelsea's interests for this to go to court and an employment tribunal which is effectively a public enquiry, Of course Chelsea know this. Since she left, her lawyers will have been discussing severance with Chelsea and it will only be going to court because whatever offer Chelsea have made is not deemed sufficient by Carneiro or her legal team. There will be no advantage to anyone (apart from maybe the lawyers) for this to go to court so its just a game of poker now. If it goes to court and the tribunal decides on a figure less than or equal to what Chelsea have offered she would end up having to pay a lot of legal costs. There does seem to be a limit of about £75k for constructive dismissal, Chelsea are hardly going to haggle over that, if she can prove a case for discrimination though, as "investigated" by the FA there is no limit to the damages you can claim...Given the comments Mourinho has made this could get interesting. My bet would be a settlement well before it gets to court but it would be really funny if Mourinho is gone before then and actually they offer her the job back on a better package!! If Chelsea could prove that Mourinho's actions constituted gross professional misconduct maybe they could fire him without having to pay him his wedge. Now that would be funny.

Given the secretary comment and the fact that she was treated differently from the physiotherapist who also went onto the field I'd have thought discrimination could also be proved. It's not just a question of what epithet Mourinho uttered to her as she came off the field.

Someone please tell Wenger she'd like to stay in London ;)

That'll push the moaning one over the edge should she follow Cech to Arsenal. I'm rolling around laughing just with the thought of how Mourinhio would explode in his very first presser after the announcement that Wenger has hired her ...

Wonder how the journos would keep a straight face asking Mourinhio the question: What are your thoughts on Wenger ... what is he a specialist in now?

blues-clues wrote: If Chelsea could prove that Mourinho's actions constituted gross professional misconduct maybe they could fire him without having to pay him his wedge. Now that would be funny.

So Chelsea won't settle over tens of thousands and go to court, which will clearly cost more. Makes no sense whatsoever, unless they could find themselves in a position where they avoid paying Maureen £30m. That would be hilarious

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.

Im_Spartacus wrote: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.

Chelsea have enough negativity surrounding their club , they will 100% settle this out of court unless they have followed their leader, and lost the plot as well.

carl_feedthegoat wrote:

Im_Spartacus wrote: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.

Chelsea have enough negativity surrounding their club , they will 100% settle this out of court unless they have followed their leader, and lost the plot as well.

That's what he said you leathery thicko.

Cheers

DoomMerchant wrote:

carl_feedthegoat wrote:

Im_Spartacus wrote: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.

Chelsea have enough negativity surrounding their club , they will 100% settle this out of court unless they have followed their leader, and lost the plot as well.

That's what he said you leathery thicko.

Cheers

Carl said it without doing an impression of Ted though.

Where is Ted now days... ;)

london blue 2 wrote:Where is Ted now days... ;)

some dick will probably start a thread a asking that same question soon

Nigels Tackle wrote:

london blue 2 wrote:Where is Ted now days... ;)

some dick will probably start a thread a asking that same question soon

Or Phips will bump the old one.

iwasthere2012 wrote:

Nigels Tackle wrote:

london blue 2 wrote:Where is Ted now days... ;)

some dick will probably start a thread a asking that same question soon

Or Phips will bump the old one.

*and Phips will bump the old one

Mase wrote:

DoomMerchant wrote:

carl_feedthegoat wrote:

Im_Spartacus wrote: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.

Chelsea have enough negativity surrounding their club , they will 100% settle this out of court unless they have followed their leader, and lost the plot as well.

That's what he said you leathery thicko.

Cheers

Carl said it without doing an impression of Ted though.

just wanted to put it out there, take or leave it

Im_Spartacus wrote: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.

It's normally hard to prove, as most employers don't slag their staff off to the world's media. After what he said in the days following the match, ignoring what happened during it, how could she be expected to undertake her job? Her position became untenable at that point unless Mourinho went. But none of that is why Chelsea won't want to go to court, at least if they have any sense.