Originally Posted by
swaledale
Your right it should have been retirement due to ill health, as for redundancy being used only when your role is no longer required, not true actually, in a restructure everybody can be put on notice of redundancy and then a process is gone thorough to appoint people to the roles in the new structure, with the unlucky ones being made redundant, even though their actual role hasn't gone - but has changed in some way.
I have to laugh when yet another poster makes an assumption that I'm giving an opinion, when actually its based on actual knowledge and experience whereas you don't seem to have read the link you posted in detail.
Dismissal on the grounds of ill health has to be handled very carefully, as indeed the link you posted says and as for it being normal, well yes it has to be handled commonly but rarely can you simply dismiss someone who cannot work due to illness there is a process to go through which includes an assessment as to whether or not they can do their job again and in what time frame etc. , whether they are classed as disabled etc. etc. Much as I said previously will depend upon the terms and conditions of the employment contract and indeed many employers do dismiss illegally and I've attended many a an employment tribunal where that has cost the employer dearly.
In any case the employment status of a footballer and someone in normal work is not comparable and the contracts are very different and it is rare for a club to simply ditch a player due to his injury record, unless the players contract comes to an end.
However, I'm understand that many on here are happy with broad generalisations and couldn't give a flying **** about reality ho hum!