Palmer is staying

[On Balance]

Agree with the above but in regards to constructive dismissal which what you have been arguing, I cannot remember a single case of it happening in football.

Freezing a player out is not a constructive dismissal case anyway, as long as you pay their wages you’re simply taking a decision as his employer as to whether you want to use his service, a service you are paying for.

Most players want to play.

So in effect, as long as you’re adhering to the terms of a player’s contract and you’re paying him on time it’s up to you whether you play him or freeze him out…….no contract is being broken by freezing someone out albeit I think it’s a petty way for any manager or club to act.

When Bosman took his club to court it was more a case of “Restriction Of Trade” because his contract had expired but they refused to let him leave without a transfer fee.

It became more of a “Human Rights” issue.

I agree that every player has a price, it’s just that Palmers price of £3m as being quoted in the media seemed to be ludicrously low and bad business on our part.

A fee of double that plus add ons and sell on clauses would be more appropriate.

Para 2 of the above is incorrect.

If any employer makes life difficult for an employee, just because they don’t want them, it may amount to constructive dismissal.

Any employer would know this and would, given the correct legal advice, be mindful of this fact.

West Bromwich Albion would be most unlikely to put themselves in the position whereby, they may find themselves facing a tribunal for unfair dismissal.

My initial post (copied above) mentioned that a player ‘May have a case for constructive dismissal.’ That is my point and the important word in that sentence is May.

Below is a section of the article in the Athletic. It clearly states Ozil may have a case but was unlikely to choose that route and explains why.

To say that a player could not take this route, as Mick is suggesting is incorrect.

The text from the Athletic re: Ozil and Arsenal…….

Contract breach? Constructive dismissal? Ozil and Arsenal – the legal angle

Does Ozil have a case for constructive dismissal?
Perhaps, but it seems unlikely he would try to go down that path. It is well established, under English law, that a duty of trust and confidence will be implied into all employment contracts. The accepted formulation of the term is as follows:

“Employers will not, without reasonable and proper cause, conduct themselves in a manner calculated or likely to destroy or seriously damage the relationship of confidence or trust between employer and employee” — Woods v WM Car Services Peterborough Limited (1981) ICR 666.
If the employer breaches this term— either via a one-off event or as the culmination of multiple smaller events — the employee can then resign and treat themselves as having been constructively dismissed.

In the world of football, this would then enable the player to claim damages for the remaining term of their contract (assuming there is no break clause) under a wrongful dismissal claim. Furthermore, where they have two or more years’ service, they would, at least in theory, also be entitled to claim a relatively small amount of additional compensation for unfair dismissal.

It’s worth noting that this duty is mutually applicable to both employer and employee. Much of what we are seeing play out publicly — Arteta’s insistence that Ozil’s omission is based purely on sporting merit, Ozil’s unwavering social media support for his team-mates — appears designed to ensure neither party is seen to breach the “trust and confidence”.

Constructive dismissal cases are very rare in sport — but they do happen.**In 2009, a Premier League managers’ arbitration tribunal upheld Kevin Keegan’s claim for constructive dismissal against Newcastle.

However, it’s unlikely to be seen as an attractive option for Ozil.**First of all, it’s a high-risk strategy. “If you assert that*you’ve been constructively dismissed and are ultimately wrong, you’re then the*one who’s*acting*in breach of contract,” explains David Hunt, a partner at legal firm Farrer & Co. “Secondly, there*can be a substantial delay in the player gaining much-needed clarity. For example, it can take time to seek a determination via the relevant arbitration process,*meaning the*player*is*left in limbo*with them not knowing if they are yet free to join another club.”

Furthermore, if a player was to sign for a new club while such a process was ongoing, it would influence the*value of their*claim. “They have to*give credit for any new sums earned by*way of mitigation,” says*Hunt.**“If a player’s claim that they had been constructively dismissed is upheld,*they would have a claim for damages against their former club*for lost earnings in relation to the remaining term of their contract. However, they would have to offset against that claim*any new salary*earned from new employment.”

The other factor to note in relation to the claim of constructive dismissal itself is that the employers will have a defence if they can show there was “reasonable and proper” cause for the actions being complained about.