Wouldn't it make more sense to pay off players OOC at the end of the year? Anyone contracted out to 2014 would surely be due more money that then counts on our salary cap for those years should we survive.

There could be players on and off contract who might not want to stay for starters. Will investors want to pay wages that some of players are currently on. There are loads of problems for Bulls to sort out even if saved.

Don't think it's possible to pick and choose with regard to player redundancies tbh. Afaik it's the entire squad or none.

If we are going to lose players then we have to at least keep the spine of the team and the youngsters together.

I,m sure there other posters who are more conversant with redundancy pay than me, and would welcome any corrections.
Redundancy pay is only due after 2 years of contract & then at 1 weeks pay (for players 22 year old to 40 year old) for each year of contract. So most players would not be due a great deal, if anything
It does not matter how long into the future the contract if for.
Under a Liquidation the redundancy pay would be paid by the government : Redundancy Pay Services
I'm not sure that applies to Administration.
Likely redundancy payments come under the salary cap for this year, but the wage savings will be far more than that. Reducing the salary cap.

You might be right Mat, though in my first experience of such a thing I saw half the staff made redundant and the other half kept on to keep the company trading. so they did pick and choose then

Think this is Nobby`s job, sorting out who to keep and who`s gonna go!

In normal employment law your correct. But as well as the law of the land we have to answer to rfl as well, who hold a big stickbover us in terms of the license. Pretty certain they would take a dim view of clubs making players that didn't fit in their future plans anymore redundant. Can't remember an example of a player being made redundant.

The administrator can sack anyone he wants, provided its not on the usual discriminatory grounds. The rest get TUPEd across to (any) successor business.

Those staff who are paid off are entitled to statutory redundancy pay, accrued holiday pay etc and pay in lieu of notice. Up to certain upper limits, in an insolvency situation these are paid by the DwP, who then stands in place of the employees as a preferential creditor.

Any amounts owing to employees above the statutory maxima rank as unsecured creditors. This applies especially to e.g. players with fixed-term contracts. And they take their chances with the rest.

The best news this week (if any news is to be believed) is that one of the consortium is insisting that
the young players be retained and that the Bulls retain their SL licence.
The players we loose I expect to be those weaker ones on high salaries.

keeping the young talented players could be that they have more value when sold for profit

What sense does that make?

About as much sense as our illustrious administrator neglecting our key asset for the future.

I guess you mean the Junior sides?

i would love to keep all the players but im just saying which ones would you like to keep the most. How about the junior players - do they get paid?

The academy players that are contracted have been told they will get paid. Whether they will be paid any win bonuses (for the 18's) or for playing in the recent 9's tournaments remains to be seen.

Adey, I guess you'd be the one to know - is there any essential difference between long term hourly paid staff (office staff for instance) and those on a fixed term contract (ie players and coaching staff)? I did wonder if the terms of the player's contract might replace the usual statutory regulations.

On a related point, it was reported on Monday that mp had said he was only seeking alternative employment in aus, because his uk work permit only applied to employment with the bulls.

Does that mean that if the cub is sold to a newco, he would have re-apply for a work permit to stay with the new club?

MP becomes an "illegal alien" imminently and I understand that the UK Border Agency has already been in touch.

What a mess.

High profile coach soon becomes 'illegal alien', sort of makes you laugh considering the City of the team that he represented.

No, not reapply for a work permit, just change the details of the Employer.
Work permits are relevant to the person's qualifying skills appropriate to the employer's trade.
He was approved for a work permit as a rugby league coach in the UK when he joined St Helens.
This carried on when he joined the Bulls, only the employer changed and would have been registered on his work permit.
The same would apply to his joining bulls Newco.
So its just an administrative thing

So why would he be reported as ruling out other coaching jobs in the UK for that reason?

Does that affect his right to stay in the country? Ie can he only stay whilst in employment?. Thinking in terms of the as yet unconfirmed contact he's had re his immigration status mentioned earlier in the thread.

Have'nt seen that. What is the source

Quote ="bobsmyuncle"Have'nt seen that. What is the source'" www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/rugbyl ... oncos.html Its only the mail but looks kosher. Its the "up to 12 weeks" to obtain a new permit that seems to be the problem. Would that apply to a Bulls Newco? And could it also be a problem for our overseas players?

Quote ="bobsmyuncle"Have'nt seen that. What is the source'" www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/rugbyl ... oncos.html Its only the mail but looks kosher. Its the "up to 12 weeks" to obtain a new permit that seems to be the problem. Would that apply to a Bulls Newco? And could it also be a problem for our overseas players?