Eva Carneiro leaves Chelsea

[marty mcfly]

When her job is "first team doctor and assistant medical director", one would imagine that Mou removing her from all contact with the first team because she followed FA guidelines during an incident, and a subsequent facebook post, and slating her in the press both personally and indirectly for at least a couple of weeks, might well be considered as "conduct(ing) himself in a manner calculated or likely to destroy or seriously damage the relationship of trust and confidence between the employer and the employee" in constructive dismissal terms.

Obviously her making no public comment at all beyond that facebook post means she is "fighting him every step of the way", though.

They're my words not anyone else's. It doesn't change the facts of the case.

 

[LinekersLegs]

I never gave the treatment of Hazard as a reason. I gave her answering back to him during the game however I said that was a minor issue.

The main reason is clear. The Facebook message of support. She doesn't have to technically break a guideline which would lead to dismissal. She just has to do something which falls foul of him and is close to breaking a guideline.

She also wasn't suspended. He did just want to restructure her duties so she did a job as far away from him as possible. The problem is she doesn't want to accept that. She didn't want to accept that he had the power to remove her from the bench for the game against Chelsea and now she doesn't want to accept that he has the power to remove her from the 1st team altogether.

I accept Mourinho isn't in the right with what he did during the game but since then he has done the only thing he really could but she just refuses to accept his authority and is fighting him every step.

It really does strike me that this hasn't come out of the blue. This is more than a disagreement over one issue.

But the main reason isn't at all clear because Fearn has been similarly reassigned and he has been completely silent - at least on the pitch and in social media. The ONLY thing we know of that Fearn has done is to treat Hazard when Mourinho didn't want him to and it looks like his primary duties have been significantly altered based solely on that incident.

To restructure someones duties to such an extent (both Carneiro and Fearn) you do typically need to have technically broken a guideline - usually more than one - if you don't want to face legal repercussions. This isn't medieval serfdom here, employment laws are there for both the protection of the company and the individuals.

I will agree that this is unlikely to be based on one issue.

 

[tsubaki]

They're my words not anyone else's. It doesn't change the facts of the case.

No, they dont - that summation of mine are the facts of the case. That is why she has a strong case.

 

[marty mcfly]

But the main reason isn't at all clear because Fearn has been similarly reassigned and he has been completely silent - at least on the pitch and in social media. The ONLY thing we know of that Fearn has done is to treat Hazard when Mourinho didn't want him to and it looks like his primary duties have been significantly altered based solely on that incident.

To restructure someones duties to such an extent (both Carneiro and Fearn) you do typically need to have technically broken a guideline - usually more than one - if you don't want to face legal repercussions. This isn't medieval serfdom here, employment laws are there for both the protection of the company and the individuals.

I will agree that this is unlikely to be based on one issue.

I answered that point. He has probably taken the decision that he can't be seen to be treating them differently especially since he will have to defend himself on charges of sexism.

What guideline did Distin break?

It's football and as such is part of the job that the manager has the authority to chose the team. The same way if you are working for a company you can be reassigned to another team if the manager simply doesn't like you or you aren't good for team morale. The doctor could still do her job just not for the 1st team. It really isn't constructive dismissal.

 

[Dithering Dougie]

I would have thought so and I think a good solicitor is making a case for constructive dismissal and they are using sexism as the argument which given the quote they are basing it on makes me believe she doesn't have any other basis to ague the case.

It really isn't constructive dismissal.

Gosh you really are losing the plot here aren't you, two posts 13 minutes apart that contradict each other so badly.

You need to stop now.

 

[orchard]

Gosh you really are losing the plot here aren't you, two posts 13 minutes apart that contradict each other so badly.

You need to stop now.

I don't really want to defend him Dougie, but it's not a contradiction mate.

Anywayz Adversus, pipe down, she's got a good case and she's going to win.

 

[marty mcfly]

Gosh you really are losing the plot here aren't you, two posts 13 minutes apart that contradict each other so badly.

You need to stop now.

What?

I said a good solicitor was making a case for constructive dismissal. I didn't say it was constructive dismissal.

The reason why they're a good solicitor is because they know they wouldn't have a case without playing the sexism card.

 

[ilikecheese]

...because you can @roydo

 

[tsubaki]

I answered that point. He has probably taken the decision that he can't be seen to be treating them differently especially since he will have to defend himself on charges of sexism.

What guideline did Distin break?

It's football and as such is part of the job that the manager has the authority to chose the team. The same way if you are working for a company you can be reassigned to another team if the manager simply doesn't like you or you aren't good for team morale. The doctor could still do her job just not for the 1st team. It really isn't constructive dismissal.

It really is.

For a start, Distin was playing appallingly as well as having a go at the manager, him being dropped was more than justified given his performances and with the emergence of Stones. Now if Martinez had come out and slated him publicly, said he was finished or did something else to make his (Distin's) position untenable and banned him from the training ground then he might have had a case for being constructively dismissed, but that is not what happened.

Also - if you are reassigned to a worse role because "the manager simply doesn't like you", then that may well be constructive dismissal if you quit because of it.

 

[Dithering Dougie]

What?

I said a good solicitor was making a case for constructive dismissal. I didn't say it was constructive dismissal.

The reason why they're a good solicitor is because they know they wouldn't have a case without playing the sexism card.

Well lets see.

In the one post you say they'll go for constructive dismissal then minutes later you say it isn't constructive dismissal, it would be impossible to make a case for constructive dismissal if there was no case to be made as you claim in the second post.

So which is it? Is there a case for constructive dismissal or not?

 

[Boss_Blue]

@Adversus

 

[chicoazul]

Are you saying she was arguing back because it was her job?

I think people are missing the point. She's not just a doctor. She's the team doctor employed by the club and under the command of Mourinho. She's not his equal and there I think lies the problem.

You can disagree with him and you can have the opinion that she was right to go on however she shouldn't have argued back or undermined him publicly in the way she did.

Players when they do something similar often find themselves in the same position of being benched and in extreme cases moved on.

Your posts underlie an insecure & naive leader who relies on autocracy towards his workforce.

It's why you will never be successful at business and ultimately fail and be unhappy in life.

Get over yourself Stalin, there's a reason why everyone is tearing into you.

 

[Baines' left foot]

@Adversus you know it's not so bad to say "okay, I was wrong". I can't stand people who argue over and over just to try and save face. In reality you don't save face at all, you just look stupid and stubborn.

 

[Woolly Blue]

No, he likely doesn't want to get into the argument because he'll probably have been informed that to suspend her for her facebook post would be legally overreaching and unlike you he doesn't want to be wrong multiple times.

Queen of the put downs as always.

 

[Boss_Blue]

Queen of the put downs as always.

LL is such a boss poster.

Take notes all of you helmets out there (myself included).