|
|
Post by fcum on May 6, 2018 22:17:57 GMT
I've yet to see anything proven in writing by these fuckers that <NAME REMOVED by Admin> and others were living off the club and the DF. What exactly do you want? The appointments and their connections to <NAME REMOVED by Admin> are public knowledge. The accounts clearly show DF costs in relation to certain individuals. It wasn't "some appointments". The connections to <NAME REMOVED by Admin> across the majority appointments are obvious. Those appointments were key to the success of the club and nepotism shouldn't have been the appointment criteria. |
|
|
|
Post by oddball on May 7, 2018 1:38:20 GMT
I've yet to see anything proven in writing by these fuckers that <NAME REMOVED by Admin> and others were living off the club and the DF. What exactly do you want? The appointments and their connections to <NAME REMOVED by Admin> are public knowledge. The accounts clearly show DF costs in relation to certain individuals. It wasn't "some appointments". The connections to <NAME REMOVED by Admin> across the majority appointments are obvious. Those appointments were key to the success of the club and nepotism shouldn't have been the appointment criteria. Speaking of nepotism i'm sure the PM would never surround himself with people he prefers to run things would he (and who must agree with him)? If this is about an individual having too much influence at FC then you can't agree with what's happening now either. It's far worse having one (resigned) board member wagging the dog through a sense of entitlement because he "invented" it surely? The club will not go anywhere as long as this continues, if it survives at all. |
|
|
|
Post by jeepster on May 7, 2018 10:38:09 GMT
club will not go anywhere as long as this continues, if it survives at all. Ain't that the truth. "It ain't what you do, it's the way that you do it". And look at the results.  |
|
|
|
Post by robthebuilder on May 7, 2018 10:49:08 GMT
Nepotism ? The ceo started in November 2016, by the beginning of December he had employed two of his friends 'K' and 'D'on £81 a day ! No job advertisements, no interviews ! Eighty One Pounds A Day !!!
|
|
|
|
Post by shadow on May 8, 2018 14:00:16 GMT
I've yet to see anything proven in writing by these fuckers that <NAME REMOVED by Admin> and others were living off the club and the DF. What exactly do you want? The appointments and their connections to <NAME REMOVED by Admin> are public knowledge. The accounts clearly show DF costs in relation to certain individuals. It wasn't "some appointments". The connections to <NAME REMOVED by Admin> across the majority appointments are obvious. Those appointments were key to the success of the club and nepotism shouldn't have been the appointment criteria. As a matter of interest can you point out where the accounts clearly show DF costs in relation to certain individuals? |
|
|
|
Post by fcum on May 8, 2018 23:11:36 GMT
What exactly do you want? The appointments and their connections to <NAME REMOVED by Admin> are public knowledge. The accounts clearly show DF costs in relation to certain individuals. It wasn't "some appointments". The connections to <NAME REMOVED by Admin> across the majority appointments are obvious. Those appointments were key to the success of the club and nepotism shouldn't have been the appointment criteria. As a matter of interest can you point out where the accounts clearly show DF costs in relation to certain individuals? You're going to tell me that the management and professional DF costs in the accounts don't at least in part relate to the individuals in question? The chair of the Finance Committee also confirmed the DF was used to partly pay "someone's salary". |
|
|
|
Post by shadow on May 9, 2018 9:05:48 GMT
I'll paraphrase you - "No, the accounts don't clearly show DF costs in relation to certain individuals but that isn't going to stop me saying so."
Can you point me to the comment from the chair of the Finance Committee? By the way, you are aware of the difference between salary payments to employees and fees to self-employed contractors aren't you?
|
|
|
|
Post by fcum on May 9, 2018 9:50:24 GMT
I'll paraphrase you - "No, the accounts don't clearly show DF costs in relation to certain individuals but that isn't going to stop me saying so." Can you point me to the comment from the chair of the Finance Committee? By the way, you are aware of the difference between salary payments to employees and fees to self-employed contractors aren't you? Go on the members' forum and search for the quote if you're that interested. I'm very aware of the distinction between employees and self employed contractors, thanks. Employment status risk appears to be another thing which was not given the importance it deserves. |
|
|
|
Post by shadow on May 9, 2018 10:54:29 GMT
I'll paraphrase you - "No, the accounts don't clearly show DF costs in relation to certain individuals but that isn't going to stop me saying so." Can you point me to the comment from the chair of the Finance Committee? By the way, you are aware of the difference between salary payments to employees and fees to self-employed contractors aren't you? Go on the members' forum and search for the quote if you're that interested. I'm very aware of the distinction between employees and self employed contractors, thanks. Employment status risk appears to be another thing which was not given the importance it deserves. Why, did the Club get pulled up for it? |
|
|
|
Post by shadow on May 9, 2018 10:56:35 GMT
I'll paraphrase you - "No, the accounts don't clearly show DF costs in relation to certain individuals but that isn't going to stop me saying so." Can you point me to the comment from the chair of the Finance Committee? By the way, you are aware of the difference between salary payments to employees and fees to self-employed contractors aren't you? I'm very aware of the distinction between employees and self employed contractors, thanks. Employment status risk appears to be another thing which was not given the importance it deserves. If it's anything like what you said was supposed to be in the accounts I don't think I'll bother wasting my time. |
|
|
|
Post by fcum on May 12, 2018 23:58:02 GMT
Go on the members' forum and search for the quote if you're that interested.I'm very aware of the distinction between employees and self employed contractors, thanks. Employment status risk appears to be another thing which was not given the importance it deserves. If it's anything like what you said was supposed to be in the accounts I don't think I'll bother wasting my time. Would you care to give us a breakdown of the DF costs then? Presumably none of the costs relate to the individuals in question? |
|
|
|
Post by fcum on May 13, 2018 0:04:16 GMT
Go on the members' forum and search for the quote if you're that interested. I'm very aware of the distinction between employees and self employed contractors, thanks. Employment status risk appears to be another thing which was not given the importance it deserves. Why, did the Club get pulled up for it? We didn't get "pulled" by an under resourced area of HMRC. That's fine then. We could have just applied a bit of common sense and not engaged with individuals where status is questionable but let's just wing it. |
|
|
|
Post by artirles on May 14, 2018 12:17:22 GMT
Perhaps we didn't get pulled because there was nothing to be pulled on.
|
|
|
|
Post by artirles on May 14, 2018 12:19:10 GMT
Nepotism ? The ceo started in November 2016, by the beginning of December he had employed two of his friends 'K' and 'D'on £81 a day ! No job advertisements, no interviews ! Eighty One Pounds A Day !!! More like £180 a day. In PM maths that's about £60k a year and we keep repeating that until everyone believes it. |
|
|
|
Post by artirles on May 14, 2018 12:51:13 GMT
Maybe nothing was said because nobody was making a living from Fc within your edited <NAME REMOVED by Admin> social circle post. However I'm sure the Almighty leader has provided you with written evidence of the feasts. So please tell all about these nasty people. They're obviously bang to rights as the Almighty is right. Put some names down and amounts taken from the club. As far as I am concerned nothing was taken but much is lost. From a personal view. What's your problem with editing a post? I think I corrected a typo. You really don't think the recruitment policy was in any way nepotistic? Let's take the paid fundraiser. A man who was confident enough to resign from his previous job prior to even being interviewed. A man who tweeted about new beginnings in the 3rd sector before he was even interviewed. I'm sorry but I just don't buy that role wasn't created without him being earmarked for the position. We then add in the various other friends and associates in staff and contractor roles such as the minithon organiser who appeared to charge more than he raised. Anyway, this is old ground and I'll leave you lot to your collective bitterness and delusions that you couldn't possibly have made some fundamental mistakes or errors of judgement. Accusations of nepotism for an advertised fundraiser post filled after a competitive interview. Compared to CEO post filled after interviewing only 1 person. Bring it up to date, is it nepotistic to co-opt a mate onto the board without letting the rest of the members know what help was needed so no competitive process. |
|
