Should we be asking to furlough?

If we don’t have insurance to cover us then we should 100% be looking at using the Job Retention Scheme. It’s not a “who blinks first” between us and them, it’s about safeguarding the business. I am sure the businessmen on our Board will more than likely be using it for those for whom there is currently no work in their own businesses so why not Rangers?
 
If our players take a 30% cut, then we should still be able to fully pay our non-playing staff the full wage - without getting a bailout from the taxpayer.

I’m sure the playing staff costs are around 70% of our total expenses on salaries.
 
No. Firstly we should be looking arojnd the boardroom and reducing salaries there. Then we should be looking to the players to sacrifice their wage to contribute to the non playing staff wage. At that stage if we need to still furlough then we should. Taking from the public fund should be the last resort.
 
My understanding that any expenses Rangers have at the moment ie season 19/20 are all from the budget set for that season,now next season is a different ball game,but personally to cut workers wages even by 20% while fellow workers are on 15 or 20 thousand and are not cut I could not accept that.
 
Hmm. Just heard the Aberdeen CEO on Radio Scotland. Interesting comments on furloughing from the Sheep guy. Their legal advice is that they cannot furlough the players because they are staying fit and uploading their daily data to a database for review by the Sports Science guys. Players are also telephoning vulnerable fans. Both classed as work so not eligible for furlough. There's a cat amongst the pigeons.
I see the point your making fella. But, im a crane driver and if im not fit for work i can get disciplined and or sacked as im sure most people on here have the same sort of deal with their jobs.
Same Should / could be made about players, if there not at a level of fitness / weight when they return they could be disciplined too ?
 
For: it protects the long term interests of the business to absolutely minimise outgoings during this time. If we don’t, and our rivals do, our finances are significantly affected relative to theirs. Furlough, from what I can see does not meet uefa’s definition of state aid, as it is an option available to all clubs. There is no business sense in not doing it. Any payback when this is done is highly unlikely to exclude those that didn’t use the system.

Against: I think it is completely immoral to offset paying higher salaries by using public funds. I think they should change the rule that if you furlough one group of employees, all must be unless they can be proven essential to the continued running of the business while in lockdown
 
If our players take a 30% cut, then we should still be able to fully pay our non-playing staff the full wage - without getting a bailout from the taxpayer.

I’m sure the playing staff costs are around 70% of our total expenses on salaries.

Just so I understand.

You want Rangers to put everyone who cannot do any work for the club just now on paid leave until this crisis is over.

Not either use the Government scheme implemented for these circumstances, or lay them off because there is no work for them.

You do also realise that if the players take a 30% pay cut they will also pay 30% less tax (well a bit more actually). On a salary which is taxed at 46% for anything over £3,000 / week.

So someone on £10,000 per week would pay £71,760 / annum or £5,980 / month less in tax.
 
For: it protects the long term interests of the business to absolutely minimise outgoings during this time. If we don’t, and our rivals do, our finances are significantly affected relative to theirs. Furlough, from what I can see does not meet uefa’s definition of state aid, as it is an option available to all clubs. There is no business sense in not doing it. Any payback when this is done is highly unlikely to exclude those that didn’t use the system.

Against: I think it is completely immoral to offset paying higher salaries by using public funds. I think they should change the rule that if you furlough one group of employees, all must be unless they can be proven essential to the continued running of the business while in lockdown

Sorry but you want to potentially cut the income of people who can do their job from home. Have them sitting about doing nothing, unless they were "essential to the continued running of the business.

Why would people agree to be furloughed in circumstances like that. Why would a business want to do it. Presumably they want as many people doing their job as possible, to keep things as normal as possible.
 
The whole point of the Government scheme is to protect jobs and to protect companies who have no income.

Are Rangers (or any other football team) at the stage that they need to announce redundancies? If the answer is no then no furlough.

Are Rangers (or any other football team) about to sell season tickets and by doing so maintain an income whilst benefiting from reduced costs? If the answer is yes then no furlough.

This is not a Government hand out for the rich and wealthy. It is a scheme to protect vulnerable jobs.
 
The whole point of the Government scheme is to protect jobs and to protect companies who have no income.

Are Rangers (or any other football team) at the stage that they need to announce redundancies? If the answer is no then no furlough.

Are Rangers (or any other football team) about to sell season tickets and by doing so maintain an income whilst benefiting from reduced costs? If the answer is yes then no furlough.

This is not a Government hand out for the rich and wealthy. It is a scheme to protect vulnerable jobs.
That is nonsense, Rangers will not go into Admin, but they are not rich and wealthy and the Government scheme is to make sure companies who are affected by this virus can keep their workforce in place so that once this has passed, the companies can then trade as normal and as quickly as possible..
This JRS is open to manipulation but the Government has been outstanding.
 
That is nonsense, Rangers will not go into Admin, but they are not rich and wealthy and the Government scheme is to make sure companies who are affected by this virus can keep their workforce in place so that once this has passed, the companies can then trade as normal and as quickly as possible..
This JRS is open to manipulation but the Government has been outstanding.
How much cash do we currently have and what is our monthly wagebill?
 
Whatever the rights and wrongs of this scheme we should be doing it . The club , the players and the supporters are all going to be paying for it in the future so we might as well reap the benefit and limit the financial burden.

As much as it pains me the Tim’s , Levy and Ashley are all just playing the system to their best advantage .
 
That is nonsense, Rangers will not go into Admin, but they are not rich and wealthy and the Government scheme is to make sure companies who are affected by this virus can keep their workforce in place so that once this has passed, the companies can then trade as normal and as quickly as possible..
This JRS is open to manipulation but the Government has been outstanding.

So you think this is Government aid for businesses that aren't making as much money as they might otherwise be making?

I never mentioned Admin. Why do you?
 
I see the point your making fella. But, im a crane driver and if im not fit for work i can get disciplined and or sacked as im sure most people on here have the same sort of deal with their jobs.
Same Should / could be made about players, if there not at a level of fitness / weight when they return they could be disciplined too ?

I dare say we could. If Morelos comes back in August/September/October or whatever overweight then we can fine him two weeks wages. That, as I understand it, is the maximum allowed. Sacking isn't an option without going down a very difficult legal path. Meanwhile, he's not fit enough to start games.

I don't have an answer mate. Some clubs have considered furloughing players but, listening to the Sheep CEO yesterday, the legal advice he has had is that if they do anything at all - as simple as telling you their weight or making a phone call to a vulnerable fan or to encourage season ticket sales - then it classes as 'work'. So no furloughing of players.

Furloughing of non-playing staff should definitely be considered though. I'd want the Club to fund them the additional 20% beyond the JRS Grant - and I'd want the players to agree cuts (ideally) or deferrals (as a minimum) in order to help fund that.
 
Last edited:
So you think this is Government aid for businesses that aren't making as much money as they might otherwise be making?

It is.

"The Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme is a temporary scheme open to all UK employers for at least 3 months starting from 1 March 2020. It is designed to support employers whose operations have been severely affected by coronavirus (COVID-19). "
 
It is.

"The Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme is a temporary scheme open to all UK employers for at least 3 months starting from 1 March 2020. It is designed to support employers whose operations have been severely affected by coronavirus (COVID-19). "

I retract my previous words. Disgrace.

I sincerely hope we don't
 
It is.

"The Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme is a temporary scheme open to all UK employers for at least 3 months starting from 1 March 2020. It is designed to support employers whose operations have been severely affected by coronavirus (COVID-19). "
ADVERB
Severely -
to an undesirably great or intense degree.
 
Just so I understand.

You want Rangers to put everyone who cannot do any work for the club just now on paid leave until this crisis is over.

Not either use the Government scheme implemented for these circumstances, or lay them off because there is no work for them.

You do also realise that if the players take a 30% pay cut they will also pay 30% less tax (well a bit more actually). On a salary which is taxed at 46% for anything over £3,000 / week.

So someone on £10,000 per week would pay £71,760 / annum or £5,980 / month less in tax.

I’m well aware of how taxation works, but this isn’t about bringing in tax through. It’s about trying our best to make sure the lowest paid employees of our club don’t have to end up on 80% wages, whilst our players sit on 100%.

If we need to use the Gov scheme to pay 80% - for financial reasons - then fair enough.
 
We should do this , for all we know it may be done . But would hope we could pay the other 20 % of wages , not sure if you are allowed to though .
 
We should do this , for all we know it may be done . But would hope we could pay the other 20 % of wages , not sure if you are allowed to though .

Yes, you can.

The 80% is paid to the employer, they can then pay the full wage if they choose to. The employee has to agree with the arrangement.

The idea of the scheme is to help businesses keep people on their books, to make sure there is a job for them to come back to when the crisis is over.

The more normal we can keep the economy going the better, and the Government are recognising that and trying to do something about it.

Bearing in mind that if people do lose their jobs it is the taxpayer who will have to deal with that anyway.
 
The harsh fact football clubs are fairly easy to run if it was not for the stupid ridiculous wages that are paid to there playing staff, they should set the budget and stick to it,I think we can all agree or may be not ,take Liverpool as a good example going down the 80% road and are about to lay out 50 mil or so on a transfer to me that's taking the pish.
 
Can I answer the question in a different way?
Companies should only be furloughing staff if they do not have the means to cover their wages.
If a football club can maintain wages like £5000 to £300000 then that should be looked at long before guys on a more normal wage.
The uptake in football club abusing this scheme will result in the suffering of many who need support as their business could not provide it. That goes for any business with funds in the bank, not just football clubs.
 
Im a bit surprised the club haven't made any movement on this. I'm prepared to give them the benefit of the doubt for another week but then they should;
1) Issue a statement ( I know) saying we intend to pay all our non playing staff x % of wages and leave the government scheme for those who need it to survive.
Or 2) Say we intend to furlough non playing staff .
Or 3) Players have agreed to reduce wages by x% to fund non playing staff wages. ( The obvious winner with no additional cost to the club)
I'm just hoping there is a plan and not burying head in the sand.
Surely the club employees need to know where they stand.
 
No idea but I know the present Directors / Investors or for that matter, a large selection of our fans would not let that happen, You said to protect Companies
If directors are plugging the gap (and we all hope they are) then we should be told that is the case.

Aberdeen announced last week their new chairman has put £2m in to help sustain them. I'd like that reassurance for ourselves. We have heard nothing about how we will deal with the impact of this epidemic.
 
Can I answer the question in a different way?
Companies should only be furloughing staff if they do not have the means to cover their wages.
If a football club can maintain wages like £5000 to £300000 then that should be looked at long before guys on a more normal wage.
The uptake in football club abusing this scheme will result in the suffering of many who need support as their business could not provide it. That goes for any business with funds in the bank, not just football clubs.
Well let’s hope the Tims, Man City, Liverpool etc are given short shrift
 
If directors are plugging the gap (and we all hope they are) then we should be told that is the case.

Aberdeen announced last week their new chairman has put £2m in to help sustain them. I'd like that reassurance for ourselves. We have heard nothing about how we will deal with the impact of this epidemic.
Why do you think the Club should put anything out until they are ready
 
I don't think any team that plays in any of England's top two leagues. Up here, hearts hibs aberdeen us and the filth shouldn't be doing it either.
 
Back
Top