Mather takes £300K with him!

[Darthter 542]

Is it only 3 months? That makes it £375k for his time or £1.5m per year remuneration. So now we sack Stockbridge for mismanagement in this case and give him the same...

 

£1m left in April? I doubt there will even be any office pens left when that thieving lot are done.

 

He will have left with a years wages, on top of what he has earned over the past 3 months....so probably about £375 - don't know where your getting the £1.5m from.

 

As for the resigned/sacked debate....I agree with BrahimHemdani. If RIFC were to have sacked Mather outright, they would have to provide concrete evidence that the correct disciplinary procedure was followed, otherwise Mather could sue for wrongful dismissal and potentially walk away with a lot more. Also, very few folk want to have a "sacking" on their CV, therefore you come to the "mutual consent" solution ie. you resign and we'll give you a years wages. If Mater had simply resigned, he would have been due nothing. This then raises the question....what he pushed or "actively encouraged" to leave????

[calscot 0]

He will have left with a years wages, on top of what he has earned over the past 3 months....so probably about £375 - don't know where your getting the £1.5m from.

 

Really? Wow.

 

Ok, three months is a quarter of a year, so to get the yearly equivalent you have to multiply the money earned in that time by four. £375k x 4 = £1.5m.

 

Note in case you still don't get it: obviously he didn't earn this, it was just his yearly rate equivalent...

 

 

As for the resigned/sacked debate....I agree with BrahimHemdani. If RIFC were to have sacked Mather outright, they would have to provide concrete evidence that the correct disciplinary procedure was followed, otherwise Mather could sue for wrongful dismissal and potentially walk away with a lot more. Also, very few folk want to have a "sacking" on their CV, therefore you come to the "mutual consent" solution ie. you resign and we'll give you a years wages. If Mater had simply resigned, he would have been due nothing. This then raises the question....what he pushed or "actively encouraged" to leave????

 

Or... could we not wait until the imminent agm where he could be voted off the board? Or does he still have to be sacked? Seems that it would be better to have a CEO in place to make sure the AGM is organised smoothly.

 

Seems to me it would be cheaper to hire somebody at twice the price but with a sacking clause in the contract.

[craig 5,195]

He was probably on a one year rolling contract or similar, would you walk away for less than you were due?

 

If his contract was similar to Ahmad's then it would be a 12 month notice period on behalf of the club and 3 months on the resignation notice being given by the employee. He should have got 75k as he resigned his position - he should have been given his 3 months notice and marched out the door.

 

It is not uncommon for employees who hand in their notice to be given the notice period pay but not work for it - this happens, particularly so in IT.

[Darthter 542]

Really? Wow.

 

Ok, three months is a quarter of a year, so to get the yearly equivalent you have to multiply the money earned in that time by four. £375k x 4 = £1.5m.

 

You've lost me completely......

 

Mathers ANNUAL SALARY was £300k.....

For a 3 month period as CEO, he would have "earned" £75k (300/12=£25k per month, £75k for 3 months)

 

His seattlement fee was worth 1 years wages, which may equate to his notice period on behalf of the club (as Craig states...)

 

Therefore for his role as CEO, Craig Mather received £375k....

 

 

As for waiting for the AGM....the only way for that to make any sense would be.....if Mather waited, he would not have received any settlement fee - he jumped ship now for the money!!!

[craig 5,195]

You've lost me completely......

 

Mathers ANNUAL SALARY was £300k.....

For a 3 month period as CEO, he would have "earned" £75k (300/12=£25k per month, £75k for 3 months)

 

His seattlement fee was worth 1 years wages, which may equate to his notice period on behalf of the club (as Craig states...)

 

Therefore for his role as CEO, Craig Mather received £375k....

 

 

As for waiting for the AGM....the only way for that to make any sense would be.....if Mather waited, he would not have received any settlement fee - he jumped ship now for the money!!!

 

Calscot is saying that he was CEO for 3 months and in that 3 months received 375k. If you extrapoloate that over a year it is 1.5 million as an annual equivalent.

 

That said, I believe cal is being a touch ingenious with his maths - because Mather couldnt expect a pay off every 3 months

[Darthter 542]

Calscot is saying that he was CEO for 3 months and in that 3 months received 375k.

 

.....he received £75k wages & a one off payment of £300k - why the need to extrapolate that over 12 months???

His annual wage was £300k...not £1.5m. He wasn't getting a £300k handout every 3 months (or at least I hope not....)

[craig 5,195]

.....he received £75k wages & a one off payment of £300k - why the need to extrapolate that over 12 months???

His annual wage was £300k...not £1.5m. He wasn't getting a £300k handout every 3 months (or at least I hope not....)

 

If you read the 2nd line of my post you will see I agree with your latter statement....

[calscot 0]

Irrespective of whether it was a one off payment, Mather received 375k for 3 months work, that works out at 1.5m per year of work. Or if you like, about 30k a week.

 

The point is that there is a massive flaw in that contract and it has no basis in any morality.

 

At worst (for Rangers) the moral thing would be to pay the guy for the next year, any difference in the amount he earns below his Rangers wage.

 

I can't see why you should be installed against many shareholder's wishes and then paid off with 4 times the actual time you did the job. I'm sure we could have saved money in court. But the contract itself may be legal but it is sheer incompetence to agree to it in the first place. Any reasonable person can see it's stupid and an incredibly poor business decision. If it wasn't for cronyism, you'd have to wonder how those guys earn much at all.

 

We need proper employment contracts for our employees and if they don't like it we get someone who does. You could pick someone out of the crowd and I believe they'd do a better job.

 

A company in the financial situation that Rangers is in cannot afford these wages and then multiplying them by 5 to include payoffs. What happens if the next CEO resigns after 3 months - after all it seems a nice wee earner and better than working for a living? And the next, and the next? We could easily be paying out 1.5m a year for the position of CEO - I can't see how we are capable of preventing this.

 

We need a proper contract where if you are crap you can be removed without too much cost - it actually seems necessary for such an important and highly paid position. There would still be plenty of takers.

[craig 5,195]

It is very, very common for CEO's to have 12 month notice periods. If this was indeed done by "mutual agreement" then it seems the company paid his notice period off, as would be their probable obligation. No matter how unpalatable we find it.

 

Proper employment contracts for employees ? as said above, 12 months notice is far from uncommon with CEO's. The question is whether this was a true "resignation" or was he pushed/engineered out of the position. As someone that has been in the corporate world for a while there is often more to it than "he resigned". Strange as this may sound right now, there is also the club's reputation to consider - often a company will have "resignation by mutual agreement" because it is the most PC, non-specific and non-negative way of handling an Executive who is pushed or forced to jump.

 

Mather could have been removed for "being crap".... if the club followed the proper disciplinary procedures. If you dont, you are likely to see yourself in an employment tribunal, and likely to lose too.

[craig 5,195]

A quote from Mather's departure speech.....

 

"It is often forgotten that I put in £1million of my own money but I can assure everyone that it was never about the money for me."

 

So, if it wasnt about the money Craig, perhaps you would consider gifting that 300k pay-off back to the club, right ?