News Coronavirus and NRL

[Perth Red]

What sort of agreement wouldn’t allow for a company to lay off staff in a crisis?

I suppose it’s just another geniused hangover from previous the administration

it’s not about being laid off, they would just make them redundant in that situation. It’s about changing their work conditions, and given Vlandys told us it was to save money then it must be changing their salaries. Reading between the lines it looks like some of The full timers have been demoted to the touch line on lower pay.

interesting to finally see how much refs get paid! It’s not much considering they can make or break a game.

 

[Storm80]

That very clause around consultation does say the NRL should consult ‘as soon as practicable after making the definitive decision’. That’s open to conjecture around what is practicable, and it being leaked by someone who was part of the decision making to the media isn’t ideal, but hardly worth all the furore over.
Ultimately, the NRL didn’t need to consult prior to making the decision, and did set up sessions to share the output (based on what we’re being told).
Not my idea of reasonable consultation, but given the crisis, the myriad of more significant issues PVL has had to deal with, a slight glitch in consultation that doesn’t appear to be outside of contractual obligations isn’t crime of the century. In my opinion, the refs are making a bigger deal of this than they need to - a symptom maybe of them getting above their stations?

It’s not your job on the line though is it? So the notion of referees getting above their station seems a little far fetched to me. That’s the easy out to claim refs think they are bigger than the game.

They are employees of the NRL. No one forced the NRL to sign the EBA. But they did, and are therefore bound to follow it. You even acknowledged the consultation was not reasonable.

The bottom line is there was no need to change to one ref nor make any of the rule changes. They were unnecessary.

Poor leadership and decision making caused this ref debacle. And COVID isn’t a reasonable excuse for poor judgement or decision making on the part of anyone on the ARLC. They are paid to make smart decisions. In my opinion, it’s just another in many distractions that could have been easily avoided by more professional NRL leadership.

 

[Storm80]

LOL. Not surprising to see you fail to understand something contractual.

Still pretending like you know something.

Sorry? How so? Haha I’ve not failed to understand anything contractual. Technically it’s an enterprise agreement but yeah you know all don’t you cactus.

The NRL made a board decision to go with one ref, made a definitive decision at a board meeting and yet the NRL had time to leak to news Ltd first but not consult the refs. Poor leadership by the NRL there yet again wouldn’t you say Cactus

How’s that 2018-2022 media contract holding up haha channel 9 gonna get everything they want aren’t they? You clueless fool

 

[Chimp]

It’s not your job on the line though is it? So the notion of referees getting above their station seems a little far fetched to me. That’s the easy out to claim refs think they are bigger than the game.

They are employees of the NRL. No one forced the NRL to sign the EBA. But they did, and are therefore bound to follow it. You even acknowledged the consultation was not reasonable.

The bottom line is there was no need to change to one ref nor make any of the rule changes. They were unnecessary.

Poor leadership and decision making caused this ref debacle. And COVID isn’t a reasonable excuse for poor judgement or decision making on the part of anyone on the ARLC. They are paid to make smart decisions. In my opinion, it’s just another in many distractions that could have been easily avoided by more professional NRL leadership.

As far as has been communicated so far, their job isn’t on the line - some will however be required to run the line instead of being out in the middle. The only ones set to lose out are the ones on casual contracts that are not full time - that’s what’s been talked about on the various media shows anyway.

Even if they are being asked to take a paycut, that’s not unreasonable considering the whole COVID situation.

And whilst I don’t think this is great consultation, the wording in the document is terrible - telling them about a decision after it has been made isn’t true consultation, but that’s the way the agreement is set up, so the NRL are well within their rights IMO.

 

[Danish]

it’s not about being laid off, they would just make them redundant in that situation. It’s about changing their work conditions, and given Vlandys told us it was to save money then it must be changing their salaries. Reading between the lines it looks like some of The full timers have been demoted to the touch line on lower pay.

interesting to finally see how much refs get paid! It’s not much considering they can make or break a game.

I would imagine there will be some layoffs, since they have less requirement for refs now.


Refs get paid based on where they ref don’t they? Like a touchie gets a basic payment while those in the middle get more? I don’t think those roles are guaranteed to anyone, so if you get assigned a touchie you get true equivalent payment. Same with if you get assigned it the middle.

If the current refs want to complain I’m sure there are plenty in reserve grade right now who’d be willing to step up

 

[T-Boon]

Nrl needs to pull the state of origin from Adelaide. It was always a waste of a game down there. Crowds will probably be back by then so give it to highest bidder out of NSW, QLD, NZ.

 

[no name]

Nrl needs to pull the state of origin from Adelaide. It was always a waste of a game down there. Crowds will probably be back by then so give it to highest bidder out of NSW, QLD, NZ.

Adelaide were the highest bidder to get it in the first place.
I’m not sure any subsequent bids will get as much as Adelaide will pay.

 

[unforgiven]

I would imagine there will be some layoffs, since they have less requirement for refs now.


Refs get paid based on where they ref don’t they? Like a touchie gets a basic payment while those in the middle get more? I don’t think those roles are guaranteed to anyone, so if you get assigned a touchie you get true equivalent payment. Same with if you get assigned it the middle.

If the current refs want to complain I’m sure there are plenty in reserve grade right now who’d be willing to step up

I think they have been told their pay won't be changing.

 

[unforgiven]

Sorry? How so? Haha I’ve not failed to understand anything contractual. Technically it’s an enterprise agreement but yeah you know all don’t you cactus.

The NRL made a board decision to go with one ref, made a definitive decision at a board meeting and yet the NRL had time to leak to news Ltd first but not consult the refs. Poor leadership by the NRL there yet again wouldn’t you say Cactus

How’s that 2018-2022 media contract holding up haha channel 9 gonna get everything they want aren’t they? You clueless fool

The NRL only had to consult with the Refs after the decision was made, this is exactly what V'landys has been stating all along. How stupid were the refs to agree with consultation after the fact?

 

[Cactus]

https://www.fwc.gov.au/documents/documents/agreements/fwa/ae503608.pdf

The problem for the NRL is that clause 28 requires the NRL to consult referees about any decision to make a major change likely to have a significant change to match officials.

And any time the NRL fail to comply with consultation requirements under clause 28 provides the Referees the ability to lodge a dispute with FWC.

Covid is no excuse to fail to meet your legal obligations..

LOLOLOOL............"fail to meet legal obligations".................LOLOLOLOLOLOL

Lets hope Daniel Andrews keeps the Victorian borders shut permanently. We wouldnt like to see genius' like you roaming free.

 

[Cactus]

Sorry? How so? Haha I’ve not failed to understand anything contractual. Technically it’s an enterprise agreement but yeah you know all don’t you cactus.

The NRL made a board decision to go with one ref, made a definitive decision at a board meeting and yet the NRL had time to leak to news Ltd first but not consult the refs. Poor leadership by the NRL there yet again wouldn’t you say Cactus

How’s that 2018-2022 media contract holding up haha channel 9 gonna get everything they want aren’t they? You clueless fool

Blah Blah Blah.

You cant talk yourself out of the stupidity you have shown on this forum. You were shown to be an idiot re the media deal and now the refs issue.

You are a victorian drop kick mate

 

[Cactus]

I’ve not failed to understand anything contractual.

My terminology and grasp of contract law was off the mark. As others have pointed out the Act of God clause doesn’t usually void a contract

 

[Frailty]

The NRL only had to consult with the Refs after the decision was made, this is exactly what V'landys has been stating all along. How stupid were the refs to agree with consultation after the fact?

I think you need to re-read the agreement. They can consult after the 'definitive decision' as identified in 28a(i) "has made a definite decision to introduce a major change that is likely to have a significant effect on Match Officials".

However, given the change "proposes to introduce a change to a Match Official's regular roster or ordinary hours of work," it should actually be 28a(ii) where the NRL will provide the referees all information about the proposed change; and invite affected Match Officials to give their views about the impact of the change ; and give timely and genuine consideration any views given by the Match officials.

This was clearly not done.

 

[Perth Red]

Nrl needs to pull the state of origin from Adelaide. It was always a waste of a game down there. Crowds will probably be back by then so give it to highest bidder out of NSW, QLD, NZ.

it can fit more in than Suncorp and tickets will be higher priced than if played in Sydney, not to mention the SA Govt paid millions for it. But yeh let’s move it because,,,,,? It will likeLy get moved if crowds arent going to attend and probably played there next year instead.

 

[Cactus]

I think you need to re-read the agreement. They can consult after the 'definitive decision' as identified in 28a(i) "has made a definite decision to introduce a major change that is likely to have a significant effect on Match Officials".

However, given the change "proposes to introduce a change to a Match Official's regular roster or ordinary hours of work," it should actually be 28a(ii) where the NRL will provide the referees all information about the proposed change; and invite affected Match Officials to give their views about the impact of the change ; and give timely and genuine consideration any views given by the Match officials.

This was clearly not done.

Can you please point out the specific clause in the agreement that defines that the NRL must consult PRIOR to any decision.

 

[Frailty]

Can you please point out the specific clause in the agreement that defines that the NRL must consult PRIOR to any decision.

By definition 'proposed change' would suggest before a change is made (or definitive).

Regardless, as mentioned the has to provide the match official all information, invite Match Officials to give their views about the impact of the change, and then give timely and GENUINE consideration.

V'Landys has done absolutely none of those things.

 

[The Mad Hatter]

Victim of Corona, Andy Raymond has been let go at Fox.

 

[Frailty]

Victim of Corona, Andy Raymond has been let go at Fox.

Yep meanwhile Fox have kept on Crawley, Roach, Anasta, Kent, Ikin, Rothfield, etc.

Andy Raymond saves Fox Sports so much money by offering a versatile caller who could work across multiple sports.

 

[Cactus]

By definition 'proposed change' would suggest before a change is made (or definitive).

That is your definition/suggestion. If you cant find the bit where it says the NRL must consult prior then what does that tell you about wether the NRL is legally obligated to do so ?

Regardless, as mentioned the has to provide the match official all information, invite Match Officials to give their views about the impact of the change, and then give timely and GENUINE consideration.

How do you know the NRL has NOT provided all relevant info ? And where does the agreement state the NRL must do all/any of this BEFORE it makes a decision ?

Doesnt look to me like the agreement defines any of that at all & if a contract does not state it then the NRL is not obliged to adhere to something that is not there.

 

[Vee]

I think the whole thing is extremely poorly written. Surprisingly, that is not as rare as you might think and generally only gets outed in a crisis when people examine the wording closely.

As for both sides' legal advisers at the time, if they were dogs, you wouldn't feed them.