Exactly what I've been trying to say before monkeys intervened!! 3 board members, all decisions voted on, majority rule, therefore not just one man calling the shots. Now about this chimp? Will he require a signing on fee?
If you like. For the few hours he sits in board meetings every year he gets paid a huge salary. The 9 to 5 job he does every day he does for free.
Being a Director isn't always just about sitting at board meetings. I know loads of Directors who are more hands on than Don. He is a Director, he is paid a salary, seems clear to me.
The paid salary is for the job he does as general manager. The work he does every day from 9 until 5. He is also a member of the board.
There are Directors of companies all over the country who are paid a salary and who 'manage' their company on a day to day basis. They are Directors.
While that makes a lot of sense to me and i'm inclined to agree with you I have one question. If you have a normal job as an employee (such as general manager) and hold a position as a director as well then does your salary HAVE to be considered 'directors remuneration' in the companies accounts? (ie are you a director who does the general managers job as officially part of your directors role) Or is it possible to be a normal employee such as general manager, take a salary which in the accounts shows as part of the general employee's salary total and also hold a position as director? In other words Don got paid 80k in 'directors remuneration', is that simply because legally is normal job has to show as that because hes a director as well? Or did he get paid 80k directors remuneration for being a director? Meaning theres a possibility he actually got paid £300k (I know he didn't), 80k as director and £220k as general manager. I only ask out of pure noseyness and a desire to understand the rules and whatnot and not because I have an agenda.
He is either a director of the company (operating company of BFC not the holding one - land/PC/council) or he isn't. A quick check at Companies House will confirm. If he's not, he's a GM. If he is, then he's a fully fledged director. Responsibilities commensurate. Anyway all directors, that are not significant equity shareholders are more or less scapegoats with large salaries, and chance of divi payouts if things go well, and HMRC breathing down your gregory when they don't.
Just ask him. They seem to think he's the general manager on the who's who section of the official site. http://www.barnsleyfc.co.uk/club/whos-who/ Why they'd pay him for a role that the other director isn't paid for, which no director in the history of the club has ever been paid for, which takes up very little of his time, and not for the role of general manager which is a full time job is beyond me.
Who is the third board member? The club has two directors, Barry Taylor (none paid and part time) and Don Rowing (paid director and full time general manager)
I have an old copy of the Chron from maybe 3 years ago, where Barry Taylor states "Don is the only paid director at Oakwell...".
He's definitely paid and he's definitely a director. There's no argument about that. I'm suggesting that he gets paid for the work he does as a general manager. I'm also suggesting that if he quit that role but continued to sit on the board he would no longer be paid. However, if he quit his seat on the board but continued to work in his role as general manager he would still be paid his salary. Are we suggesting otherwise?
I would actually guess that in reality he gets paid for BOTH roles. A huge chunk of his wages are for his general manager duties with, understandably, a little bit extra on top for the extra responsibilities he took on as a director
Why does reading a thread make anyone a stalker? Don Rowing is the salaried general manager of BFC. He holds a seat on the Directorate as his input is invaluable on how decisions and policy affect the day to day running of the club. Constructive enough for you?