Keith Turner axed

It's like any other self employed
contractor in any industry.."sorry mate, you've done on Friday we're getting someone else in."
And that's it, pack up yer tools and go.

 

I noticed literally 100s being sorted for allocation yesterday.

 

I don't think anyone thinks that. Or very few. But there has to be a ballance. Even when good things come out. The pile on people that never give credit when it's due (and lots of critics, do give credit occasionally) But there are those constantly having a dig at everything. (and I mean everything )

 

If he was freelance and not an employee of the club then surely the club have outsourced for the last 23 years albeit the same photographer? He must have put a tender in for the business each of those years. So I don't get the statement that they have decided to outsource. We had the same window cleaners at work for 20 years then some bright spark in accounts thought we could save a few bob and gave the contract to a new lower bidder. After a year of streaky windows and complaints from all departments, the original cleaners were reinstated the following year. Let's hope a similar thing happens at Oakwell with this photographer. (Not window cleaning for the smart ones)

 

I'd love to be a fly on the wall at the 2024 summer board meeting. There must be an annual agenda item "Run some ideas up the flagpole on how we can p155 off our supporters (customers)".

2021. "Let's sign Oulare to fast forward bankrupting the club, but let's temper the anger by offering ST holders a free shirt. We can always renege"
2022. "Let's make access to the ground nigh on impossible, and let's enhance the experience by shutting the West Lower"
2023. "There was far too much on-pitch progress so I vote we let the gaffer and skipper walk. We can promise them big news, and if they don't swallow it we can get rid of a club stalwart"

 

Mainly the complete lack of communication for a good couple of weeks after the news broke about Swansea’s interest in Duff. The outsourcing of the club shop along with the terrible kit launch, we were made into a laughing stock, then this news about a loyal & committed worker being told he’s no longer needed, seemingly to cut costs, or is it? We don’t know because we don’t get told anything.
And of course the sound bite from Khaled about this supposed great news, which happened to be around the time early bird renewals got announced, but we’ve heard nothing since! We are being taken for mugs.

 

I totally agree, but there are two or three that will not say anything negative about the club whatsoever.

 

The style of the new kit was criticised but the actual launch using young people and others as well as players I thought was a bit different

 

No not at all. Just saying that fans should be balanced in their views not just kissing the club's arse in blind faith or slating it 24/7.

I just find it funny that some posters do the complete opposite end of the spectrum to what annoys them whilst 90% of the rest us in the middle can criticise AND give credit when it is due.

 

I posted earlier in this thread about how strange this decision is and I still think that.

However, I've also been thinking about why the club might do it. I may be completely wrong on this but wonder whether it could be connected to HMRC IR35 rules. Choosing my words carefully here so as not to expose the club to risk but in summary, the rules apply if a worker who provides services to a client (company) through their own intermediary (e.g. limited company) would have been an employee if they were providing their services directly to that client. HMRC has previously taken cases to court and one of the assessment criteria used appears to have been the length of time a company has received a service from the worker i.e. the longer a worker provides a service to a company, the more likely it becomes that HMRC view the arrangement as seeking to avoid tax and NI.

I've oversimplified the above and there are other criterion - others will know more than me about it. But I wonder if this could be the club realising a potential risk and taking action to prevent / mitigate it?

 

If he's a sole trader then I believe he's outside of IR35 scrutiny. It only applies if you are employed as a limited company and gaining certain tax advantages (a sole trader pays the same Tax/NI as a PAYE employee).

 

is this what HMRC were trying to do to Gary Lineker?

 

I would have thought he was deemed to be OUTSIDE IR35 especially judging by his FB post stating that he can still do work for the Chron and other customers.

We don't know the ins and outs ........ I think Stretch is a decent bloke but for all we know he might have doubled his rate or something. I doubt that is the case, but as usual, where silence comes, detail doesn't.

 

Yes, exactly that.

It's all about "disguised employment", as they call it. Effectively doing the job freelance that a full-time employee could do.

Freelancers who take contracts normally adhere to the 2-year rule. HMRC will chase anyone on a contract longer than two years as in their eyes, you are essntially a permy.
The downside for the freelancer is that they then get done for double-taxation, i.e they have to pay back 2 years of Tax and NI but don't get any rebate for waht they paid from their limited company in either tax, corp tax or VAT (which is a far greater amount than the anti-contractor brigade would imagine).

Linekar argued that even though he was a regular Beeb presenter, and had been for far longer than 2 years, the fact he worked for multiple Media companies meant he is entitled to be accurately deemed freelance.

 

"that damn rule".

Amen brother.

 

Uncalled for. Bringing her name in to it.

 

You've got a very different definition of disaster to me.

 

Yes, I agree. I'm not sure if he's a sole trader or not.