ITS BACK
Re: ITS BACK
All this should have been sorted theve had more meetings than God knows what and it just looks a mess now ,I got a bad feeling about what's going to happen in the next two months
The measure of who we are is what we do with what we have
Vince Lombardi
Vince Lombardi
-
- Academy Player
- Posts: 278
- Joined: 19 Feb 2011, 23:21
- Location: CAS
- Contact:
Re: ITS BACK
got your numbers wrong there 15% of 50k is 7.5K 20% is 10k so anyone on 50k would end up with 40k / 42.5 k depending which bracket you put them in, same goes for 100k depends which bracket you put them 20% reduction leaves them with 80k and 25% reduction leaves 75kHuddsTigers wrote: ↑07 Jul 2020, 12:06 I believe they were wanting a model like Hull (think it was them in League Express) where a % is taken between each boundary a player earns
30k or under - nothing
Then staggered 15% for earnings between 30-50k, 20% for 50-100k and 25% for 100k+
It means someone on 100k would end up earning 87k
Someone on 30k wouldn't lose a thing
Someone on 50k would drop down to 47k.
Someone on 75k would drop to £67k
75k would reduce to 60k not 67
-
- League One Player
- Posts: 2986
- Joined: 21 Dec 2014, 00:40
- Contact:
Re: ITS BACK
I thought the same with the numbers but I'm guessing that Hudds has taken into account the salary already paid at full pay prior to having to take the cuts?noxandrattles wrote: ↑07 Jul 2020, 13:59got your numbers wrong there 15% of 50k is 7.5K 20% is 10k so anyone on 50k would end up with 40k / 42.5 k depending which bracket you put them in, same goes for 100k depends which bracket you put them 20% reduction leaves them with 80k and 25% reduction leaves 75kHuddsTigers wrote: ↑07 Jul 2020, 12:06 I believe they were wanting a model like Hull (think it was them in League Express) where a % is taken between each boundary a player earns
30k or under - nothing
Then staggered 15% for earnings between 30-50k, 20% for 50-100k and 25% for 100k+
It means someone on 100k would end up earning 87k
Someone on 30k wouldn't lose a thing
Someone on 50k would drop down to 47k.
Someone on 75k would drop to £67k
75k would reduce to 60k not 67
-
- Academy Player
- Posts: 278
- Joined: 19 Feb 2011, 23:21
- Location: CAS
- Contact:
Re: ITS BACK
but are they not asking them to take a cut in the years salary and not just the portion that is still to be paid?
- Flat Capper
- Grand Final Winner
- Posts: 15173
- Joined: 06 Jul 2006, 00:10
- Location: Where ever I lay my fat
- Contact:
Re: ITS BACK
I'm thinking like a tax advisor accountant and its 15% of the difference between 30k and 50k, ie 20K, which equals a 3k deduction and so onderbystiger wrote: ↑07 Jul 2020, 14:41I thought the same with the numbers but I'm guessing that Hudds has taken into account the salary already paid at full pay prior to having to take the cuts?noxandrattles wrote: ↑07 Jul 2020, 13:59got your numbers wrong there 15% of 50k is 7.5K 20% is 10k so anyone on 50k would end up with 40k / 42.5 k depending which bracket you put them in, same goes for 100k depends which bracket you put them 20% reduction leaves them with 80k and 25% reduction leaves 75kHuddsTigers wrote: ↑07 Jul 2020, 12:06 I believe they were wanting a model like Hull (think it was them in League Express) where a % is taken between each boundary a player earns
30k or under - nothing
Then staggered 15% for earnings between 30-50k, 20% for 50-100k and 25% for 100k+
It means someone on 100k would end up earning 87k
Someone on 30k wouldn't lose a thing
Someone on 50k would drop down to 47k.
Someone on 75k would drop to £67k
75k would reduce to 60k not 67
Spreading the Cas gene pool
-
Verified
- Grand Final Winner
- Posts: 15893
- Joined: 31 Jan 2009, 03:55
- Contact:
Re: ITS BACK
They wouldn't get deducted on the first 30k so they only get deducted on the amount in the boundary.noxandrattles wrote: ↑07 Jul 2020, 13:59got your numbers wrong there 15% of 50k is 7.5K 20% is 10k so anyone on 50k would end up with 40k / 42.5 k depending which bracket you put them in, same goes for 100k depends which bracket you put them 20% reduction leaves them with 80k and 25% reduction leaves 75kHuddsTigers wrote: ↑07 Jul 2020, 12:06 I believe they were wanting a model like Hull (think it was them in League Express) where a % is taken between each boundary a player earns
30k or under - nothing
Then staggered 15% for earnings between 30-50k, 20% for 50-100k and 25% for 100k+
It means someone on 100k would end up earning 87k
Someone on 30k wouldn't lose a thing
Someone on 50k would drop down to 47k.
Someone on 75k would drop to £67k
75k would reduce to 60k not 67
15% of 20k (that is the amount between 30 and 50k)
If they fall into the next boundary, they would get:
First 30k
15% removed from 30-50k (or next 20k) (so 3k)
20% from 70-100k (or next 30k) so anything between 0 for bang on 70k upto 6k for 100k a year.
In the spirit of the final Blackadder episode - Goooodbyeee!
-
Verified
- Grand Final Winner
- Posts: 15893
- Joined: 31 Jan 2009, 03:55
- Contact:
Re: ITS BACK
As FC said above, it is like our tax system where we don't get taxed on the first 12.5k we earn, and 20% for anything between that and whatever it is now- 40k?
In the spirit of the final Blackadder episode - Goooodbyeee!
-
- Championship Player
- Posts: 5272
- Joined: 11 Jul 2006, 16:17
- Contact:
Re: ITS BACK
That’s how I see it too.HuddsTigers wrote: ↑07 Jul 2020, 17:05 As FC said above, it is like our tax system where we don't get taxed on the first 12.5k we earn, and 20% for anything between that and whatever it is now- 40k?
No deduction up to 30k.
Anything between 30k and 50k reduces by 15%.
Anything between 50k and 100k reduces by 20%.
Anything above 100k reduces by 25%.
So some models.
Player A earns 28k. He will still earn 28k as there is no deduction below 30k.
Player B earns 40k. He gets the full 30k and then loses 15% of his earning between 30k and 40k (a loss of £1,500), therefore reducing his salary from 40k to 38.5k.
Player C earns 80k. He gets the full 30k, then loses 15% of his earnings between 30k and 50k (a loss of 3k). He then loses 20% of earnings between 50k and 80k (a loss of £6k) so his overall salary is reduced from 80k to 71k.
Player C earns 125k. He keeps the first 30k. He loses 15% between 30k and 50k (a loss of 3k). He loses 20% of earning between 50k and 100k (a loss of 10k) and then 25% of his earning between 100k and 125k (a loss of £6.25k). Therefore his salary goes from 125k to 105.75k.
This is hardly going to bankrupt players. As I said on a previous post, they need to realise two things:
Firstly, if the club goes bankrupt they will have a salary of 0k.
Secondly, it doesn’t look great when the club ask season tickets holders to write off their money to help the club, but the players won’t agree to a reasonable pay-cut.
-
Verified
- Grand Final Winner
- Posts: 15893
- Joined: 31 Jan 2009, 03:55
- Contact:
Re: ITS BACK
It depends if that is what clubs are offering. It seems like some are trying for more and just flat cuts of say 20%.
The cynic in me wonders whether some of the clubs are using it as a way of reducing their salary cap spend so they can sign more players. Wouldn't look great. The RFL and SL should be governing this IMO and making it a law that if you offer pay cuts, players will still count on the cap at their original rate. That probably is the case to be fair but they need to make it explicit.
The cynic in me wonders whether some of the clubs are using it as a way of reducing their salary cap spend so they can sign more players. Wouldn't look great. The RFL and SL should be governing this IMO and making it a law that if you offer pay cuts, players will still count on the cap at their original rate. That probably is the case to be fair but they need to make it explicit.
In the spirit of the final Blackadder episode - Goooodbyeee!
Re: ITS BACK
With all that's at stake couldn't you hope the 12 clubs had decided at one of there meetings to set say 15% -30% and then if one club wanted to deduct less than another it wouldn't threaten a players strike that would have made sense to me
The measure of who we are is what we do with what we have
Vince Lombardi
Vince Lombardi
Re: ITS BACK
If a club is found to be using this to avoid sc restrictions then I would suggest the threat of additional points deductions. Cretins.
If clubs are doing the 20% flat rate to get ‘more’ money from their top earners then that is out of order too.
If clubs are doing the 20% flat rate to get ‘more’ money from their top earners then that is out of order too.
Audacter Et Sincere
Re: ITS BACK
But what if by accepting a 15-30% pay cut the thing at stake is:
Your home
Your child’s education
Your savings
Your vehicle
Would you accept? Every single one of us has an individual set of circumstances in such a unique time. I certainly won’t be critical of any players who puts their own families first in this situation. I’m sure we’re all doing the same right now.
-
- Championship Player
- Posts: 5272
- Joined: 11 Jul 2006, 16:17
- Contact:
Re: ITS BACK
I think I would if the result of not taking a pay cut was my employer ceasing to exist, and therefore my pay reducing by 100% to £0.Fumper27 wrote: ↑07 Jul 2020, 20:59
But what if by accepting a 15-30% pay cut the thing at stake is:
Your home
Your child’s education
Your savings
Your vehicle
Would you accept? Every single one of us has an individual set of circumstances in such a unique time. I certainly won’t be critical of any players who puts their own families first in this situation. I’m sure we’re all doing the same right now.
Granted, RL players are not highly paid. But I don’t think the scale of the cuts is going to plunge any of them into poverty.
Re: ITS BACK
But that is exactly by point Notts, no one knows and everyone’s situation is different. My opinion is that this can’t be dealt with via a broad stroke approach and needs tailoring to each individuals needs. Not doing so could and potentially would risk the future of our great game.nottinghamtiger wrote: ↑07 Jul 2020, 22:16I think I would if the result of not taking a pay cut was my employer ceasing to exist, and therefore my pay reducing by 100% to £0.Fumper27 wrote: ↑07 Jul 2020, 20:59
But what if by accepting a 15-30% pay cut the thing at stake is:
Your home
Your child’s education
Your savings
Your vehicle
Would you accept? Every single one of us has an individual set of circumstances in such a unique time. I certainly won’t be critical of any players who puts their own families first in this situation. I’m sure we’re all doing the same right now.
Granted, RL players are not highly paid. But I don’t think the scale of the cuts is going to plunge any of them into poverty.
Re: ITS BACK
But if the season dosnt re-start because of a players strike over wages and as to be void there may be no game next season at best 2 or 3 super league clubs would foldFumper27 wrote: ↑07 Jul 2020, 20:59
But what if by accepting a 15-30% pay cut the thing at stake is:
Your home
Your child’s education
Your savings
Your vehicle
Would you accept? Every single one of us has an individual set of circumstances in such a unique time. I certainly won’t be critical of any players who puts their own families first in this situation. I’m sure we’re all doing the same right now.
I'm not having a go at players clubs are signing players putting them on good money while asking other players to take a pay cut I would hope clubs players get together and realise the seriousness of the situation they and the powers that be have had three months to sort it out let's hope they come to a agreement fairly quick now
The measure of who we are is what we do with what we have
Vince Lombardi
Vince Lombardi
-
Verified
- Grand Final Winner
- Posts: 15893
- Joined: 31 Jan 2009, 03:55
- Contact:
Re: ITS BACK
Six clubs apparently agreed now to cuts according to Carvell.
Apparently, GMB Union are also canvassing The RFL to stop any new signings (sounds more like marquees) if players are taking paycuts as players are angry that they are losing out and clubs are still making big signings.
Apparently, GMB Union are also canvassing The RFL to stop any new signings (sounds more like marquees) if players are taking paycuts as players are angry that they are losing out and clubs are still making big signings.
In the spirit of the final Blackadder episode - Goooodbyeee!
Re: ITS BACK
no one will want to take a pay cut that's obvious but you can not give money you have not got, having no gate receipts will have impacted all the clubs sticking out for their full money is OK for the short term but if clubs fold what is out there for these lads to go to its predicted 3 million will be looking for work next year, i do hope all the players make the right decision
- Flat Capper
- Grand Final Winner
- Posts: 15173
- Joined: 06 Jul 2006, 00:10
- Location: Where ever I lay my fat
- Contact:
Re: ITS BACK
Whilst I don't doubt for a second that Clubs have taken a significant financial hit, most (if not all) have had their salary costs paid for by the government through the furlough scheme for four months.
This also means the players have received a maximum of £2.8k per month, which is in itself a significant pay cut for some of them and their families.
I fully understand the players wanting their full pay for the remainder of their contract and should certainly be dissatisfied by attempts to sign other players at additional costs whilst being told the Club can't afford to pay current agreed contracts.
This also means the players have received a maximum of £2.8k per month, which is in itself a significant pay cut for some of them and their families.
I fully understand the players wanting their full pay for the remainder of their contract and should certainly be dissatisfied by attempts to sign other players at additional costs whilst being told the Club can't afford to pay current agreed contracts.
Spreading the Cas gene pool
Re: ITS BACK
I’m not joking now; I see this as the start of desperate times in rugby league.
Other sports too, but I feel several clubs will enter administration unless the government allows spectators in with visors or masks on. Which they won’t...
I pray that our club survives. No doubt folks will say I’m overreacting, but this is the scariest time in the history Of our club for me.
Other sports too, but I feel several clubs will enter administration unless the government allows spectators in with visors or masks on. Which they won’t...
I pray that our club survives. No doubt folks will say I’m overreacting, but this is the scariest time in the history Of our club for me.
Audacter Et Sincere
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Ahrefs [Bot], Semrush [Bot] and 48 guests