OAFC_Ryan Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 Actually the actions of other clubs can have an effect. The decision taken has to be one a (hypothetical) reasonable employer takes, the fact that other clubs, faced with the same evidence have not (yet) taken the same action we have can be taken into consideration when deciding if the club has taken a decision that a reasonable employer takes. If the club are merely relying on the same evidence that is in the public domain, then things could get complicated and costly. I thought it was just Monty and Sam Sodje on the tape? Whatever the sun have on Goodison and DJ Campbell it hasn't been released into the public domain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
underdog Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 Can I throw a question out there...re the rape charge before he signed for us. Aren't the players CRB checked before we sign them or any staff for that matter? Especially as we are a family club and we have kids clubs on the premises Surely if they were, an incident like the allegation would show? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crusoe Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 I don't think most jobs involve CRB checks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pinevillawill Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 Can I throw a question out there...re the rape charge before he signed for us. Aren't the players CRB checked before we sign them or any staff for that matter? Especially as we are a family club and we have kids clubs on the premises Surely if they were, an incident like the allegation would show? As CRB stands for Criminal Records Bureau, I doubt an allegation would even show up on a CRB check. He has been charged but hasn't been convicted. Therefore, he isn't a criminal. Innocent until proven guilty and all that. I was disgusted when I found out that his barrister has encouraged him to appeal the sacking. To describe the club's decision as 'illogical' is absolutely ludicrous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simpo Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 The alleged incident was July 2012, not the charge. The plaintiff may not have said anything until more recently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pinevillawill Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 I don't think most jobs involve CRB checks. Do you reckon Lee Hughes was CRB checked? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
underdog Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 As CRB stands for Criminal Records Bureau, I doubt an allegation would even show up on a CRB check. He has been charged but hasn't been convicted. Therefore, he isn't a criminal. Innocent until proven guilty and all that. I was disgusted when I found out that his barrister has encouraged him to appeal the sacking. To describe the club's decision as 'illogical' is absolutely ludicrous. Thanks.....but if the club use it then it should show convictions right? I know it would not have been much help with Monty but surely, the club does check before purchasing? Surely it should be implemented if it isn't already? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
underdog Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 I don't think most jobs involve CRB checks. Mine does as I work in an educational facility. Any employment that involves access to under 16's should use them. As our players/staff/community teams have contact with under 16's ie boundary blues, then I presumed they did. Just thinking ahead would not have helped with Monty as it's not a conviction on either counts yet, Just think it might, might help us in the future Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pinevillawill Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 Thanks.....but if the club use it then it should show convictions right? I know it would not have been much help with Monty but surely, the club does check before purchasing? Surely it should be implemented if it isn't already? There's no need to do a CRB check unless players are working directly with children. They cost money and can take weeks to be returned. All criminal convictions must be disclosed unless spent. Again, as Montano hadn't been charged or convicted, why would he disclose? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pinevillawill Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 Mine does as I work in an educational facility. Any employment that involves access to under 16's should use them. As our players/staff/community teams have contact with under 16's ie boundary blues, then I presumed they did. Just thinking ahead would not have helped with Monty as it's not a conviction on either counts yet, Just think it might, might help us in the future Can you discriminate against a player for having a criminal conviction? A drink-driver is as much a 'criminal' as a child-rapist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rudemedic Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 Can you discriminate against a player for having a criminal conviction? A drink-driver is as much a 'criminal' as a child-rapist. Yep. There is no law against discriminating against convicted criminals. Although you could argue that is indirect racial/sex discrimination due to the statistics of those who have criminal records. Wrt to Montano it is a moot point he is only accused of 2 seperate criminal acts, he has been convicted of neither. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pinevillawill Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 Yep. There is no law against discriminating against convicted criminals. Although you could argue that is indirect racial/sex discrimination due to the statistics of those who have criminal records. Wrt to Montano it is a moot point he is only accused of 2 seperate criminal acts, he has been convicted of neither. My point was, if all clubs had to carry out a CRB check on all staff, where do you draw the line on who you will and won't sign? It will never happen due to the cost and time implications. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rudemedic Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 My point was, if all clubs had to carry out a CRB check on all staff, where do you draw the line on who you will and won't sign? It will never happen due to the cost and time implications. Anybody working at the community trust gets checked as routine bear in mind you need to CRB prospective employees if they work with vulnerable adults too. Players, coaching and other admin staff perhaps not, but they should randomly do some. The same way most employers randomly check references. The only member of staff in recent years (essentially since 2000) who will have shown up anything on a CRB check we knew about as we signed him from prison. Especially as some convictions expire after 5 or 10 years and any convictions as a child don't get included either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crusoe Posted December 18, 2013 Share Posted December 18, 2013 (edited) Think you might be on dodgy ground justifying why you CRB checked some of your staff but not others. And CRB checking would have made no difference in this case. Think it should suffice to ask people to declare past convictions as part of the hiring process and contract negotiations. Edited December 18, 2013 by Crusoe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarryBosch Posted December 18, 2013 Share Posted December 18, 2013 Yep. There is no law against discriminating against convicted criminals. Although you could argue that is indirect racial/sex discrimination due to the statistics of those who have criminal records Only if you were bat:censored: mental Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsslatic Posted December 18, 2013 Share Posted December 18, 2013 thought it was £72k, just been through it and won, For wrongful dismissal or unfair dismissal? I thought the limit for wrongful dismissal was 25k but will stand to be corrected if someone can show me otherwise! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SavageTheBeast Posted December 18, 2013 Share Posted December 18, 2013 It goes on http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/oldham-winger-cristian-montano-vehemently-6416847 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaticsPete Posted December 18, 2013 Share Posted December 18, 2013 He was apparently sacked not for spot fixing but for the gross misconduct of bringing the club into disrepute by his action in saying that he had try to spot fix. Will be easy for the club to defend unless he can demonstrate that it was an impressionist that was on the video. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpmarko Posted December 18, 2013 Share Posted December 18, 2013 (edited) 'vehemently denies' spot-fixing allegations" How is this possible from the video? He could have been lying to 'big-up' his apparent usefulness to the fixers. The video does not show one way or the other if what he says is true (if he is dishonest enough to cheat like that, you should probably assume that he equally could lie about it too) and as noted above, whether he actually did it or not is quite irrelevant to whether his words bring his club and/or sport into disrepute. Edited December 18, 2013 by bpmarko Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpmarko Posted December 18, 2013 Share Posted December 18, 2013 There's no need to do a CRB check unless players are working directly with children. They cost money and can take weeks to be returned. All criminal convictions must be disclosed unless spent. Again, as Montano hadn't been charged or convicted, why would he disclose? Actually, a job with children would need an Enhanced CRB check, whereas many employers now require a Basic CRB check for even the most tenuously linked jobs to money or influence or whatever else. And yes, whilst an employer should ask about convictions not spent under the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act, and they must be answered truthfully, most employers should assume that if a person has been in a situation where they have been convicted in a court of law , then there is a fair possibility that they could lie about it, hence the need for CRB checks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoalDigger Posted December 18, 2013 Share Posted December 18, 2013 Either way, his credibility is a liability to the team. And any other he may join. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ackey Posted December 18, 2013 Share Posted December 18, 2013 As is often the case as the time passes and there's less direct information this is straying towards speculation, hyperbole and frustration. With that in mind I am going to close it. Thank you to everyone who contributed and kept it clean. If there's a legitimate development we can reopen / start a new one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts