"The Carlos
Tevez and Manchester City affair
rumbles on with the most recent
incident involving the multi million
pound player seemingly refusing to
play as a substitute against Bayer
Munich. Unsurprisingly this resulted
in wide spread criticism and
disgust, a view apparently shared
and aired by Man City boss Roberto
Mancini publicly saying that Carlos
Tevez was "finished".Prior
to this Carlos Tevez has made no
secret of his desire to leave. So
where do Man City stand as an
"Employer"?
Tevez primary contractual
obligation is to play football for
Man City, a fundamental term which
he refused to comply with.
Ordinarily this would be viewed as a
fundamental breach of contract,
gross insubordination and a
breakdown in mutual trust and
confidence any of which could be
grounds for summary dismissal - the
reality however is that Football is
an industry in itself where the
players usually hold the cards given
the fact that they are not merely
employees but also commercial
assets, Tevez is undoubtedly worth
millions to Manchester City.
Mancini could discipline Tevez
but what example does that set for
the rest of the squad when they may
also become disaffected in the
future?
One option would be to treat the
contract as repudiated by Carlos
Tevez, allow him to leave but bring
an action for damages against Tevez
for the losses they suffer. However
time is of the essence to act on a
breach - a delay could result in
Manchester City waiving their right
to rely on the breach. Further there
is the concern that Tevez could beat
them to it.
Arguably Tevez may have grounds
to walk away and claim constructive
dismissal after Mancini publicly
stated Tevez was finished there!
There is some recent case law which
states that an employee who is
himself in repudiatory breach cannot
rely on his employers subsequent
repudiatory breach to resign and
claim unfair dismissal and breach of
contract.
Although this affair is a million
miles away from the realities of day
to day business it nevertheless
serves as a reminder of some of the
difficulties employers can face when
confronted with difficult employees.
When matters like this arise
employers need to respond quickly,
but carefully after considering all
available options and taking legal
advice." |
