Scott Munn’s Tottenham start date delayed after prolonged exit from CFG

[mawspurs]

Scott Munn’s start date at Tottenham Hotspur as chief football officer has been delayed after a protracted exit from his role at the City Football Group.
He had been due to start at Tottenham on July 1 but that has been delayed, with no official start date scheduled as yet.

Source: The Athletic

 

[PLTuck]

Blimey. Nothing is ever simple with us is it?

 

[Johnny J]

He's obviously already doing stuff for us so not a problem. If he's the right guy for the job then it doesn't matter.

 

[spursfan77]

He's obviously already doing stuff for us so not a problem. If he's the right guy for the job then it doesn't matter.

Unless that is the problem and the reason why they won’t let him go?

 

[Johnny J]

Unless that is the problem and the reason why they won’t let him go?

They can't not let him go, he's already gone - I haven't Read the piece but it's likely the details of restrictive covenants. These things get sorted out pretty easily.

 

[spursfan77]

They can't not let him go, he's already gone - I haven't Read the piece but it's likely the details of restrictive covenants. These things get sorted out pretty easily.

Has he been on gardening leave since we announced him coming? Strange someone in that position wouldn’t have been all this time.

 

[Johnny J]

Has he been on gardening leave since we announced him coming? Strange someone in that position wouldn’t have been all this time.

I don't his specific situation but garden leave means staying away from your work during your notice period. Restrictive covenants are longer and subsist after your notice period ends, but usually 3, 5 or 12 months depending on the job, scope of purported restriction and so on.

 

[tcyrus]

Has he been on gardening leave since we announced him coming? Strange someone in that position wouldn’t have been all this time.

probably decided to spend a little longer on his yacht with those two blonde chicks he met on his travels,
i'm just guessing

 

[Metalhead]

Blimey. Nothing is ever simple with us is it?

Ha ha no but I'm sure that stuff like this goes on at a lot of clubs.

 

[Locotoro]

probably decided to spend a little longer on his yacht with those two blonde chicks he met on his travels,
i'm just guessing

You know how this works....

We need proof

 

[RogerTCB]

Let's just say it's true and Munn hasn't been doing anything for us. That blows my theory about why we have been so decisive in the transfer market or of the water. Can it really be Levy?

 

[Thenewcat]

I don't his specific situation but garden leave means staying away from your work during your notice period. Restrictive covenants are longer and subsist after your notice period ends, but usually 3, 5 or 12 months depending on the job, scope of purported restriction and so on.

They are also generally legally unenforceable unless you are paying them during the period, as it’s a blatant restraint of trade

 

[Johnny J]

They are also generally legally unenforceable unless you are paying them during the period, as it’s a blatant restraint of trade

That's not quite correct. Restrictive covenants do generally require consideration to be enforceable, like any contract. Most usually they're entered into at the start of the employment relationship and incorporated into the contract. If they're new at the end of the employment, then it's usually a one-off payment.

But consideration by itself doesn't mean a restriction is enforceable.

Whether a covenant is enforceable depends on various factors, but the most important is whether the restriction protects a legitimate business interest. If it does not, then it will be unenforceable due to being, as you say, a restraint of trade.

Source: I'm an employment lawyer

 

[Thenewcat]

That's not quite correct. Restrictive covenants do generally require consideration to be enforceable, like any contract. Most usually they're entered into at the start of the employment relationship and incorporated into the contract. If they're new at the end of the employment, then it's usually a one-off payment.

But consideration by itself doesn't mean a restriction is enforceable.

Whether a covenant is enforceable depends on various factors, but the most important is whether the restriction protects a legitimate business interest. If it does not, then it will be unenforceable due to being, as you say, a restraint of trade.

Source: I'm an employment lawyer

My understanding is even if you are protecting a legitimate interest (as the company) you still need to compensate the person for keeping them from earning a living. That could be covered by the existing contract, but in many cases it isn’t. When I joined my last company, it had a 3 month probation period and a 12 month competition provision - I pointed out they could get rid of me after paying me 3 months salary and expect me not to work in a (very broadly defined) competitive field for a year. They laughed and said that would be enenforceable, to which I replied you won’t mind taking it out then

 

[FloridaSpur]

This is funnier than anything Laurel & Hardy could have written.

 

[dk-yid]

probably decided to spend a little longer on his yacht with those two blonde chicks he met on his travels,
i'm just guessing

Wait what? Pictures....

 

[teok]

 

[worcestersauce]

Aren't these restrictive covenants to do with not entering into business discussions with a client your previous employer was negotiating with as you, would obviously have advantageous information, that sort of thing?
I'm not sure how there can be a veto/delay mechanism if you have worked your notice.