@tigers2005 said:@Cultured Bogan said:In the eyes of the club he is no longer required. This happens in management type contracts everyday in the real world. As long as he gets his entitlements owed to him for that contract, their behaviour is legitimised as it is a common practice and far from illegal. The way some harp on you'd think the club were balls deep in illegal behaviour.
In the real world you dont identify an employee to the media as someone who does not "fit" in your workplace, tell him he is no longer required , yet leave him hanging around for the next 12 maybe 24 months. You would pay they are due and tell them to leave immedately. A proffesional organisation in the "real world" would never in a million years handle a situation like this the way the tigers coaching staff and higher management have.
Uh, the club never went to the media, Farah did, a fact always conveniently forgotten.
I take it that you've not heard of the term "gardening leave." Many businesses employ that tactic, I've also encountered that personally after resigning, simply to stop me from going to a competitor early but not have any contact with those within my previous employer.
The one significant difference is that Rugby League clubs are inhibited by salary caps on player spending. Real world private enterprise can let someone contracted go and while it counts the salary counts on their bottom line, it doesn't stop them from spending more on bringing another employee into the business whereas NRL clubs are precluded from doing that by way of the salary cap.