Is Dyche still on Burnley's wage bill?

[It Is What It Is]

Saw SD on Sky Sports Manure game.
He's still unemployed and doesn't appear to be putting himself out there for a job.
So, does anyone know if he has had a full settlement from us or is he still on wages as per his contract?

[Middle-agedClaret]

I’d be surprised if anyone on here knew details of an individual contract of employment.
I’d be even more surprised were they to share such details.

[helmclaret]

He doesn’t need to work again.

[4midable]

He will be getting paid off for a few years yet so yes

[GodIsADeeJay81]

We don't know quite simply.

Some contracts have dismissal clauses that allow clubs to pay a manager who they've sacked in installments over the duration of the contract, until said manager gets a new job, at which point payments stop.
I think Newcastle had this with Pardew for example.

It's been gone over before on here more than a few times.

At the end of the day, it doesn't matter either way, Dyche has earned enough money that he doesn't need to enter management again if he doesn't feel like it.
Or he could just be taking a decent break away from it like Howe did.

[warksclaret]

I am sure he is still getting paid. Yes its likely there is something in the contract that says if another club appoints him, that it releases us from paying further wages. Otherwise how rich would Ranieri or Moreno be. For me the worry is he is publicly stating that he has "earned the right" to manage a PL side again, which no one can argue with, however we have seen the jobs come up at Villa, Bournemouth, Southampton and he was not linked with any. .With all three likely to be involved in a relegation battle you might have thought one would have gone for his experience of staying up despite minimum budget.He was also not linked to the Rangers job either when he stated he knew one of the Directors there well, and would not rule out that club. The biggest worry however is that a high number of Championship clubs have sacked their managers recently and none would appear to have considered him. Two of those WBA and QPR could well have provided the platform for him to resurrect his career. Dont be surprised if he is still jobless in Summer. I am sure its hurting the club finacially

[Marney&Mee]

£100k/month apparently

[Carwin261]

Thought he was on £90k / week,

[equinox]

Let's see how high we can get it by purely guessing - 95k a week after tax.

[Marney&Mee]

Whether bit is weekly or monthly, he’s still getting a huge wedge from us

[clarethomer]

For me the worry is he is publicly stating that he has "earned the right" to manage a PL side again, which no one can argue with, however we have seen the jobs come up at Villa, Bournemouth, Southampton and he was not linked with any. .With all three likely to be involved in a relegation battle you might have thought one would have gone for his experience of staying up despite minimum budget.He was also not linked to the Rangers job either when he stated he knew one of the Directors there well, and would not rule out that club.

He was linked to Wolves I believe.

However you are right in that with the level of manager vacancies, I think that whilst he may have earned the right to manage at this level. I don't think many clubs would be keen to give him that right.

He will hold out for the roles whilst he can as you would imagine whether he was paid out or if still being paid, he doesn't need to rush.

He was a perfect fit for us and will be a legend in our history. He was exactly what we needed but I don't see many premier league clubs needing what we needed back then.

[Longsidelenny1882]

My opinion the best manager the club as ever had it’s not is fault he is still getting payed from the club merry Christmas everybody and utc

[Marney&Mee]

We don't know quite simply.

Some contracts have dismissal clauses that allow clubs to pay a manager who they've sacked in installments over the duration of the contract, until said manager gets a new job, at which point payments stop.
I think Newcastle had this with Pardew for example.

It's been gone over before on here more than a few times.

At the end of the day, it doesn't matter either way, Dyche has earned enough money that he doesn't need to enter management again if he doesn't feel like it.
Or he could just be taking a decent break away from it like Howe did.

I think it’s fair to say both parties agreed not to pay the full compensation out to Dyche in one hit. Instead pay him xxx/week instead..until the time another club employs him

[Boss Hogg]

The length of the new contract was one of the biggest mistakes ALK have made. Manager contract lengths are ridiculous as not very many will see them out.

[jojomk1]

In a lot of examples, managers continue to be paid their full salaries for the length of the original contract (on a monthly basis), until they get appointed to another club
Even then the original club may still pay the difference between new and old wages if new wage is lower
Way back Peter Reid was sacked by City and later got the job at Sunderland. City still paid the difference between their deal and his with Sunderland for the length of his old contract
It happens with players as well - indeed I believe City made up Joe Hart's wages when he came to play for us (he was on £100k at City but way less at Burnley)
Of course there may be other times when contracts are not fully honoured such as if disciplinary issues are part of the reason for anyone being sacked

[equinox]

In a lot of examples, managers continue to be paid their full salaries for the length of the original contract (on a monthly basis), until they get appointed to another club
Even then the original club may still pay the difference between new and old wages if new wage is lower
Way back Peter Reid was sacked by City and later got the job at Sunderland. City still paid the difference between their deal and his with Sunderland for the length of his old contract
It happens with players as well - indeed I believe City made up Joe Hart's wages when he came to play for us (he was on £100k at City but way less at Burnley)
Of course there may be other times when contracts are not fully honoured such as if disciplinary issues are part of the reason for anyone being sacked

No sh!t?

[Lowbankclaret]

He was sacked for gross misconduct, is not getting paid and not getting a settlement.

[Shaggy]

Indeed the 4 year contract was a huge mistake. Think Dyche had Alan Pace’s pants down with that one but at least you’ve got to give Pace his credit as He’s rectified his mistake which has brought in a new era for the club.

I can’t see Dyche taking up a post anywhere else this season as he seems to have delusions of grandeur that he’s gong to be offered a premier league job.

[taio]

He was sacked for gross misconduct, is not getting paid and not getting a settlement.

I don't believe this. What's your evidence for it?

[clarethomer]

He was sacked for gross misconduct, is not getting paid and not getting a settlement.

I'd heard some bloke in the local saying something similar.

Allegedly, he had got caught talking to Everton or something like that according to this guy.

I find it hard to believe but who knows what goes on. Regardless, if it hasn't come out through more reputable sources I can only imagine it to either not be true, or under some kind of legal/compromise agreement that forbids it to be talked about by either party.

[Lowbankclaret]

I don't believe this. What's your evidence for it?

No one has any evidence.

Just think back how fast it all happened, and how unusual it was.

Believe it or not, it’s fine. But that’s what I understand has happened.

Just a pointer, Americans are very savvy when it comes to employment law.

[TheFamilyCat]

Let's see how high we can get it by purely guessing - 95k a week after tax.

download.jpeg-3.jpg (9.45 KiB) Viewed 4192 times

[TheFamilyCat]

No one has any evidence.

Just think back how fast it all happened, and how unusual it was.

Believe it or not, it’s fine. But that’s what I understand has happened.

Just a pointer, Americans are very savvy when it comes to employment law.

But he's also talked very positively about Pace since. Not the words of someone sacked under such (potentially contentious) circumstances.

[Bosscat]

But he's also talked very positively about Pace since. Not the words of someone sacked under such (potentially contentious) circumstances.

Not one thats paying you 110k a week

[taio]

No one has any evidence.

Just think back how fast it all happened, and how unusual it was.

Believe it or not, it’s fine. But that’s what I understand has happened.

Just a pointer, Americans are very savvy when it comes to employment law.

So it's just a complete guess rather than having any factual basis. The way you posted was very matter of fact.

[Lowbankclaret]

But he's also talked very positively about Pace since. Not the words of someone sacked under such (potentially contentious) circumstances.

Would you go around telling every one you got sacked for gross misconduct. Not something you want on your CV, let alone broadcast it on TV.

SC left by mutual consent, but we all know he got sacked.

Stan left as his contract was not being renewed. Barry told the story on Radio before the Man Utd game. Apparently there is a pod cast.

It’s an accepted end to a football manager . So just dress it up as that.

[Lowbankclaret]

So it's just a complete guess rather than having any factual basis. The way you posted was very matter of fact.

It’s not a guess,

[warksclaret]

I guess we will never know the reasons for his departure, most will assume it was for a bad run of poor form. I agree with a number on here that it might have been for misconduct as it happened so quickly and at the end of the week rather than immediately after the 2-0 defeat by Norwich. I also heard he had been caught talking to Everton, about him and the coaching team going to Everton, which made me think that was the reason why none of SD's immediate team stayed-Billy Mercer (a superb GK coach) for example and no one senior stayed behind to manage the team.If that's the case it will save us a huge pay-off. As I say we will never know and can only speculate

[taio]

It’s not a guess,

Where have you got the information from?

[GodIsADeeJay81]

No one has any evidence.

Just think back how fast it all happened, and how unusual it was.

Believe it or not, it’s fine. But that’s what I understand has happened.

Just a pointer, Americans are very savvy when it comes to employment law.

Love it when people make an assumption and go with it being a fact.

Managers get fired quickly all the time, one manager found out before a game and still managed for the game I think

Just stop it with this unless you've got facts

[TheFamilyCat]

Would you go around telling every one you got sacked for gross misconduct. Not something you want on your CV, let alone broadcast it on TV.

SC left by mutual consent, but we all know he got sacked.

Stan left as his contract was not being renewed. Barry told the story on Radio before the Man Utd game. Apparently there is a pod cast.

It’s an accepted end to a football manager . So just dress it up as that.

He doesn't need to say he was sacked for gross misconduct. Not does he need to say what great guys ALK are.

He has never claimed mutual consent. He accepts he was sacked for not winning enough games.

[clarethomer]

I guess we will never know the reasons for his departure, most will assume it was for a bad run of poor form. I agree with a number on here that it might have been for misconduct as it happened so quickly and at the end of the week rather than immediately after the 2-0 defeat by Norwich. I also heard he had been caught talking to Everton, about him and the coaching team going to Everton, which made me think that was the reason why none of SD's immediate team stayed-Billy Mercer (a superb GK coach) for example and no one senior stayed behind to manage the team.If that's the case it will save us a huge pay-off. As I say we will never know and can only speculate

Thats pretty much the story i heard. At a time where relationships between the 2 clubs were not great too.

[RVclaret]

I guess we will never know the reasons for his departure, most will assume it was for a bad run of poor form. I agree with a number on here that it might have been for misconduct as it happened so quickly and at the end of the week rather than immediately after the 2-0 defeat by Norwich. I also heard he had been caught talking to Everton, about him and the coaching team going to Everton, which made me think that was the reason why none of SD's immediate team stayed-Billy Mercer (a superb GK coach) for example and no one senior stayed behind to manage the team.If that's the case it will save us a huge pay-off. As I say we will never know and can only speculate

We will know to a degree in the next set of accounts.

[Vegas Claret]

Pace seems to have his screwed on ok, I'd be surprised if we are paying Dyche anywhere near close to his wage whilst he was working for us, surely that was written into his new contract ? (he says hopefully!)

[claret2018]

Just a pointer, Americans are very savvy when it comes to employment law.

American CEOs with a finance background are very savvy when it comes to U.K. employment law are they? Or are you making stuff up as you go along?

[Big Vinny K]

Who was the last manager to be sacked for gross misconduct ?
Surely the media would be all over this story if there was an ounce of truth in it
And if this was the case why would the club not announce this was the reason Dyche left ?

If Everton were interested in taking Dyche there was little to stop them doing this the normal way. Why would Dyche risk losing more than £10m in wages by doing something he could be sacked for ? Unless he knew he was going to get the Everton job and walk into a similar and better contract which never happened anyway.

Not sure what is being speculated here as ever happened to a manager before ? We know managers leave clubs to go to bigger clubs and talks go on that strictly speaking should not take place. We know that Coyle talked to the Bolton chairman whilst he was still our manager for example. But the difference is that he resigned and took that job (after he had sorted his new contract with Bolton no doubt)

I can’t say the reason he left for definite but logically it would seem to be losing games most weeks last season.

[clarethomer]

American CEOs with a finance background are very savvy when it comes to U.K. employment law are they? Or are you making stuff up as you go along?

or someone with vast experience of working with lawyers and accountants who would have access to a team that are paid to protect the club and board. Those people would have the required knowledge of the law.

[warksclaret]

Thats pretty much the story i heard. At a time where relationships between the 2 clubs were not great too.

Dont forget it came very soon after we had beaten Everton 3-2, when they had been winning 2-1 at half time. We played brilliantly second half and upstaged Everton. I suspect the Everton Board who had seen themselves shell out a fair amount of money in the previous window, witnessed a great victory by a manager who had been operating on a fraction of their budget, and might have liked the psychology that SD adopted at HT of "come on, we can beat this lot, everyone else has been doing it".

[Big Vinny K]

And if this was true and AP is “savvy” then surely the savvy thing to do would be to announce that he was forced to sack Dyche for gross misconduct as soon as it happened. That way nobody could criticise AP for anything that happened after this in terms of relegation.
Remember there were a lot of supporters and a significant proportion of the media questioning Pace’s decision to get rid of Dyche.

[taio]

Who was the last manager to be sacked for gross misconduct ?
Surely the media would be all over this story if there was an ounce of truth in it
And if this was the case why would the club not announce this was the reason Dyche left ?

If Everton were interested in taking Dyche there was little to stop them doing this the normal way. Why would Dyche risk losing more than £10m in wages by doing something he could be sacked for ? Unless he knew he was going to get the Everton job and walk into a similar and better contract which never happened anyway.

Not sure what is being speculated here as ever happened to a manager before ? We know managers leave clubs to go to bigger clubs and talks go on that strictly speaking should not take place. We know that Coyle talked to the Bolton chairman whilst he was still our manager for example. But the difference is that he resigned and took that job (after he had sorted his new contract with Bolton no doubt)

I can’t say the reason he left for definite but logically it would seem to be losing games most weeks last season.

Yes, I'm sure it would've been leaked to and reported by the media.

I recall many reports saying the club and Dyche were negotiating the settle agreement including.compensation.

I don't recall any reports of gross misconduct.

Seems to me that some people are just be making stuff up.

[clarethomer]

Who was the last manager to be sacked for gross misconduct ?
Surely the media would be all over this story if there was an ounce of truth in it
And if this was the case why would the club not announce this was the reason Dyche left ?

All opinion but

A compromise agreement would mean the official reason was hidden for the benefit of both parties. The owners probably didn't want a distraction at that point of the season. The manager probably wanted to protect his reputation. With a compromise agreement, both parties achieve an amicable split. However neither the club or manager can talk about it without legal implications would be my guess.

The agreement would mean that the reason for leaving would have been negotiated and agreed. Therefore - he hasn't been sacked for gross misconduct officially. He has been sacked due to underperformance which no one would question given our position. The club doing this would benefit from either not paying out the contract or a reduced payment and minimising the media attention at a time where everyone was trying to focus on staying up.

[jrgbfc]

If that was the reason I can't believe it wouldn't come out in this day and age with social media etc.
There were all sorts of rumours flying around at the time, last night in the pub somebody was trying to tell me Jay Rod had lamped Woan down at the training ground.

[boatshed bill]

If that was the reason I can't believe it wouldn't come out in this day and age with social media etc.
There were all sorts of rumours flying around at the time, last night in the pub somebody was trying to tell me Jay Rod had lamped Woan down at the training ground.

I wish

But didn't Jay say he wouldn't sign if a certain member of the coaching staff was kept on?

[Big Vinny K]

All opinion but

A compromise agreement would mean the official reason was hidden for the benefit of both parties. The owners probably didn't want a distraction at that point of the season. The manager probably wanted to protect his reputation. With a compromise agreement, both parties achieve an amicable split. However neither the club or manager can talk about it without legal implications would be my guess.

The agreement would mean that the reason for leaving would have been negotiated and agreed. Therefore - he hasn't been sacked for gross misconduct officially. He has been sacked due to underperformance which no one would question given our position. The club doing this would benefit from either not paying out the contract or a reduced payment and minimising the media attention at a time where everyone was trying to focus on staying up.

That’s a lot of assumptions !
Why bother compromising if they had grounds for gross misconduct ?
And why did Dyche not go to Everton if any of this was true ?

Roll it back a bit to Feb / March last season why would Everton even want to take Dyche ? They never wanted him when he was doing well for Burnley so why would they want him all of a sudden when he was having his worst season as manager and Everton were in the predicament they were ?

[Lowbankclaret]

Apparently Pace said there is now a harmony in the squad that was not there before.

[elwaclaret]

Apparently Pace said there is now a harmony in the squad that was not there before.

I think that is plain to see, to be honest. (Think you were bang on with your ‘other’ reaction BTW)

[Lowbankclaret]

SD was great for our club, we had an amazing journey under his management.

Why would you try to even damage that.

Do a low key exit, with little or no fall out. With no payout.

[Swizzlestick]

Where on earth has this Everton thing come from? As mentioned above, they didn’t want him when his stock was sky high, never mind during a spell where we both mainly losing and playing dire football. I think somebody’s heard a wild rumour in the pub and rolled with it. My hunch is the time delay was due to Mee and others kicking off about him and having a word with Pace after the Norwich game. Mee’s subsequent, and to me highly surprising, comments seem to back something like that up. But I don’t know.

[clarethomer]

That’s a lot of assumptions !
Why bother compromising if they had grounds for gross misconduct ?
And why did Dyche not go to Everton if any of this was true ?

Roll it back a bit to Feb / March last season why would Everton even want to take Dyche ? They never wanted him when he was doing well for Burnley so why would they want him all of a sudden when he was having his worst season as manager and Everton were in the predicament they were ?

I said it was opinion.

Why bother compromising - I have explained that in my response and many senior/high earning people in business are often moved on this way and its positioned that it was their choice to move on, or that they have decided they want a new challenge.

They do something that the employer doesn't like and just want rid. Clear gross misconduct may not have taken place but there is enough for trust to be lost and therefore the best and cleanest way to get someone out of the business is through a compromise agreement.

AP could have had enough to terminate the contract but risk any of the following happening:

1 - SD public termination generates media frenzy and puts spotlight on the club at a time they would rather be focused on staying up.
2 - SD ends up in a legal process which again is cost/time and effort that they don't want/need.
3 - Commercial implications of this could have had unintended consequences for the club.

So what would typically happen is a conversation would take place and they would position that SD no longer has a future with the club and the reasons for this are whatever they have on him.

They would then explain that they have 2 ways to do this. One is the way that is difficult - explaining that they will announce that they have terminated his contract and would have to report potential breaches of regulations etc. This clearly impacts the club and the team and they would prefer not to do this.

The other way is that we sack you for underperformance and you can go with none of this being in the public domain. In return for us keeping this confidential, you leave and waive your right to full payment of your contract. This way you stand a good chance of getting a job based on what you have achieved and a solid reputation.

The problem with my opinion is that if there was any truth in it, ,no one will ever be able to confirm this based on the fact that the agreement is in place.

Re - Everton.

There was a lot of discussions going on about Moshiri selling his stake in Everton. Their alleged discussions with Everton, may not have been for him to go that season etc. It could have been sounding him out about going if they went down, or if a new owner came in. It could have even been part of the compromise agreement that made it difficult/impossible for him to take a job there for a period of time.

I don't believe a penny wont have been paid to him if this was true. However, it would be plausible that we are not liable for anywhere near what would have been due had we just sacked him for no other reason.

Again it's all opinion and more trying to offer that just because something hasn't happened, or been said publicly it doesn't mean something hasn't happened.

[It Is What It Is]

I understood SD was given a 4 year contract worth region of £13 million... Not an insignificant amount, which having been relegated would be financially devastating for the club. So, I cannot really see AP throwing £13 million away whether in installments or monthly, considering the debt we had.
I would like to think that SD got £1 million for his indiscretion with Everton (if that was true), and that was it.
When the account figures come out next year, would this clarify the position at all?