Grant Thomas paid $100,000 hush money by St Kilda

[bigmicka]

wondered why no one posted this.

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/ ... 61,00.html

ST KILDA promised to pay ex-coach Grant Thomas $100,000 not to denigrate the club after he was sacked, a judge was told today.

But barrister Matthew Stirling said the club reneged on the deal after a "very messy" series of negotiations that included private financial deals between Thomas and then club president Rod Butterss.
Mr Stirling told the County Court that in dealing with his client's departure the club had tried to "chain his lips" and Thomas agreed to the conditions imposed on the $100,000 payment.

But within days of his sacking St Kilda tried to impose a further series of conditions that were "out of bounds" and would have required Thomas to sign away statutory and legal rights.

Thomas, who was sacked in the wake of the club's elimination final defeat against Melbourne in September 2006, has sued St Kilda Saints for $272,000, he claims he is owed in contractural payments and annual leave entitlements.

Opening his case Mr Stirling said Thomas signed a series of contracts after his appointment as full-time coach in 2002. By the time he signed his fourth contract he was earning $525,000 a year.

On top of his base payments in his contracts were bonuses of $30,000 if the club made the top four on the AFL ladder, $75,000 if they made the top two and $100,000 if they won a premiership.

Mr Stirling said that in his four years as a senior coach St Kilda never paid Thomas any annual leave and this became a matter of ongoing dispute between him and the club.

In August 2005 the AFL fined Thomas $15,000 for comments he made about umpires and the club told his client it would "look after him".

But soon after it made the statement Butterss said Thomas should pay the fine and the coach agreed.

Later the club said it would pay the $15,000 if Thomas agreed to forego his annual leave entitlements which were worth in excess of $80,000.

Two days before the 2006 elimination final St Kilda's CEO, Archie Fraser, visited Thomas as he was conducting a meeting with his coaching assistants and asked him to sign a document relating to his annual leave.

Mr Stirling said Thomas did not read the document before he signed it but it said that the coach agreed he had taken all of his annual leave.

Thomas did not know, Mr Stirling said, that the president and the board had already agreed that the coach would be sacked if St Kilda lost to Melbourne.

Mr Stirling said that under workplace laws an employee ciould not sign away statutory entitlements.

The hearing is continuing.



time to let the sycophants loose.

mic

[rodgerfox]

Thomas did not know, Mr Stirling said, that the president and the board had already agreed that the coach would be sacked if St Kilda lost to Melbourne.

Does this mean that if we didn't lose 4 key players to injury during that game, all the talk about 'gen Y', 'taking the next step', 'Sydney' and 'off-field structures' wouldn't have happened?

[Spinner]

As much as I hate GT....I dont think he would go to this length if he wasn't technically in the right by law. Ive got a feeling that the club is in the wrong this time


Other than that;
$525,000 per year.....what a f****** joke.

[rodgerfox]

$525,000 per year.....what a f****** joke.

That was in his 4th contract though wasn't it?

By that stage, his performance and experience was pretty good.

And his best mate was paying his wage!

[bigmicka]

And his best mate was paying his wage!

more like his creditor (or is it debtor) that was paying the wage.

mic

[asiu]

after a meeting of eyes ,

who said , when turning again from his seat a second time

hello andrew , are you still living in hawthorn ?

and then , who replyed with

yes, hello grant , are you still living in brighton?

[asiu]

1st year $325 k (as caretaker) .....7 games
then $420k
then $465k
then $508k
then $525k

plus bonuses

[suss]

As much as I hate GT....I dont think he would go to this length if he wasn't technically in the right by law. Ive got a feeling that the club is in the wrong this time

Just because he thinks he's right, doesn't make him right. All he has is an argument and he's taking a mighty risk if ut turns out he's wrong and ends up paying court costs.

Personally, I don't think he's got a hope in hell. Whilst an uneducated employee may argue they were forced to sign away contractual rights, I find it less believable that a bloke capable of being the CEO of a large company could be bullied into signing a document or failing to read a document properly.

I wonder if B4Eva is a casual observer in the docks!!

[SENsei]

As much as I hate GT....I dont think he would go to this length if he wasn't technically in the right by law. Ive got a feeling that the club is in the wrong this time


Other than that;
$525,000 per year.....what a f****** joke.

Tend to agree. If true, paints the club in a very poor light on the way it treats it's employees.

[JeffDunne]

I still find it amazing that people still continue to focus just on GT.

Could the management of the club have acted any less professionally?

Thank christ most St Kilda members aren't as deluded as some of the people I'm sure we'll see in this thread.

GT may have been incompetent, he may have been greedy, but FFS can we at least for once lay some responsibility at the feet of the people that allowed this situation to develop?

[Dan Warna]

<shrug>

pay the money and tell the man he's not welcome through our doors no more.

he's gone now, and his actions in the past 18 years indicate he won't be welcome back any time soon.

(I dont see the point in discussing what he did or didn't achieve with the team while at the club we've been through that once a week for 18 months)

[markp]

I wonder if B4Eva is a casual observer in the docks!!

I think you mean the public gallery.... the docks are for the accused aren't they?

[Mr Magic]

As much as I hate GT....I dont think he would go to this length if he wasn't technically in the right by law. Ive got a feeling that the club is in the wrong this time


Other than that;
$525,000 per year.....what a f****** joke.

So far all you've heard is GT's Barrister's version of events.
It may be right, it may be wrong.
You cannot form an opinion after hearing only 1 side of the argument.

[suss]

I think you mean the public gallery.... the docks are for the accused aren't they?

Yeah, oops...although he I'd bet B4E would enjoy the chance to give his version of events.

[asiu]

although he I'd bet B4E would enjoy the chance to give his version of events.

he is

after a meeting of eyes ,

........ , when turning again from his seat a second time

hello andrew , are you still living in hawthorn ?

........ , who replyed with

yes, hello grant , are you still living in brighton?

and

1st year $325 k (as caretaker) .....7 games
then $420k (x2?)
then $465k
then $508k
then $525k

plus bonuses

he's just gone back in after another adjournment

(said a few other things , but thats for him to say , if he wants)

[SENsei]

Gaz, are you saying that B4E is actually at the hearing?

Seriously?

[yipper]

Gaz, are you saying that B4E is actually at the hearing?

Seriously?

Sounds like it..

[ausfatcat]

Gaz, are you saying that B4E is actually at the hearing?

Seriously?

he did say he was going didn't he?

[SENsei]

Well he's nothing if not committed.







Or should be.

[Dan Warna]

although he I'd bet B4E would enjoy the chance to give his version of events.

he is

after a meeting of eyes ,

........ , when turning again from his seat a second time

hello andrew , are you still living in hawthorn ?

........ , who replyed with

yes, hello grant , are you still living in brighton?

and

1st year $325 k (as caretaker) .....7 games
then $420k (x2?)
then $465k
then $508k
then $525k

plus bonuses

he's just gone back in after another adjournment

(said a few other things , but thats for him to say , if he wants)

you there too gaz?

lol

[Shaggy]

Well he's nothing if not committed.







Or should be.

I had a good laugh.

[evertonfc]

So, it turns out that million-dollar premiership bonus was a paltry $100,000? A tenth of the figure?

Ah dear. Never let the truth get in the way, hey?

I still find it amazing that people still continue to focus just on GT.

Could the management of the club have acted any less professionally?

Thank christ most St Kilda members aren't as deluded as some of the people I'm sure we'll see in this thread.

Three outstanding points.

but FFS can we at least for once lay some responsibility at the feet of the people that allowed this situation to develop?

No, because GT didn't win a flag, he's an evil, evil man.

FFS - he turned the club around and made us so much stronger. He taught us to think big - to reject mediocrity. We were a stinking rabble before he stepped in, and the lunatic fringe still want to twist the knife. Crazy.

I didn't agree with everything he did, but, off-field, he was the best thing to happen to this football club since Allan Jeans.

[Dan Warna]

concur with points.

his actions after leaving the club for whatever reason have been poor, and the fact the new management of st kilda are still going to fight GT is indicative of where he is now.

Certainly I don't think this thread should be discussing where GT WAS, but hte issues of the current action as frankly I would be interested in seeing how this pans out without reading 12,000 pages of GT was the greatest followed by GT eats babies posts.

[evertonfc]

his actions after leaving the club for whatever reason have been poor

Have they?

He never bags the club in public; he's never raised anything about the pay-out/his sacking in public. I think his actions have been fine (mind you you, I'd keep quiet for the cash, too.).

RB is the one who was desperate to air the dirty laundry, hoping to win public sympathy. But everyone knew it was RB who knifed GT, and everyone knew it was unfair. End result? Overwhelming push for change of board and RB ousted, as he should have been.

Here's another question. If it was so obvious within the club's board room that Grant had to go, why would they pay him hush money?

We, the members, deserve a lot better than what was dished out by 'our' board.

Two days before the 2006 elimination final St Kilda's CEO, Archie Fraser, visited Thomas as he was conducting a meeting with his coaching assistants and asked him to sign a document relating to his annual leave.

Un-be-lie-vable.

[JeffDunne]

Two days before the 2006 elimination final St Kilda's CEO, Archie Fraser, visited Thomas as he was conducting a meeting with his coaching assistants and asked him to sign a document relating to his annual leave.

Un-be-lie-vable.

I had the same thought reading that.


I'm starting to think they would have actually sacked him even if we'd won the flag.