Jump to content

Alan Pardew


Mike

Recommended Posts

 

 

I totally agree with that policy. At the end of the season I was disappointed to read a quote from Debuchy saying he wasn't going to be learning English during the Summer. If you're getting paid Premier League footballer wages learning English isn't too much to ask. Intensive English classes 3 times a week isn't very much.

 

 

The club can't force players to learn English, the club would be much better off trying to encourage them rather than trying to force them to do something that they could refuse to do and the club would be able to do nothing about it.

 

Having a clause in their contracts could make a difference as they would then have signed to say they will learn the language but I don't know how enforceable it would be.

 

We had a number of foreign workers at work and had massive problems communicating and we wanted to force them to learn English.  We contacted an employment lawyer who we work with and they told us to back off and if communication was that important to us a company then we would learn their language.

 

I've never heard such ridiculous tripe in my life - if you go to a foreign country, the onus is on YOU to be able to do the job they require of you ; it may or may not require you to learn the language, but if it does, then if you take the job with that understanding, they are within their rights to fire you if you fail to do the job properly because you can't speak the language.

 

Try going to France and trying to get a job in which it is vital to learn the language if you aren't proficient in French ; try it in ANY foreign country(where they have politicians with ba--s) and you'll be on your bike smartish.

 

The sooner the UK leaves the EU and repeals the ridiculous Human Rights Act, the better - the whole thing is just a money-making racket for lawyers and if anyone on here knows anything about Shakespeare, they will remember that during a discussion about improving the lot of people, he said ' First, we have to kill all the lawyers..!'

It really isn't a life or death  issue if footballers are not proficient in the language of the country in which they play as long as they can use the basics during a game but as with any situation where people are in a foreign country, life is much easier if you CAN speak the language. There is no doubt that I would learn the local lingo if I lived in a country where it was necessary - I even brushed up my Spanish for a S.American trip 3 years ago and it was worth it.

 

As for sodding lawyers telling me to 'back off' from instructing foreign workers to learn the language in order to do the job properly - good luck with THAT one because I just wouldn't employ any.

 

Bastards.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Human Rights Act certainly needs repealing and for the record a lot of lawyers (I'll hopefully be one soon) actually agree with you on that.

 

Not that it has much at all to do with what we're discussing in here, or Britain's place in the EU which has even less relevance here.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I totally agree with that policy. At the end of the season I was disappointed to read a quote from Debuchy saying he wasn't going to be learning English during the Summer. If you're getting paid Premier League footballer wages learning English isn't too much to ask. Intensive English classes 3 times a week isn't very much.

 

 

The club can't force players to learn English, the club would be much better off trying to encourage them rather than trying to force them to do something that they could refuse to do and the club would be able to do nothing about it.

 

Having a clause in their contracts could make a difference as they would then have signed to say they will learn the language but I don't know how enforceable it would be.

 

We had a number of foreign workers at work and had massive problems communicating and we wanted to force them to learn English.  We contacted an employment lawyer who we work with and they told us to back off and if communication was that important to us a company then we would learn their language.

 

I've never heard such ridiculous tripe in my life - if you go to a foreign country, the onus is on YOU to be able to do the job they require of you ; it may or may not require you to learn the language, but if it does, then if you take the job with that understanding, they are within their rights to fire you if you fail to do the job properly because you can't speak the language.

 

Try going to France and trying to get a job in which it is vital to learn the language if you aren't proficient in French ; try it in ANY foreign country(where they have politicians with ba--s) and you'll be on your bike smartish.

 

The sooner the UK leaves the EU and repeals the ridiculous Human Rights Act, the better - the whole thing is just a money-making racket for lawyers and if anyone on here knows anything about Shakespeare, they will remember that during a discussion about improving the lot of people, he said ' First, we have to kill all the lawyers..!'

It really isn't a life or death  issue if footballers are not proficient in the language of the country in which they play as long as they can use the basics during a game but as with any situation where people are in a foreign country, life is much easier if you CAN speak the language. There is no doubt that I would learn the local lingo if I lived in a country where it was necessary - I even brushed up my Spanish for a S.American trip 3 years ago and it was worth it.

 

As for sodding lawyers telling me to 'back off' from instructing foreign workers to learn the language in order to do the job properly - good luck with THAT one because I just wouldn't employ any.

 

Bastards.

 

Genuine question, are there any rules or regulations stating that certain groups of people or individuals must be employed regardless of their language skills? I'm finding it really hard to get my head around people being given jobs when they're not suitable. That's the employers fault, not the candidate.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Hang on a second, if someone can't speak a certain language that you deem important in the workplace, to a standard you deem adequate, surely you just don't give them the job? :lol:

 

I didn't, somebody else did.  :lol:

 

Well that's the employers fault then isn't it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Imagine our staff doing a 'Learn English Day!' at the training ground :lol:

 

9.00am - Introduction

 

9.30am - Grammar and structure - Mr A. Pardew

 

10.30am - Break

 

11.00am - Pronunciation and choice vocabulary - Mr J. Kinnear

 

12.00pm - Lunch

 

1.00pm - Queen's English and how to speak it - Mr J. Carver

 

2.00pm - Video - Series 2, Episode 1 of Auf Wiedersehen, Pet

 

3.00pm - Break

 

3.30pm - The first, second and mainly third person - special guest speaker Mr G. Roeder

 

4.30pm - Home time

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Human Rights Act certainly needs repealing and for the record a lot of lawyers (I'll hopefully be one soon) actually agree with you on that.

 

Not that it has much at all to do with what we're discussing in here, or Britain's place in the EU which has even less relevance here.

 

Not quite right there - it is a requirement of EU membership that a country becomes a signatory of the ECHR...which, although slightly different, would still be used by Human Rights lawyers to enforce legislation similar to that which affected Mick's firm. Therefore it IS relevant to this discussion because on the face of it, the UK would have to leave the EU if it refused to comply....I bet they would soon back down if the UK called their bluff, though....

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Human Rights Act certainly needs repealing and for the record a lot of lawyers (I'll hopefully be one soon) actually agree with you on that.

 

Not that it has much at all to do with what we're discussing in here, or Britain's place in the EU which has even less relevance here.

 

Not quite right there - it is a requirement of EU membership that a country becomes a signatory of the ECHR...which, although slightly different, would still be used by Human Rights lawyers to enforce legislation similar to that which affected Mick's firm. Therefore it IS relevant to this discussion because on the face of it, the UK would have to leave the EU if it refused to comply....I bet they would soon back down if the UK called their bluff, though....

 

There's absolutely no way we'd be required to leave the EU if we repealed the Act and reverted to the domestic legislation, which is perfectly fine. As you say, they'd back down.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This knacker still here then?

 

Probably in cahoots with a bright IT sparky, feverishly working on a new code/format (for all the accompanying stats & spreadsheets) - just in time for his opening address at summer training camp.

Link to post
Share on other sites

An almost groundless rumour to pass on:

 

My dad was talking to someone from one of the local papers in the pub last night (he didn't say who) and he reckoned Pardew is on his way out with Poyet lined up as replacement.

 

He said that Pardew has not been prepared to make an official comment on anything for 4 weeks now, which is very unlike him (he has been a bit quiet recently). Possibly the actions of a man who knows his days are numbered.

Link to post
Share on other sites

it does seem extremely weird. We seem to be selling players, making plans and Pardew is nowhere to be found and has made one statement sine JFK came in

 

A one sentence statement, at that. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...