Player Watch Steele Sidebottom

[Markfs]

just to correct what i said earlier, this is from the fair work commission...

Dad and Partner Pay
Eligible working dads and partners (including same-sex partners) get 2 weeks leave paid at the National Minimum Wage. These payments are made directly to the employee by the Australian Government.

the father has to be caring for the child on a daily basis...

 

[Markfs]

Depends on what/if the allocation is, I had a guy off for 3 months on full pay, his wife did in this case go back to work quite soon and he stayed home as the primary carer. The point is that Collingwood have agreed to allow this as his employer, we don't know the terms and what has been agreed but the point was made it should be leave without pay, I was just making the point that paternity leave is extended to both the mother and father, there may well be a period of Leave without pay or not.

I dont think anyone argues with the point that the Pies or any employer can give their employees unlimited leave. The other point is that the example that you give, the father was the primary carer. That is a big difference. Helping out the mother isnt the same as primary care giver.

For example, if steele's partner had complications and had to stay in hospital and steele took the child home, he is the primary care giver.

 

[jackcass]

To me there are several key issues.

1. The attitude of the club to Steele is comparable to the rest of the AFL industry. He isn't being treated as a special case.

2. While conditions of employment vary enormously in the corporate environment, the treatment of Steele is certainly at the most favourable end of the market. I could only hazard a guess, but 90% of employers wouldnt be paying a guy to take extended leave. I'm uncertain about what is in the player's agreement, but the response to Steele is probably better than the agreement because of the virus, and corporations arent doing that at the moment. A lot of fathers take unpaid leave after the birth of a child, but that isn't always possible in some employment situations.

3. Membership makes up a large part of the collingwood income, and a lot of that comes from people who often dont have anything more than a week for a father on parental leave. Most casuals wouldnt get any. Most employees in small business would be lucky to get the week.

4. The majority of the 70000 pie members have chosen not to ask for a refund and many of these members might either have lost their job because of the virus or are financially affected.

Personally, I just feel uneasy about some of the attitudes expressed about the so-called "right" for Steele to make decisions on whether he remains home on paid leave.

Is he not attending the club and training? Do you go into your work and practice/prepare for your role when you are on leave? Do we know what he was paid during his paternity leave? Do we know that he is being paid if as suggested he's actually taking extended leave?

 

[Horaceg]

I dont think anyone argues with the point that the Pies or any employer can give their employees unlimited leave. The other point is that the example that you give, the father was the primary carer. That is a big difference. Helping out the mother isnt the same as primary care giver.

For example, if steele's partner had complications and had to stay in hospital and steele took the child home, he is the primary care giver.

I possibly shouldn't have added the primary carer because it didn't really matter, under the Company policy he was still entitled to the paternity time off with pay.

 

[Markfs]

Is he not attending the club and training? Do you go into your work and practice/prepare for your role when you are on leave? Do we know what he was paid during his paternity leave? Do we know that he is being paid if as suggested he's actually taking extended leave?

Obviously, i dont know all the answers. You will note that I spoke generally about the situation in my last emails, and I'm not against him getting daddy leave if the club wants to give it to him. I was making the point that he is being treated a lot better than a most fathers in the community, and ironically, probably better than most of our members who are fathers.

I've made the point generally in a lot of emails over the years that clubs often treat players very well, even when they are leaving the club, because it wants to maintain a good relationship with the rest of the player group. A lot of people in this forum seem to want to treat players like meat, or like soccer players in europe, and that doesn't work in AFL. Note the disquiet that has emerged about bellchambers not getting a final game. It is the other senior players who are rumoured to be upset. So I support steele being treated well for a number of reasons.

However, I dont support a lot of the talk around this. He doesnt have a right to pick and choose what he wants to do. The argument that its "too hard" to come back through quarantine doesn't convince me. A lot of people are doing it hard, including members who are paying a large portion of his wage.

 

[Markfs]

I possibly shouldn't have added the primary carer because it didn't really matter, under the Company policy he was still entitled to the paternity time off with pay.

That is pretty generous and pretty unusual. The guy who you were referring to had 3 months off paid leave when the wife was the primary care giver? Well a lot of large corporations are being generous in this area because they want to attract and retain staff. This is not the case at the low end of the labour market.

 

[Yidaki]

Sidebottom's feet must be super itchy knowing he could be playing in a EF. YES! DON'T ATTACK ME! I know he is already super happy with being at home too with his new bub, but he also loves his footy.

 

[Markfs]

you do get hypersensitive types in here eh....

(disclaimer : some people may feel the need to talk to someone after being at BF. The following site may assist you

Resilience training | How to cope with stress and anxiety

Learn healthy ways to cope with stress, anxiety, and smartphone addiction. Discover unique resilience training for companies, schools and families.

resiliencebuilders.com.au

)

 

[Horaceg]

That is pretty generous and pretty unusual. The guy who you were referring to had 3 months off paid leave when the wife was the primary care giver? Well a lot of large corporations are being generous in this area because they want to attract and retain staff. This is not the case at the low end of the labour market.

Agree, my wife worked for IBM and she took 6 months at half pay, twice. Just going back to Sidebottom and the suggestion he should take leave without pay, it depends on the Club and his agreement. i Can’t see them taking money off him but we don’t know details.

 

[jmac70]

That is pretty generous and pretty unusual. The guy who you were referring to had 3 months off paid leave when the wife was the primary care giver? Well a lot of large corporations are being generous in this area because they want to attract and retain staff. This is not the case at the low end of the labour market.

Pandemics are pretty unusual too.

 

[Markfs]

Pandemics are pretty unusual too.

yes, so the club effectively gave steele more leave than what he would normally get...

there are a group of people on jobkeeper who are being paid for nothing.... so its not unusual

 

[jmac70]

yes, so the club effectively gave steele more leave than what he would normally get...

there are a group of people on jobkeeper who are being paid for nothing.... so its not unusual

Yep.

 

[jackcass]

Obviously, i dont know all the answers. You will note that I spoke generally about the situation in my last emails, and I'm not against him getting daddy leave if the club wants to give it to him. I was making the point that he is being treated a lot better than a most fathers in the community, and ironically, probably better than most of our members who are fathers.

I've made the point generally in a lot of emails over the years that clubs often treat players very well, even when they are leaving the club, because it wants to maintain a good relationship with the rest of the player group. A lot of people in this forum seem to want to treat players like meat, or like soccer players in europe, and that doesn't work in AFL. Note the disquiet that has emerged about bellchambers not getting a final game. It is the other senior players who are rumoured to be upset. So I support steele being treated well for a number of reasons.

However, I dont support a lot of the talk around this. He doesnt have a right to pick and choose what he wants to do. The argument that its "too hard" to come back through quarantine doesn't convince me. A lot of people are doing it hard, including members who are paying a large portion of his wage.

And here I was thinking that was just another answer you didn't have and you were simply guessing....

As to his rights, I doubt any club has the capacity within the existing player agreement to enforce a doctrine that requires players to be in quarantine away from family. I'd assume that is why it was optional at all clubs for all players to go or not. So nice that clubs and players can amicably come to terms in the weird times in which we find ourselves without needing to push the rights of players or the entitlements of clubs to get there.

 

[jackcass]

yes, so the club effectively gave steele more leave than what he would normally get...

there are a group of people on jobkeeper who are being paid for nothing.... so its not unusual

Just another guess. Exactly how much paternity leave has he had? Has he actually had any or has he been turning up to the club every day to train as required?

 

[Markfs]

And here I was thinking that was just another answer you didn't have and you were simply guessing....

As to his rights, I doubt any club has the capacity within the existing player agreement to enforce a doctrine that requires players to be in quarantine away from family. I'd assume that is why it was optional at all clubs for all players to go or not. So nice that clubs and players can amicably come to terms in the weird times in which we find ourselves without needing to push the rights of players or the entitlements of clubs to get there.

so you saying the clubs cant require the players to take a temporary transfer to get their contract payments? So if all the players said no, the clubs would still be required to pay the contracts and probably go insolvent....

 

[Markfs]

Just another guess. Exactly how much paternity leave has he had? Has he actually had any or has he been turning up to the club every day to train as required?

well its all guessing. I suppose the reality might clock in when the members see their membership costs for 2021 and whether will see any games for that amount.

 

[sr36]

Is he not attending the club and training? Do you go into your work and practice/prepare for your role when you are on leave? Do we know what he was paid during his paternity leave? Do we know that he is being paid if as suggested he's actually taking extended leave?

In terms of the bolded, I'm pretty confident that the club would be making a big deal out of it, if he'd agreed to leave without pay.
In terms of your opening point, he's not paid becasue he's a good trainer. He's paid becasue he's a good player and he has opted not to play. I'm not having a go at him for this decision - I'd do the same, but I don't understand why you'd be expecting full pay. I certainly wouldn't if I took a heap of leave in this situation. I'd be shocked if AFL contracts would have extended paternity leave in them, as I doubt it's ever been requested before. If Collingwood are giving him full pay, I think he's lucky and they're foolish.

 

[jackcass]

so you saying the clubs cant require the players to take a temporary transfer to get their contract payments? So if all the players said no, the clubs would still be required to pay the contracts and probably go insolvent....

There were numbers of players who did say no. Ablett, Edwards, Houli etc. How many of their clubs are screaming insolvency?

And you say temporary transfer like they're now required to train at Arden Street. Collingwood players have been in the interstate hubs since they flew to Perth after the Hawks game on July 10. That's nearly 11 weeks. Even FIFO workers aren't usually kept away from home, forgoing anything that remotely resembles a normal life for that long. Military are likely the only organisation that requires that sort of temporary transfer, and people sign up to that with full understanding of what they're committing to. But even the military in this day and age rarely requires 24/7 isolation from the general populace.

 

[jackcass]

In terms of the bolded, I'm pretty confident that the club would be making a big deal out of it, if he'd agreed to leave without pay.
In terms of your opening point, he's not paid becasue he's a good trainer. He's paid becasue he's a good player and he has opted not to play. I'm not having a go at him for this decision - I'd do the same, but I don't understand why you'd be expecting full pay. I certainly wouldn't if I took a heap of leave in this situation. I'd be shocked if AFL contracts would have extended paternity leave in them, as I doubt it's ever been requested before. If Collingwood are giving him full pay, I think he's lucky and they're foolish.

Again, he hasn't opted not to play, he's opted not to quarantine. You get the Queensland Government to relax that requirement and I'm sure he'd be more than happy to fly in and out and play. As would the remainder of the squad.

It's all just guess work and trying to make mountains out of molehills.

 

[Markfs]

There were numbers of players who did say no. Ablett, Edwards, Houli etc. How many of their clubs are screaming insolvency?

And you say temporary transfer like they're now required to train at Arden Street. Collingwood players have been in the interstate hubs since they flew to Perth after the Hawks game on July 10. That's nearly 11 weeks. Even FIFO workers aren't usually kept away from home, forgoing anything that remotely resembles a normal life for that long. Military are likely the only organisation that requires that sort of temporary transfer, and people sign up to that with full understanding of what they're committing to. But even the military in this day and age rarely requires 24/7 isolation from the general populace.

two points. if enough players say no to moving to interstate bubbles, there would be no games and i'm not sure the clubs could escape insolvency.... foxtel certainly wouldnt pay... and i'm not sure the members would pay if there was no season at all...

second point, the families moved to qld... it is effectively a temporary transfer, not a remote posting.

 

[Markfs]

Again, he hasn't opted not to play, he's opted not to quarantine. You get the Queensland Government to relax that requirement and I'm sure he'd be more than happy to fly in and out and play. As would the remainder of the squad.

It's all just guess work and trying to make mountains out of molehills.

using your logic, i would recommend stephenson to go home to melbourne on full pay sick leave. There are probably quite a few others who might be under a bit of stress and might choose to ditch it for the rest of the season and come back in january.

 

[jackcass]

two points. if enough players say no to moving to interstate bubbles, there would be no games and i'm not sure the clubs could escape insolvency.... foxtel certainly wouldnt pay... and i'm not sure the members would pay if there was no season at all...

second point, the families moved to qld... it is effectively a temporary transfer, not a remote posting.

Where has it ever been suggested that enough players would opt out to imperil the season?

Prior to the resumption it very much looked like there would be no season and it seemed the vast majority of members at that time were opting to leave their memberships with the club.

Some families moved to Queensland, not all. If it had been all then Sidey wouldn't have had to return to Melbourne for the birth.

So now you're just making stuff up. I'll leave it there.

 

[Pie eyed]

Yep, but fortunately grown adults with brains can plan babies... and most people with brains know babies take around 9 months... It's REALLY not hard to have a baby in October November December Jan Feb March April May June July August...

Anyone with the choice would go for a spring baby.
Best weather for Mum and Bub.
Summer too hot for both in the first few months of Bubs life and
winter too flipping cold and a pain in the arse rugging up every time you move from house to car to shop etc.

Bet you can't guess when my kids were born?

September.
I gave not a single minutes thought to what I may be doing footy wise for either birth, though I played finals and GF on both occasions....losing unfortunately.

 

[Pie eyed]

Family comes before everything. Period. especially in this current social climate.
Good on you Sidey.

 

[Premier Pies]

I think delaying pregnancy for 4 years is different to delaying for 4 weeks. I don't think its a big sacrifice to ask a guy on 600-700k to not plan for a birth during a 4 week block in a year, if you think that's completely unreasonable we can agree to disagree.

Kappa, surely you can't be serious mate?

Let's assume your theory of holding off for four weeks or planning to not have a baby in September is actually feasible.

Mr Sidey and Mrs Sidey recommence relations in January to avoid having a baby in the month of September. Tell you what, they wait until February to really be sure not to have a baby in September because Mr Sidey earns $600k per year and has obligations to work for the club.

Mrs Sidey falls pregnant in February, first month of trying.....it's a wonderful miracle! Everything is going to plan and baby will be born in November.

Fast forward to third week of September and Mrs Sidey has developed "complications" during the third trimester and has to be hospitalised. Fast forward another week and a half or so to the morning of the last day in September, grand final day. Mrs Sidey and baby aren't doing so well and it's decided she has to go in to surgery to have an emergency c section to deliver the baby prematurely. Mr Sidey quite rightly decides to stay with his wife for the surgery and delivery of their baby. He will miss the grand final.

So, as you can see, no matter all the meticulous planning and holding off for at least four weeks, the baby still came in September and Mr Sidey missed the grand final.

Of course this is all hypothetical, but this is a perfect example of what can and does happen in the real world with couples having babies all the time. Things almost always do not go to plan.

Due to the fact of things not always going to plan as well as endless other reasons, couples planning to start a family don't "delay for four weeks" in trying to conceive a child. Most couples do not tempt fate or delay for really any reason at all.