Manchester United stars donate to NHS in their coronavirus fight by taking 30% wage cut

Manchester United players today became the first Premier League stars to slash their pay and they will donate millions to the NHS, MailOnline can reveal today. 

Old Trafford stars earning up to £375,000-a-week have agreed to forgo 30 per cent of their wages for one month on the proviso that the money is used to benefit hospitals and health centres throughout Manchester in the fight against the coronavirus. 

Captain Harry Maguire was approached by chairman Ed Woodward about the idea, and the England defender opened up the initiate to the rest of the senior squad, who are believed to have overwhelmingly agreed.

The decision came as a row over footballers’ pay erupted with Gary Lineker today defending those who have not taken a cut during the coronavirus crisis after Health Secretary Matt Hancock urged them to support club staff who are being furloughed at the taxpayers’ expense. 

The Match of the Day host, who will donate two months of his £1.75million BBC salary to the British Red Cross, believes that Premier League stars should not be vilified yet saying: ‘I think a lot of footballers will do something’. 

Many football fans are irate and have accused millionaire star players of ‘living in a bubble’ while club staff who serve them through the season are being put out of work while football is cancelled due to coronavirus.

Spurs, whose owner Joe Lewis is worth £4.5billion and pays most players between £70,000 and £200,000-a-week, has furloughed non-playing staff along with Premier League rivals Newcastle, Norwich and Bournemouth.  Shop workers, security staff, cleaners and catering staff will now be paid 80 per cent of their salary up to £2,500-a-month by the taxpayer when club stars remain on multi-million pound salaries.

Mr Lineker said: ‘It’s now up to the players how to respond. Let’s give them a chance to respond before this hugely judgemental pile-on that we always get nowadays. My inkling is that footballers will take pay cuts. I think we need to be a little bit patient with them.’ 

The former England striker spoke out after Gary Neville accused Matt Hancock of having a ‘f***ing cheek’ after the Health Secretary said Premier League footballers should give up some of their pay packets, when the Government can’t organise testing for NHS staff. Mr Lineker later shared the tweet saying: ‘Abso-bl**dy-lutely’.

Joey Barton also tweeted a defence of players today and said: ‘Herd Immunity? Boris and his cronies? NHS under funded and mismanaged for decades? That’ll be the Premier League footballers fault. Wake up! This is about shifting the focus away from the government handling this pandemic horrendously’. 

Former Premier League player David Cotterill wrote: ‘2.5 million millionaires in the UK! ‘512 players in the Premier League! YOU all want footballers to donate or take pay cuts during this? I agree. But there’s a lot more rich people out there. Soon as anything happens footballers become instant targets’.

But Tottenham’s Labour MP David Lammy sided with Mr Hancock and said: ‘It’s criminal that Premier League footballers haven’t moved more quickly to take pay cuts and deferrals. And completely wrong that taxpayers are now being asked to subsidise cleaners, caterers and security guards at these clubs instead’.

The Premier League is trying to agree a deal with players’ union, the Professional Footballers’ Association, whose chief executive Gordon Taylor insists top-flight players should would not take pay cuts to ease the financial pressure on clubs caused by the coronavirus crisis.

A three-month deferral of pay for players is being mooted if the season has not resumed by the middle of the summer – but the PFA is clear they would not accept wage cuts for their members saying it would ‘only serve shareholders’ interests’.

The Premier League is meeting today to discuss players’ pay and ways to finish the current season safely as it was claimed one top club has suggested moving the games to China or another country where the coronavirus peak has passed.

Brighton’s chief executive Paul Barber has taken a pay cut along with manager Graham Potter for the next three months – but claimed today that because players are ‘assets on a balance sheet’ rather than employees, it is difficult to change their contracts and force them to cut their pay. 

Although no Premier League footballer appears to have taken a pay cut, Wilfriend Zaha has offered NHS workers free accommodation to help ease the strain caused by the Coronavirus crisis on London’s hospital workers.

Manchester Uniter’s Marcus Rashford has teamed up with FareShare, a food distribution charity, after schools in the Manchester area were closed due to the coronavirus pandemic, raising £134,000 for meals.

Liverpool FC star and Scotland captain Andy Robertson has given his backing to a charity supporting elderly people during the Covid-19 pandemic.

The footballer said he wants people to know Age Scotland, which has experienced a tenfold increase in calls during the coronavirus outbreak, is there for them.

Matt Hancock said yesterday that top-flight footballers needed to ‘make a contribution and take a pay cut,’ with many clubs facing financial difficulties due to matches being suspended, saying the stars  must: ‘Take a pay cut, play your part’. 

He said that ‘given NHS staff making the ultimate sacrifice getting into work and have caught the diseases and sadly died, I think the first thing Premier League footballers can do is make a contribution’. 

However, Sky Sports pundit Gary Neville said his statement was ‘a f***ing cheek, adding: ‘I wish I was a player for 10 more mins. The PL players are more than likely working on a proposal to help clubs, communities and the NHS. It takes longer than 2 weeks to put together. 

‘Matt Hancock calling them out when he can’t get tests in place for NHS staff is a f@@@@@g cheek!’

Piers Morgan also piled in last night and said: ‘Will Mr Hancock & his cabinet colleagues also be taking a pay cut – or is the intention here just to shame footballers who haven’t said they won’t?’

Brighton’s chief executive Paul Barber told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme this morning: ‘Players have very different contracts to ordinary working people. The players are sort of assets on our balance sheet, so it’s a lot more complex to move to changes in the contract.

‘Talks are going on between the leagues and the unions at the moment and we’re hoping to hear something over the next day or two on that particular topic.’

Questioned over footballers living on smaller wages, Mr Barber added: ‘I think we can totally understand the public’s perception at the moment.

‘The whole country is suffering. Everybody is in a very difficult position. People are losing their jobs, worse still people are losing their lives, so we totally understand the perception.

‘I think individually players are good people, they do lots of good things. Many of our players have already made private donations to support various charities in our particular city.

‘I think most players are waiting on the union to come up with a formula or a strategy to help them work with their clubs through this crisis.’ 

Gary Lineker has said that players should be given a chance to support non-playing staff before a ‘judgemental pile-on’ begins. 

Lineker told BBC Radio 4’s ‘World at One’: ‘The way Tottenham have handled it I don’t think has been very good – what they are doing to their staff I don’t agree with whatsoever.

‘But that is a separate issue to what the players do. It’s the club that has said that the players are going to carry on with their wages, but let’s see how the players react to it.’ 

In a strongly-worded statement that followed lengthy talks with the Premier League, EFL and League Managers Association that broke up without agreement, the PFA also criticised big clubs such as Tottenham and Newcastle, who have taken advantage of the government’s job retention scheme to furlough non-playing staff at the expense of the tax payer.

The Premier League and EFL had spent the afternoon attempting to persuade the PFA to endorse a universal financial settlement package for players involving deferrals and potentially cuts ahead of today’s crucial conference call of the 20 top-flight clubs, who had hoped to rubberstamp that agreement. 

Sportsmail has learnt that the proposal put to the PFA involved players accepting a deferral of a fixed percentage of their salary for three months followed by a cut if football has not resumed by the middle of the summer.

The PFA have not ruled out advising players to accept deferrals, although the percentage has yet to be agreed with the figures mooted by both sides ranging from between 25 and 50 per cent, but made it clear they would not accept wage cuts. 

In an incendiary statement released less than an hour after health secretary Matt Hancock had called on players to ‘take a pay cut and play their part’ the PFA dismissed that suggestion out of hand. 

‘Each club’s financial standing will vary,’ the statement read. ‘We are aware of the public sentiment that the players should pay non-playing staff’s salaries. However, our current position is that – as businesses – if clubs can afford to pay their players and staff, they should.’

Taylor is the highest-paid union official in the country with a salary of £2.2million and has developed a reputation as a hard-nosed negotiator, which he has had no qualms about displaying despite the country facing a national emergency and unprecedented public health crisis. In addition to refusing to bow to the increasing public pressure for pay cuts the PFA also accused clubs who have furloughed staff of damaging society simply to protect the wealth of their shareholders.

‘The players we have spoken recognise that the non-playing staff are a vital part of their club and they do not want to see club staff furloughed unfairly,’ the statement read. ‘Any use of the government’s support schemes without genuine financial need is detrimental to the wider society. In instances where clubs have the resources to pay all staff, the benefit of players paying non-playing staff salaries will only serve the business of the club’s shareholders.’

The PFA’s statement followed a day of mounting political pressure, which culminated in Hancock using part of the government’s daily press briefing to publicly call players to take a pay cut.

‘Given the sacrifices that many people are making, including some of my colleagues in the NHS, who have made the ultimate sacrifice getting into work and have caught the diseases and sadly died, I think the first thing Premier League footballers can do is make a contribution, take a pay cut and play their part,’ he said.

Earlier in the day the chair of the Department of Culture, Media and Sport select committee, Julian Knight, called on the government to impose a windfall tax on clubs who refused to cut wages.

‘We are facing an obscene situation where top players who aren’t working are continuing to see hundreds of thousands of pounds roll in each week while the staff who keep the clubs going are losing wages,’ ‘Knight said. ‘If the Premier League isn’t going to act to resolve this crisis then the government must step in by imposing a significant financial penalty on clubs to reimburse those hit hardest in the pocket. That’s why I have written to Chancellor Rishi Sunak today demanding that Premier League clubs do the right thing by Tuesday next week or face the consequences.’

Tottenham Hotspur Supporters Trust has called on Levy to make a bigger financial contribution to help the club cover non-playing staff’s wages.

It said in a statement: ‘We are aware that no football club can impose contract changes on its playing or coaching staff without agreement with the respective unions, the PFA and LMA (League Managers’ Association).

‘So the comment that THFC has chosen to cut non-playing staff wages while choosing not to cut playing staff wages is inaccurate.

‘But there is nothing to stop the club’s players making a voluntary contribution to ensure that the most vulnerable do not bear too great a burden.

‘And there is nothing to stop the club’s directors, including the chairman, making a further personal contribution on top of their 20 per cent wage cuts. Points we have made directly to the club board and will continue to do so.

‘We have made it clear that this is a course of action fans would overwhelmingly support.’

Players across Spain and Italy have agreed voluntary pay-cuts with the entire Barcelona squad, led by Lionel Messi, agreeing to 70% reductions while the coronavirus crisis continues. 

Premier League chiefs are holding their crunch coronavirus meeting TODAY… now is the time to decide on the fate of the season, when – or if – it will resume, transfers, a £762m debt to TV companies – and players’ pay cuts

English football’s moment of truth is upon us.

Today we will find out how the Premier League plans to solve the many issues caused by the coronavirus crisis as it holds a meeting of its stakeholders this morning via video link.

Top of the agenda will be how to finish a season that has been suspended for nearly a month as the killer pandemic enforces lockdown and social distancing, making playing football seem trivial. 

But there are matters that need to be resolved with careers and hundreds of millions of pounds at stake.

On the pitch, titles, relegations and European places need to be confirmed, at the risk of a plethora of lawsuits if they are not. 

Liverpool fans will be most anxious of all to find out their fate, with their club on the brink of ending their 30-year wait for a league title and only a cancellation of the season standing between them and the trophy.

At the other end of the table, Bournemouth, Aston Villa and Norwich also face a nervy day, as they occupy the relegation places. The promotion-chasing clubs in the Championship, including the top two – Leeds United and West Bromwich Albion – will be on tenterhooks too.    

Off the pitch the issue of whether players should take wage cuts while clubs’ non-playing staff are being furloughed is one that has grabbed national attention.

Changes to the transfer window and players with contracts set to expire this summer are also likely to be on the agenda.

Sportsmail exclusively revealed earlier this week that the Premier League have been working on a plan to restart the season behind closed doors on the first weekend in May, in order for it be finished by mid-July so that TV contracts are honoured.

Martin Samuel and Matt Hughes reported: ‘Under the terms of the TV contracts the cut-off point to finish this season is July 16, and if the campaign is not completed by that date Sky Sports, BT Sport and the international rights-holders could demand rebates totalling as much as £762million.’

The plan is a bold one and could be unrealistic with lockdown expected to go on for months, with major doubts over how to keep players healthy and many minor issues, such as whether VAR can be implemented, to be ironed out.

We will find out if the Premier League have stuck to that plan today, or are pursuing a different course to get the season finished – as all stakeholders are pitching for.

Premier League clubs and players have come in for a barrage of criticism this week for not yet agreeing pay cuts despite some – Tottenham, Newcastle and Norwich – already announcing plans to use the government furlough scheme for non-playing staff. That means clubs have pushed the burden of paying their staff onto the taxpayer, while still paying huge sums to already vastly rich players.  

Former Spurs manager Harry Redknapp led the criticism, saying: ‘I can’t believe it. Surely players should be taking a cut. This isn’t for big clubs like Tottenham.’

The reason clubs have been hesitant in asking players to take wage cuts is that players could technically then leave for free, citing breach of contract – as revealed by Sportsmail earlier this week.

Professional Footballers Association chief Gordon Taylor has been urging players not to accept pay cuts and wants clubs’ accounts revealed before they consider doing so. 

Taylor refused to back down on Thursday night despite criticism from the Government and pressure from the Premier League, insisting that top-flight players will not take cuts. 

The Premier League have worked on a co-ordinated approach to salary management, to avoid the aforementioned free-transfer issue, and they need a two-thirds majority from clubs to ratify any decision. 

There could, though, be a deferral of wages and the PFA’s statement on Thursday evening suggested that was still on the table. Sportsmail has reported, though, that a decision on that could be pushed back to next week. 

It is expected that players whose contracts are set to expire on June 30 will be told to remain with their current clubs until the season ends, whenever that is, and that the summer transfer window will run until the end of January. Both of these decisions, while on the agenda, are likely to be announced by FIFA and not the Premier League.

 

 

Football’s PR disaster: Politicians, ex-players and fans pile in on Premier League stars as £2m-a-year PFA chief executive Gordon Taylor urges them to hold firm and NOT agree wage cuts as coronavirus ravages the country

Politicians, former players and football fans have slammed Premier League clubs for failing to reduce the wages of their multi-millionaire players before using the government’s furlough scheme for their non-playing staff.

While the programme sellers and stewards are taking 20 per cent wage cuts and being bailed out by the government, top stars are still earning hundreds of thousands a week, and have been urged by the PFA to hold fire on accepting cuts to their pay.

All this has left a sour taste in the mouths of football fans and even ex-players, who have urged players to do the right thing and end the PR disaster they find themselves embroiled in.

Leading figures from the world of politics have also weighed in on the debate, with Julian Knight, the chair of the Digital, Media and Sport committee, stating: ‘It sticks in the throat.

‘This exposes the crazy economics in English football and the moral vacuum at its centre.’

MP for Tottenham David Lammy took to Twitter on Thursday morning and said: ‘It’s criminal that Premier League footballers haven’t moved more quickly to take pay cuts and deferrals. And completely wrong that taxpayers are now being asked to subsidise cleaners, caterers and security guards at these clubs instead.’ 

Harry Redknapp, former Tottenham and Portsmouth manager, told the BBC: ‘I’m a bit disappointed they’ve used that scheme to keep workers on. These people are so important to every football club, the club shouldn’t be taking the government’s money to be paying them. 

‘The players need to have a meeting among themselves and from their heart, say ‘I think it would be a good idea, let us take a wage cut, not deferred wages, we can afford to take a cut, whether its five, 10 per cent, but do it from the heart.’ 

‘When the government brought this scheme out I thought it was for businesses who couldn’t afford to keep workers on, I didn’t think it was for the use of top Premier League clubs.’ 

MailOnline columnist and football fan Piers Morgan summed up the thoughts of the nation when he told Sportsmail: ‘It is outrageous for any football club right now to cut salaries of club staff but not the extravagantly paid players too.’

Fans too have made their feelings abundantly clear, taking to Twitter to share their increasing anger on the situation football finds itself in. 

One wrote: ‘Massive PR opportunity for the first high-profile Premier League footballer who comes out and asks their club for a pay cut, so the non-playing staff can continue to be paid. Even better if a captain got the entire team to agree to it.’

Elsewhere, meanwhile, some fans believe football may struggle to recover from the position it has put itself in.

‘At this rate when things go back to normal, the stadiums will still be empty as the public give up or boycott their support for players & refuse to keep lining billionaires pockets,’ one said.

Another football fan noted: ‘Football is cutting its own throat right now. If they carry on with this greedy stance attendances will plummet when football finally resumes.’

As it stands, no Premier League players have cut their wages amid the ongoing coronavirus crisis, which has already seen 2,352 deaths in the United Kingdom.

Gordon Taylor, the £2million-a-year chief executive of the PFA, has told Sportsmail that the union want to know the precise financial position of a club before agreeing to any deferral, to prevent clubs from capitalising on the pandemic to save money.

The PFA are thought to be keen to protect players playing in the EFL’s lower leagues, making sure their earnings – much lower than those seen in the top flight – are safeguarded.

Players may end up accepting wage deferrals, but the union are keen to see clubs’ finances to ensure their members are not treated unfairly.

Former Crystal Palace chairman Simon Jordan, never one to hold back with his strong opinions, also spoke on the subject during his talkSPORT show earlier this week. 

‘I think it is an awful look for football,’ he began, ‘and I think it’s awful Premier League footballers are being paid £250,000 to £500,000 a week and the government is having to support Premier League clubs. 

‘I’m sat here saying: Come on football, you can’t sit there and have every footballer in the Premier League on an average £70,000 a week and seriously say ‘let’s not cut the players’ wages first before we go to the government to fund our own staff’.

‘Come on! There is a moral obligation here – there has to be. Football has GOT to take a pay cut!’

Elsewhere Sadiq Khan, the Mayor of London, spoke to BBC Radio 5 Live and insisted that top-flight players need to ‘carry the burden’.

‘My view is always that those who are the least well off should get the most help,’ he said.

‘Highly paid football players are people who can carry the greatest burden and they should be the first one to, with respect, sacrifice their salary, rather than the person selling the programme or the person who does catering or the person who probably doesn’t get anywhere near the salary some of the Premier League footballers get.

‘It should be those with the broadest shoulders who go first because they can carry the greatest burden and have probably got savings, rather than those who were in catering or hospitality who have probably got no savings and live week by week and who probably won’t get the [government] benefits for five weeks.’ 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

There is a view at United as one of the richest and biggest clubs in world football, they want to be leading the way in the fight against coronavirus.

The generous gesture will see millions of pounds injected into the crisis that has taken grip of the nation.

The playing community have been criticised in recent days, particularly after their union, the Professional Footballers Association, publicly declared they would not be accepting pay cuts.

But players, in general, are desperate to do their part – and United players’ huge donation represents that feeling.   

It was revealed back in October that United have racked up a staggering spend on player salaries, the highest ever reported by an English side.

Financial documents show the club’s incredible £332million yearly wage bill is an all-time high that has grown by £100m – 43 per cent – in the past three years.

The figures come by way of Swiss Ramble, a financial blogger on Twitter, with United the first Premier League club to publish their numbers for 2018-19.

The wage bill shot up £36m from £296m to £332m in recent months, largely due to the club’s outlay on improving the first team squad.

In the current squad, goalkeeper David de Gea, who earns £375,000-a-week, and midfielder Paul Pogba, who earns £290,000-a-week, are the biggest earners in the dressing room.  

The £332m figure also includes seven months of wages paid to Alexis Sanchez, who earns £400,000 a week at Old Trafford.  

Inter Milan, who took Sanchez on loan this summer, agreed to pay close to £4.5m of the Chile international’s £21m annual salary, meaning United are still having to subsidise a significant portion of his wages.