Flintoff’s £9 million payout

Status
Not open for further replies.
king_hellfire said:
You say all that, yet the fact remains that they paid him £9 million. They wouldn’t pay a penny if they didn’t have to, so you can try and put the blame on him all you want but the payout he received would imply he wasn’t to blame.
Click to expand...
I didn't pin the blame on him, I said he may or may not have been at some fault, none of us know the details.

But more importantly it doesn't seem to me like BBC would have expected to have to dish out £9m of taxpayers money to Flintoff for a 22mph crash, for a job which largely involves racing cars or doing daft things with cars in daft scenarios for entertainment. Then couple that with £5m to cancel the series.
Effectively probably one of the most watched shows on BBC has effectively had the plug pulled for the sake of a 22mph crash that was probably nobody's fault, and a complete one off.

Has nobody ever been given a pay-out more than they deserve like?

The same as is every pay-out ever received what was actually deserved? When are we going to give the millions a payout for taking actual risk, which has led to actual loss of life?

What about paying out some of the publics money, probably more than required, to try and make something go away? That doesn't happen either does it?
 
Andy_W said:
I didn't pin the blame on him, I said he may or may not have been at some fault, none of us know the details.

But more importantly it doesn't seem to me like BBC would have expected to have to dish out £9m of taxpayers money to Flintoff for a 22mph crash, for a job which largely involves racing cars or doing daft things with cars in daft scenarios for entertainment. Then couple that with £5m to cancel the series.
Effectively probably one of the most watched shows on BBC has effectively had the plug pulled for the sake of a 22mph crash that was probably nobody's fault, and a complete one off.

Has nobody ever been given a pay-out more than they deserve like?

The same as is every pay-out ever received what was actually deserved? When are we going to give the millions a payout for taking actual risk, which has led to actual loss of life?

What about paying out some of the publics money, probably more than required, to try and make something go away? That doesn't happen either does it?
Click to expand...

Stop saying "tax payer's money". It isn't. You are either hard of thinking or trolling here.
 
One of my mates knows Fred quite well and I know some of the details as to what went on. I don’t understand why people are getting all mardy about his payout, I think the lad deserves it.
 
So he has an accident....he was wearing a helmet...he nearly died (according to his son) and looks like he's had half his face replaced. He's settled for a payment for loss of earnings (he doesn't just do Top Gear, he does a lot of other shows on other channels and has probably had to pull out of other projects as..bet he was nailed on to be a co-commentator somewhere for the Ashes), instead of suing where its been reported he would have got lots more. And its not licence payers money....and people are complaining. Its 2 year loss of earnings....which suggests he still has a long way to go to recover and payment towards his physical and mental health recovery. This has been agreed by both sides so I don't see the problem personally.
 
Legz said:
So he has an accident....he was wearing a helmet...he nearly died (according to his son) and looks like he's had half his face replaced. He's settled for a payment for loss of earnings (he doesn't just do Top Gear, he does a lot of other shows on other channels and has probably had to pull out of other projects as..bet he was nailed on to be a co-commentator somewhere for the Ashes), instead of suing where its been reported he would have got lots more. And its not licence payers money....and people are complaining. Its 2 year loss of earnings....which suggests he still has a long way to go to recover and payment towards his physical and mental health recovery. This has been agreed by both sides so I don't see the problem personally.
Click to expand...
Me too. Just picked up the end of the thread and can’t really work out what anyone is arguing about.
 
Legz said:
So he has an accident....he was wearing a helmet...he nearly died (according to his son) and looks like he's had half his face replaced. He's settled for a payment for loss of earnings (he doesn't just do Top Gear, he does a lot of other shows on other channels and has probably had to pull out of other projects as..bet he was nailed on to be a co-commentator somewhere for the Ashes), instead of suing where its been reported he would have got lots more. And its not licence payers money....and people are complaining. Its 2 year loss of earnings....which suggests he still has a long way to go to recover and payment towards his physical and mental health recovery. This has been agreed by both sides so I don't see the problem personally.
Click to expand...
I just can’t comprehend the few posters on here minimising what he has been through and even actually blaming him. Pretty poor behaviour really, hopefully they reflect upon it as it doesn’t speak well to their character.

His life has been changed, probably forever. Let’s try and show a bit of compassion and empathy.
 
Andy_W said:
Exactly, people are expected to risk their life for 25k (Nurses, Cops, Police, Firemen), with an actual risk of losing their life and that's all fine and dandy apparently, but when a celeb gets hurt in an isolated low risk incident, which may have been hard to foresee, then the world ends.

Like I said, it probably wasn't Freddie's fault (the accident), unless he did something he wasn't meant to or went against training etc, but there are no details of this, so would be wrong to assume either way.

But just because it wasn't Freddie's fault, does not mean for one second it was BBC's fault or Top gears fault. Sure, it may have been, but it doesn't mean it was.

The Health and Safety at work act actually requires employees to take their own measures also, it's not just the employer. The basics of it are:
  • Taking reasonable care of their own health and safety
  • Co-operating with their employer and following instructions
  • Not putting others in danger.
  • Report any hazards, illnesses or injuries
  • Don't interfere with safety equipment
  • Participate in any offered H&S training.
Then there are also many more additions to this when working in dangerous environments like construction, combat zones, diving, air ports, ports, train stations, racing, driving on test tracks etc.

Equally the payout means zero either, loads of people have been paid out for things which were largely their own fault, or been paid out because it's basically "simpler". Equally loads of people get paid out because they deserve it. Sometimes people get way more than the problem the injury causes, and sometimes it's absolutlely nowhere near.

Sometimes people get paid LOADS extra to take on minimal extra risk, sometimes people get 10 year pay cuts and get TOLD to take on extra risk.
Click to expand...
Everything you say is completely irrelevant. The fact he does other more dangerous stuff is irrelevant. If he had gone into the studio building and the lift shaft had been open and he had fallen and had the same injuries would you be saying he doesn't deserve compensation? How he got the injuries is irrelevant. He was at work and the incident happened and it was the fault of the employer. That's the only thing that is relevant. The value is the value because he gets paid well and he's not going to be getting paid because he's been injured.
 
Freddy Flintoff's compensation payout doesn't even deserve a footnote on an addendum to a comment on the list of 'things that are wrong with this country' it's completely irrelevant to anyone but BBC studios, their insurers, legal teams and the Flintoffs.
 
As stated above Andrew Flintoff could quite easily earn £4.5m a year, this accident means he could potentially lose future earnings and a settlement has been made that could quite easily equate to two years loss of earnings.

So if the logic of some is followed that the payout is too high, then for example a bin man who suffers life changing injuries whilst at work due to neglect by their employer should not receive compensation in excess of 2 years of their potential earnings (around £50-£60k)???
 
m3t4tr0n said:
Freddy Flintoff's compensation payout doesn't even deserve a footnote on an addendum to a comment on the list of 'things that are wrong with this country' it's completely irrelevant to anyone but BBC studios, their insurers, legal teams and the Flintoffs.
Click to expand...

In your opinion.
 
Pak_Doo_Ik said:
As stated above Andrew Flintoff could quite easily earn £4.5m a year, this accident means he could potentially lose future earnings and a settlement has been made that could quite easily equate to two years loss of earnings.

So if the logic of some is followed that the payout is too high, then for example a bin man who suffers life changing injuries whilst at work due to neglect by their employer should not receive compensation in excess of 2 years of their potential earnings (around £50-£60k)???
Click to expand...

His facial injuries stop him doing any of his work do they? Commentary? His cricket programme that incidentally he’s filming again?
 
Nano said:
Everything you say is completely irrelevant. The fact he does other more dangerous stuff is irrelevant. If he had gone into the studio building and the lift shaft had been open and he had fallen and had the same injuries would you be saying he doesn't deserve compensation? How he got the injuries is irrelevant. He was at work and the incident happened and it was the fault of the employer. That's the only thing that is relevant. The value is the value because he gets paid well and he's not going to be getting paid because he's been injured.
Click to expand...
It's not, pay is relevant to risk, ability and actions. Why do people get paid £100k to do a job in a high risk environment, when the same job pays £20k in a low risk environment? Because the payment (wage) is compensation for the risk (or crap working environment).

His job wasn't to jump down lift shafts, nobodies job is. If that was a job it would be £100m a year as nobody would last a year. His job was to drive cars at 0-200mph and review them etc, he was well aware of the risk which comes with that (top gear is a higher risk than almost any other presenters job), and normal day to day activities carry a higher risk than driving at 22mph in a road safe car without a helmet.

Not all injuries at work are the fault of the employer, H&S law does not work like that. If the employer has took reasonable controls for reasonable risks, then they are largely in the clear, no matter what the job is. I'm not saying they did or didn't do that here, as we don't know the details, but blanket statements don't work.

Had every presenter wore a helmet for every scene for the previous 30 years then top gear would not have existed for 29 of those years, and none of them would be getting paid a dime. You cannot control or predict all risks, and if you try and protect for risks which are minute then you effectively lose quality, value or performance, it has to be a balance. We get that balance wrong all the time in the uk, it's largely why every construction project costs 5x more than it needs to.

I've not said he doesn't deserve compensation, I just think the amount of compensation is way too high. It's too high as he's been paid off as BBC see paying out any figure as better than having this drawn out. The thing is it's not BBC's money to pay out, they don't care what they pay out, it's taxpayer money. His payment is probably around his career cricket earnings, for context.

To be honest I would rather that £9m compensation given to victims of crime or those forced to work at extreme risk for crap pay. You know, like when people get burgled or assaulted with a guy with a knife and they get a £120 "victim surcharge" or whatever. Strange how my nurse mate never gets compensation whenever she's bitten or whatever, which happens a few times a year. Strange how cops who regularly get punched or whatever get nothing. Strange how teachers forced to teach covid kids, got nothing. The only time most people do get compensation in their lives is through "whiplash" and most of those claims are bull****, yet they don't get it for things they actually deserve.
 
sherlock1969 said:
Ignoring the tv programme he’s now filming huh?
Click to expand...
I'm not ignoring anything, I have absolutely no idea what he is or isn't filming, I also have no idea on his legal advice, the terms of the settlement, the exact details of the incident or anything regarding what is an agreed settlement between a commercial organisation and one of its former employees or contractors. If he still gets some work, good luck to him ... I can think of a million things to get worked up about before even contemplating thinking about Freddie.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top