|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
ringfinger
Retired Number
Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418
|
 Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2019 9:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
| governator wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | | governator wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | He didn’t short change the caddie. The amount was agreed to prior and Kuchar paid him in excess of that.
Now maybe some folks think the caddie should have been given more but that is different than short changing him. |
Not shortchanged, what's the word for poor faith negotiation? |
Poor faith? I mean, it appears that they had a good faith negotiation. He paid above what he was legally required to pay as a result of that negotiation. If anything that is good faith negotiation on the part of Kuchar.
The fill-in caddie isn't claiming violation of contract here, is he? I haven't seen that. If so, that would be short changing. It sounds like he is saying he wants to be paid what HE thinks is fair even though he never agreed to it. Would love it if I could do that after negotiating a job offer.
Also, Kuchar offered him $20K and he refused it. So I'm not sure who the arbiter of what is fair for a fill-in caddie is, but, Kuchar has every legal right to pay him at least the $4K they agreed to and nothing more. Now if they agreed to $50K, or $130K or whatever, then yeah, he needs to pony up.
The caddie should accept his poor decision, and learn for next time to get this stuff in writing and make sure your terms are clear. Negotiating after the fact is poor faith negotiating. |
negotiating well below market value is poor faith, no? |
What is market value and who determines it? The guy was a fill-in caddie. He did not (and to be fair to him, could not) perform the same duties as a golfer's regular caddie.
There is no law or contract that was broken here. It was an agreement between two grown men. If you are a grown adult, have all of the physical and mental faculties available to you, and you negotiate a bad deal for yourself, you have no one else to blame.
If you offer to sell a car worth $50K for $20K and find out AFTER the fact you negotiated yourself below market value -- did the buyer act in poor faith?! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
adkindo
Retired Number
Joined: 16 Jun 2005
Posts: 40345
Location: Dirty South
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2019 9:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
I find it irritating the statement Kuchar made about $5,000 "being a good sum of money for a week of work". It just comes off as "it is a good sum for you common folk", because I guarantee you that Kuchar would not have a smile on his face if he only made $5k that week. $5 Thousand is a good sum of money for a weeks work, but that has nothing to do with the issue....and it is not up to Kuchar to decide what is a good sum of money for another person. You win $1.3 Million in a 4 day golf event....you pay your caddie more than $5k....you tip the valet's a little more, you give the waitress at the lounge very good tip, and you take care of the staff at the hotel that hosted you and your family that week.....and you walk away with $1,175,000+. Take care of those that took care of you those 4 days....it can all be written off as a tax deduction.
It is similar when guys like Lebron or Kobe say that players shouldn't be effected by trade talks....when they have never heard and know they never will hear their name in a trade rumor. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ringfinger
Retired Number
Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2019 9:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
| adkindo wrote: | I find it irritating the statement Kuchar made about $5,000 "being a good sum of money for a week of work". It just comes off as "it is a good sum for you common folk", because I guarantee you that Kuchar would not have a smile on his face if he only made $5k that week. $5 Thousand is a good sum of money for a weeks work, but that has nothing to do with the issue....and it is not up to Kuchar to decide what is a good sum of money for another person. You win $1.3 Million in a 4 day golf event....you pay your caddie more than $5k....you tip the valet's a little more, you give the waitress at the lounge very good tip, and you take care of the staff at the hotel that hosted you and your family that week.....and you walk away with $1,175,000+. Take care of those that took care of you those 4 days....it can all be written off as a tax deduction.
It is similar when guys like Lebron or Kobe say that players shouldn't be effected by trade talks....when they have never heard and know they never will hear their name in a trade rumor. |
That's something you do to go the extra mile. That isn't what you are legally required to do -- he has every right not to do that if he wishes.
Plus, he already offered the caddie $20K and the caddie refused it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LongBeachPoly
Franchise Player
Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 16157
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2019 10:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ringfinger wrote: | He didn’t short change the caddie. The amount was agreed to prior and Kuchar paid him in excess of that.
Now maybe some folks think the caddie should have been given more but that is different than short changing him. |
It was an oral agreement. According to Kuchar, the deal was what he said. According to the caddie, the deal was $3k flat fee plus bonus if he wins.
They never negotiated the bonus. Bonus is some kind of industry standard. Kuchar decided the bonus should be: 0.15% |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
adkindo
Retired Number
Joined: 16 Jun 2005
Posts: 40345
Location: Dirty South
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2019 10:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
ringfinger cold  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ringfinger
Retired Number
Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2019 10:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| LongBeachPoly wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | He didn’t short change the caddie. The amount was agreed to prior and Kuchar paid him in excess of that.
Now maybe some folks think the caddie should have been given more but that is different than short changing him. |
It was an oral agreement. According to Kuchar, the deal was what he said. According to the caddie, the deal was $3k flat fee plus bonus if he wins.
They never negotiated the bonus. Bonus is some kind of industry standard. Kuchar decided the bonus should be: 0.15% |
Yup. If the caddy was expecting a specific percentage, that should have been negotiated and put in writing if he wasn't willing to accept anything short of a specific dollar amount. I mean, he didn't leave the non-bonus details to Kuchar, right? He negotiated a specific amount, why not just leave it all to fate as well?
And actually, Kuchar offered 1.5% (not 0.15%). But the caddie didn't want that either as he wanted 3.8% so he refused 1.5% and took 0.38% instead. Not smart. Hopefully he learned from this error. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ringfinger
Retired Number
Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2019 10:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
| adkindo wrote: | | ringfinger cold |
Haha what do you want from me? He offered his caddie $20,000 to do a fraction of what a regular Tour caddie would do and the same guy, who is legally owed nothing above the $4K they agreed to, chose $5,000 instead. I mean, just a bad decision.
But it's ok, we learn from bad decisions. Can't put everyone in a bubble. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LongBeachPoly
Franchise Player
Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 16157
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2019 10:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ringfinger wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | He didn’t short change the caddie. The amount was agreed to prior and Kuchar paid him in excess of that.
Now maybe some folks think the caddie should have been given more but that is different than short changing him. |
It was an oral agreement. According to Kuchar, the deal was what he said. According to the caddie, the deal was $3k flat fee plus bonus if he wins.
They never negotiated the bonus. Bonus is some kind of industry standard. Kuchar decided the bonus should be: 0.15% |
Yup. If the caddy was expecting a specific percentage, that should have been negotiated and put in writing if he wasn't willing to accept anything short of a specific dollar amount. I mean, he didn't leave the non-bonus details to Kuchar, right? He negotiated a specific amount, why not just leave it all to fate as well?
And actually, Kuchar offered 1.5% (not 0.15%). But the caddie didn't want that either as he wanted 3.8% so he refused 1.5% and took 0.38% instead. Not smart. Hopefully he learned from this error. |
Kuchar didn't offer 1.5%. He even said so. He said his agent offered that as damage control, not him. When they asked who would be paying it, he said well, not his agent.
But Kuchar feels that 0.15% is more than fair. He's said so himself.
Now your point about getting it in writing - does any caddy get it in writing? It seems like these are handshake deals. I mean, if you think about it, shouldn't Kuchar have gotten it in writing as well?
Also, another point - if the bonus was up to Kuchar, would it have been ok for Kuchar to give him $0 bonus at all? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2019 10:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ringfinger wrote: | Haha what do you want from me? He offered his caddie $20,000 to do a fraction of what a regular Tour caddie would do and the same guy, who is legally owed nothing above the $4K they agreed to, chose $5,000 instead. I mean, just a bad decision.
But it's ok, we learn from bad decisions. Can't put everyone in a bubble. |
If he offered the caddie $20k, and the caddie said no, then this story should be over. What's left is people trying to shame Kuchar into giving the caddie a big tip. If the guy was not Kuchar's regular caddie, and if he did not have an agreement that he would get paid 10%, and if Kuchar paid him what he said he was going to pay, then what is this all about? Tip shaming? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
governator
Retired Number
Joined: 28 Jan 2006
Posts: 25092
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2019 10:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | Haha what do you want from me? He offered his caddie $20,000 to do a fraction of what a regular Tour caddie would do and the same guy, who is legally owed nothing above the $4K they agreed to, chose $5,000 instead. I mean, just a bad decision.
But it's ok, we learn from bad decisions. Can't put everyone in a bubble. |
If he offered the caddie $20k, and the caddie said no, then this story should be over. What's left is people trying to shame Kuchar into giving the caddie a big tip. If the guy was not Kuchar's regular caddie, and if he did not have an agreement that he would get paid 10%, and if Kuchar paid him what he said he was going to pay, then what is this all about? Tip shaming? |
I guess it is tip shaming. Do regular caddie gets written agreement or is it just 'customary' to give 8%-10%? Is there a different 'tip % customary' for substitute caddie? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LongBeachPoly
Franchise Player
Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 16157
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2019 10:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | Haha what do you want from me? He offered his caddie $20,000 to do a fraction of what a regular Tour caddie would do and the same guy, who is legally owed nothing above the $4K they agreed to, chose $5,000 instead. I mean, just a bad decision.
But it's ok, we learn from bad decisions. Can't put everyone in a bubble. |
If he offered the caddie $20k, and the caddie said no, then this story should be over. What's left is people trying to shame Kuchar into giving the caddie a big tip. If the guy was not Kuchar's regular caddie, and if he did not have an agreement that he would get paid 10%, and if Kuchar paid him what he said he was going to pay, then what is this all about? Tip shaming? |
Is it really a tip though? The day after they won, even the newspapers thought the caddie was going to get $130k.
I mean, is it really up to the golfer to decide whether he wants to tip or not? If Kuchar's not the only one that shortchanges his caddie like that, I can understand.
I mean, somehow he came up with 0.15%. That's what he came up with. Somehow, he figured in his head that was enough. I don't know how he came about that figure, but that's the figure he worked out to what's fair.
And that extra $15k, that wasn't from Kuchar. He admitted it wasn't from him. The caddie emailed his agent 3 times. The agent wanted it to go away so he offered $15k. Kuchar said it wasn't his idea. He thought $5k was more than fair. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LongBeachPoly
Franchise Player
Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 16157
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2019 10:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
| governator wrote: | | Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | Haha what do you want from me? He offered his caddie $20,000 to do a fraction of what a regular Tour caddie would do and the same guy, who is legally owed nothing above the $4K they agreed to, chose $5,000 instead. I mean, just a bad decision.
But it's ok, we learn from bad decisions. Can't put everyone in a bubble. |
If he offered the caddie $20k, and the caddie said no, then this story should be over. What's left is people trying to shame Kuchar into giving the caddie a big tip. If the guy was not Kuchar's regular caddie, and if he did not have an agreement that he would get paid 10%, and if Kuchar paid him what he said he was going to pay, then what is this all about? Tip shaming? |
I guess it is tip shaming. Do regular caddie gets written agreement or is it just 'customary' to give 8%-10%? Is there a different 'tip % customary' for substitute caddie? |
Yup, that's the real question. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ringfinger
Retired Number
Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2019 11:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
| LongBeachPoly wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | He didn’t short change the caddie. The amount was agreed to prior and Kuchar paid him in excess of that.
Now maybe some folks think the caddie should have been given more but that is different than short changing him. |
It was an oral agreement. According to Kuchar, the deal was what he said. According to the caddie, the deal was $3k flat fee plus bonus if he wins.
They never negotiated the bonus. Bonus is some kind of industry standard. Kuchar decided the bonus should be: 0.15% |
Yup. If the caddy was expecting a specific percentage, that should have been negotiated and put in writing if he wasn't willing to accept anything short of a specific dollar amount. I mean, he didn't leave the non-bonus details to Kuchar, right? He negotiated a specific amount, why not just leave it all to fate as well?
And actually, Kuchar offered 1.5% (not 0.15%). But the caddie didn't want that either as he wanted 3.8% so he refused 1.5% and took 0.38% instead. Not smart. Hopefully he learned from this error. |
Kuchar didn't offer 1.5%. He even said so. He said his agent offered that as damage control, not him. When they asked who would be paying it, he said well, not his agent.
But Kuchar feels that 0.15% is more than fair. He's said so himself.
Now your point about getting it in writing - does any caddy get it in writing? It seems like these are handshake deals. I mean, if you think about it, shouldn't Kuchar have gotten it in writing as well?
Also, another point - if the bonus was up to Kuchar, would it have been ok for Kuchar to give him $0 bonus at all? |
Wrong yet again.
| Quote: | | Kuchar confirmed to GolfChannel.com that he and Ortiz, his fill-in caddie that week in Mexico, originally agreed to a $3,000 fee for the week with a bonus amount that could up that total to $4,000. After the win, Kuchar confirmed he paid Ortiz $5,000 and also offered him an additional $15,000, which the caddie turned down. |
http://www.espn.com/golf/story/_/id/25992336/make-everybody-happy |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LongBeachPoly
Franchise Player
Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 16157
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2019 11:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ringfinger wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | He didn’t short change the caddie. The amount was agreed to prior and Kuchar paid him in excess of that.
Now maybe some folks think the caddie should have been given more but that is different than short changing him. |
It was an oral agreement. According to Kuchar, the deal was what he said. According to the caddie, the deal was $3k flat fee plus bonus if he wins.
They never negotiated the bonus. Bonus is some kind of industry standard. Kuchar decided the bonus should be: 0.15% |
Yup. If the caddy was expecting a specific percentage, that should have been negotiated and put in writing if he wasn't willing to accept anything short of a specific dollar amount. I mean, he didn't leave the non-bonus details to Kuchar, right? He negotiated a specific amount, why not just leave it all to fate as well?
And actually, Kuchar offered 1.5% (not 0.15%). But the caddie didn't want that either as he wanted 3.8% so he refused 1.5% and took 0.38% instead. Not smart. Hopefully he learned from this error. |
Kuchar didn't offer 1.5%. He even said so. He said his agent offered that as damage control, not him. When they asked who would be paying it, he said well, not his agent.
But Kuchar feels that 0.15% is more than fair. He's said so himself.
Now your point about getting it in writing - does any caddy get it in writing? It seems like these are handshake deals. I mean, if you think about it, shouldn't Kuchar have gotten it in writing as well?
Also, another point - if the bonus was up to Kuchar, would it have been ok for Kuchar to give him $0 bonus at all? |
Wrong yet again.
| Quote: | | Kuchar confirmed to GolfChannel.com that he and Ortiz, his fill-in caddie that week in Mexico, originally agreed to a $3,000 fee for the week with a bonus amount that could up that total to $4,000. After the win, Kuchar confirmed he paid Ortiz $5,000 and also offered him an additional $15,000, which the caddie turned down. |
http://www.espn.com/golf/story/_/id/25992336/make-everybody-happy |
| Quote: | Kuchar seemed slightly embarrassed that the additional sum had been offered, as he felt his financial obligation to Ortiz was complete. Asked how it came to be that the additional sum was offered, Kuchar said, “That was the agency.” He was referring to Excel Sports Management, which represents him. Kuchar’s agent there is Mark Steinberg, who also represents Tiger Woods and Justin Rose.
Kuchar was asked who would actually pay the money.
Kuchar smiled and said, “It’s not coming out of Steinberg’s pocket.” In other words, Kuchar would be paying. He said the additional proffered payment was Steinberg’s effort at damage control.
https://www.golf.com/news/2019/02/14/matt-kuchar-caddie-pay-controversy/ |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ringfinger
Retired Number
Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2019 12:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LongBeachPoly wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | He didn’t short change the caddie. The amount was agreed to prior and Kuchar paid him in excess of that.
Now maybe some folks think the caddie should have been given more but that is different than short changing him. |
It was an oral agreement. According to Kuchar, the deal was what he said. According to the caddie, the deal was $3k flat fee plus bonus if he wins.
They never negotiated the bonus. Bonus is some kind of industry standard. Kuchar decided the bonus should be: 0.15% |
Yup. If the caddy was expecting a specific percentage, that should have been negotiated and put in writing if he wasn't willing to accept anything short of a specific dollar amount. I mean, he didn't leave the non-bonus details to Kuchar, right? He negotiated a specific amount, why not just leave it all to fate as well?
And actually, Kuchar offered 1.5% (not 0.15%). But the caddie didn't want that either as he wanted 3.8% so he refused 1.5% and took 0.38% instead. Not smart. Hopefully he learned from this error. |
Kuchar didn't offer 1.5%. He even said so. He said his agent offered that as damage control, not him. When they asked who would be paying it, he said well, not his agent.
But Kuchar feels that 0.15% is more than fair. He's said so himself.
Now your point about getting it in writing - does any caddy get it in writing? It seems like these are handshake deals. I mean, if you think about it, shouldn't Kuchar have gotten it in writing as well?
Also, another point - if the bonus was up to Kuchar, would it have been ok for Kuchar to give him $0 bonus at all? |
Wrong yet again.
| Quote: | | Kuchar confirmed to GolfChannel.com that he and Ortiz, his fill-in caddie that week in Mexico, originally agreed to a $3,000 fee for the week with a bonus amount that could up that total to $4,000. After the win, Kuchar confirmed he paid Ortiz $5,000 and also offered him an additional $15,000, which the caddie turned down. |
http://www.espn.com/golf/story/_/id/25992336/make-everybody-happy |
| Quote: | Kuchar seemed slightly embarrassed that the additional sum had been offered, as he felt his financial obligation to Ortiz was complete. Asked how it came to be that the additional sum was offered, Kuchar said, “That was the agency.” He was referring to Excel Sports Management, which represents him. Kuchar’s agent there is Mark Steinberg, who also represents Tiger Woods and Justin Rose.
Kuchar was asked who would actually pay the money.
Kuchar smiled and said, “It’s not coming out of Steinberg’s pocket.” In other words, Kuchar would be paying. He said the additional proffered payment was Steinberg’s effort at damage control.
https://www.golf.com/news/2019/02/14/matt-kuchar-caddie-pay-controversy/ |
|
?
It was the agent's idea and Kuchar agreed to pay the man $20K. Dude, can you stop already?! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LongBeachPoly
Franchise Player
Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 16157
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2019 12:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ringfinger wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | He didn’t short change the caddie. The amount was agreed to prior and Kuchar paid him in excess of that.
Now maybe some folks think the caddie should have been given more but that is different than short changing him. |
It was an oral agreement. According to Kuchar, the deal was what he said. According to the caddie, the deal was $3k flat fee plus bonus if he wins.
They never negotiated the bonus. Bonus is some kind of industry standard. Kuchar decided the bonus should be: 0.15% |
Yup. If the caddy was expecting a specific percentage, that should have been negotiated and put in writing if he wasn't willing to accept anything short of a specific dollar amount. I mean, he didn't leave the non-bonus details to Kuchar, right? He negotiated a specific amount, why not just leave it all to fate as well?
And actually, Kuchar offered 1.5% (not 0.15%). But the caddie didn't want that either as he wanted 3.8% so he refused 1.5% and took 0.38% instead. Not smart. Hopefully he learned from this error. |
Kuchar didn't offer 1.5%. He even said so. He said his agent offered that as damage control, not him. When they asked who would be paying it, he said well, not his agent.
But Kuchar feels that 0.15% is more than fair. He's said so himself.
Now your point about getting it in writing - does any caddy get it in writing? It seems like these are handshake deals. I mean, if you think about it, shouldn't Kuchar have gotten it in writing as well?
Also, another point - if the bonus was up to Kuchar, would it have been ok for Kuchar to give him $0 bonus at all? |
Wrong yet again.
| Quote: | | Kuchar confirmed to GolfChannel.com that he and Ortiz, his fill-in caddie that week in Mexico, originally agreed to a $3,000 fee for the week with a bonus amount that could up that total to $4,000. After the win, Kuchar confirmed he paid Ortiz $5,000 and also offered him an additional $15,000, which the caddie turned down. |
http://www.espn.com/golf/story/_/id/25992336/make-everybody-happy |
| Quote: | Kuchar seemed slightly embarrassed that the additional sum had been offered, as he felt his financial obligation to Ortiz was complete. Asked how it came to be that the additional sum was offered, Kuchar said, “That was the agency.” He was referring to Excel Sports Management, which represents him. Kuchar’s agent there is Mark Steinberg, who also represents Tiger Woods and Justin Rose.
Kuchar was asked who would actually pay the money.
Kuchar smiled and said, “It’s not coming out of Steinberg’s pocket.” In other words, Kuchar would be paying. He said the additional proffered payment was Steinberg’s effort at damage control.
https://www.golf.com/news/2019/02/14/matt-kuchar-caddie-pay-controversy/ |
|
?
It was the agent's idea and Kuchar agreed to pay the man $20K. Dude, can you stop already?! |
Wait, so I say this:
| Quote: | | Kuchar didn't offer 1.5%. He even said so. He said his agent offered that as damage control, not him. When they asked who would be paying it, he said well, not his agent. |
You told me I'm wrong again.
I provide the EXACT source of where I got it from:
| Quote: | Kuchar seemed slightly embarrassed that the additional sum had been offered, as he felt his financial obligation to Ortiz was complete. Asked how it came to be that the additional sum was offered, Kuchar said, “That was the agency.” He was referring to Excel Sports Management, which represents him. Kuchar’s agent there is Mark Steinberg, who also represents Tiger Woods and Justin Rose.
Kuchar was asked who would actually pay the money.
Kuchar smiled and said, “It’s not coming out of Steinberg’s pocket.” In other words, Kuchar would be paying. He said the additional proffered payment was Steinberg’s effort at damage control. |
What is your actual issue today dude? Is it disgreement day or something? You disagreed with a statement that I got off an article and I provided the article. What's your issue? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Omar Little
Moderator
Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 90307
Location: Formerly Known As 24
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2019 12:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
There is a difference between a legal and a moral obligation. If you win the tournament with your fill in caddy, and it doesn't immediately occur to you to give him a hell of a bonus, you're an ahole.
_________________
“We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Omar Little
Moderator
Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 90307
Location: Formerly Known As 24
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2019 12:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LongBeachPoly wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | He didn’t short change the caddie. The amount was agreed to prior and Kuchar paid him in excess of that.
Now maybe some folks think the caddie should have been given more but that is different than short changing him. |
It was an oral agreement. According to Kuchar, the deal was what he said. According to the caddie, the deal was $3k flat fee plus bonus if he wins.
They never negotiated the bonus. Bonus is some kind of industry standard. Kuchar decided the bonus should be: 0.15% |
Yup. If the caddy was expecting a specific percentage, that should have been negotiated and put in writing if he wasn't willing to accept anything short of a specific dollar amount. I mean, he didn't leave the non-bonus details to Kuchar, right? He negotiated a specific amount, why not just leave it all to fate as well?
And actually, Kuchar offered 1.5% (not 0.15%). But the caddie didn't want that either as he wanted 3.8% so he refused 1.5% and took 0.38% instead. Not smart. Hopefully he learned from this error. |
Kuchar didn't offer 1.5%. He even said so. He said his agent offered that as damage control, not him. When they asked who would be paying it, he said well, not his agent.
But Kuchar feels that 0.15% is more than fair. He's said so himself.
Now your point about getting it in writing - does any caddy get it in writing? It seems like these are handshake deals. I mean, if you think about it, shouldn't Kuchar have gotten it in writing as well?
Also, another point - if the bonus was up to Kuchar, would it have been ok for Kuchar to give him $0 bonus at all? |
Wrong yet again.
| Quote: | | Kuchar confirmed to GolfChannel.com that he and Ortiz, his fill-in caddie that week in Mexico, originally agreed to a $3,000 fee for the week with a bonus amount that could up that total to $4,000. After the win, Kuchar confirmed he paid Ortiz $5,000 and also offered him an additional $15,000, which the caddie turned down. |
http://www.espn.com/golf/story/_/id/25992336/make-everybody-happy |
| Quote: | Kuchar seemed slightly embarrassed that the additional sum had been offered, as he felt his financial obligation to Ortiz was complete. Asked how it came to be that the additional sum was offered, Kuchar said, “That was the agency.” He was referring to Excel Sports Management, which represents him. Kuchar’s agent there is Mark Steinberg, who also represents Tiger Woods and Justin Rose.
Kuchar was asked who would actually pay the money.
Kuchar smiled and said, “It’s not coming out of Steinberg’s pocket.” In other words, Kuchar would be paying. He said the additional proffered payment was Steinberg’s effort at damage control.
https://www.golf.com/news/2019/02/14/matt-kuchar-caddie-pay-controversy/ |
|
?
It was the agent's idea and Kuchar agreed to pay the man $20K. Dude, can you stop already?! |
Wait, so I say this:
| Quote: | | Kuchar didn't offer 1.5%. He even said so. He said his agent offered that as damage control, not him. When they asked who would be paying it, he said well, not his agent. |
You told me I'm wrong again.
I provide the EXACT source of where I got it from:
| Quote: | Kuchar seemed slightly embarrassed that the additional sum had been offered, as he felt his financial obligation to Ortiz was complete. Asked how it came to be that the additional sum was offered, Kuchar said, “That was the agency.” He was referring to Excel Sports Management, which represents him. Kuchar’s agent there is Mark Steinberg, who also represents Tiger Woods and Justin Rose.
Kuchar was asked who would actually pay the money.
Kuchar smiled and said, “It’s not coming out of Steinberg’s pocket.” In other words, Kuchar would be paying. He said the additional proffered payment was Steinberg’s effort at damage control. |
What is your actual issue today dude? Is it disgreement day or something? You disagreed with a statement that I got off an article and I provided the article. What's your issue? |
Protip: the guy who shows up defending every jackhole behaving badly doesn't have an issue so much as a mission.
_________________
“We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ringfinger
Retired Number
Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2019 1:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Omar Little wrote: | | There is a difference between a legal and a moral obligation. If you win the tournament with your fill in caddy, and it doesn't immediately occur to you to give him a hell of a bonus, you're an ahole. |
It's a tip. If you're going to require someone to pay it, then it isn't a tip, it is agreed to compensation.
I do agree it would have been nice for Kuchar to give much more than what he initially offered, but that doesn't mean I think he should be villified for it, and certainly not after he upped it to $20,000. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2019 2:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LongBeachPoly wrote: | Is it really a tip though? The day after they won, even the newspapers thought the caddie was going to get $130k.
I mean, is it really up to the golfer to decide whether he wants to tip or not? If Kuchar's not the only one that shortchanges his caddie like that, I can understand. |
If it is something more than the agreed-upon payment, then yes, it's a tip. I've heard before that 10% is the customary share for the caddie, but I expect you would find that golfers have all sorts of different arrangements with their regular caddies. Most if not all of them will have talked through what the caddie gets paid under different circumstances. That sort of payment would be a bonus, not a tip, because it is agreed upon. Here, the caddie did not have any sort of arrangement other than $4k. Anything above that would be a tip (or, if you prefer, a gratuity).
Anyway, for me, the fact that Kuchar offered $20k ends the story. As best I can tell, the caddie wanted $50k and went to the media. If people want to tip-shame Kuchar, that's fine. $20k is an awful lot of money for a few days of caddying for someone you don't know and don't work with on a regular basis. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LongBeachPoly
Franchise Player
Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 16157
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2019 2:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: | Is it really a tip though? The day after they won, even the newspapers thought the caddie was going to get $130k.
I mean, is it really up to the golfer to decide whether he wants to tip or not? If Kuchar's not the only one that shortchanges his caddie like that, I can understand. |
If it is something more than the agreed-upon payment, then yes, it's a tip. I've heard before that 10% is the customary share for the caddie, but I expect you would find that golfers have all sorts of different arrangements with their regular caddies. Most if not all of them will have talked through what the caddie gets paid under different circumstances. That sort of payment would be a bonus, not a tip, because it is agreed upon. Here, the caddie did not have any sort of arrangement other than $4k. Anything above that would be a tip (or, if you prefer, a gratuity).
Anyway, for me, the fact that Kuchar offered $20k ends the story. As best I can tell, the caddie wanted $50k and went to the media. If people want to tip-shame Kuchar, that's fine. $20k is an awful lot of money for a few days of caddying for someone you don't know and don't work with on a regular basis. |
Yeah, if it's actually treated like an optional tip, then he did nothing wrong. But it's not treated that way.
This doesn't seem to be optional. Kuchar would be crucified right now if he "chose" to not tip him anything. It doesn't seem to be optional like you put it.
Just like tipping when you go eat. Is it really optional? Doesn't feel that way. It does feel pretty mandatory.
Anyone here willing to admit that they don't tip when they go out to eat?
One of the things Kuchar said was that he wasn't trying to get away with anything. As if this is commonplace to tip that low. But the reaction seems to be that it's not really that common.
Also, the fee arrangement that they both agreed to is $3k. The bonus part - there's disagreement. Kuchar feels he owed $4k for a top 10 finish, caddie says there's no such agreement for a top 10 finish. Caddie just says $3k flat fee plus bonus for winnings.
Not sure how this can get mixed up so bad.
But if things really were that clear, wouldn't he have said something when he handed him the envelope? Something like, "I know we agreed on $4k, but I threw in an extra $1k cuz it was a great week."
Something like that. And why did he pay him cash? That makes no sense. He's going to get taxed on the full amount. Why pay cash?
Wouldn't you want to pay by check so that you can deduct it from the winnings? If his regular caddie would have been there, would he have scrounged up a bunch of $20s, $10s, and $5s to make $130k?
I think he paid cash because he didn't want any paper trail. It doesn't make sense to pay cash when you need it for a tax deduction.
Also, if you feel you're not trying to get away with something, how do you go from offering $1k to offering $15k more? That makes no sense if all you really owe him is $1k.
Why would his agent put him in a bad light? His agent works with other golfers. He knows what the standard is. If Kuchar was within the standard ($1k tip to local caddies) then why offer $15k more?
Shouldn't other golfers come out to back him up? This affects all pro golfers. If the standard is actually $3-4k a week for a local caddie, then the price just jumped astronomically. Other golfers should be speaking out - no, that is the fair price. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vanexelent
Retired Number
Joined: 17 May 2005
Posts: 30081
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2019 3:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LakerLanny wrote: | Not a good look at all for Kuchar.
Just pay the guy the regular 10%, who cares? |
The regular 10% is for guys who pay their own way to travel with the golfers, not a local person who just did it for the week.
Granted his payout wasn't enough.
In a previous work life I was around PGA golfers at a handful of tournaments. Kuchar was by far the nicest guy to everyone. He was engaging and legit took time to chat with people and ask where they were from and what their background was. I'm sure he'll end up doing the right thing and throw some cash this guys way. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ChickenStu
Retired Number
Joined: 25 Apr 2015
Posts: 31921
Location: Anaheim, CA
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2019 5:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
^
And he's apparently cheap. And that isn't a good look. If Kuchar becomes known as a cheapskate because of this, well, good. He deserves it. Again, like Omar says, this isn't a question of him breaking the law or anything. It's about what kind of a person you are. I have no issue with a replacement caddie getting less than 10%. I have no issue with a set amount being agreed to beforehand, up to a point. But if you win the event or finish near the top and get a gigantic check, I'm sorry, I'm giving the dude at least 5%. That's just what I believe in and how I was raised. We took a family vacation to Jamaica when I was 17 and it was an all-inclusive deal. The company specifically told us not to tip the wait staff at their eateries. Well, my dad found out that the workers there made about $5 a day. He proceeded to tip them every time we went out to eat. He just felt it was the right thing to do. I just think that this falls under that category. There's a right way to treat people and a wrong way to treat people. I think it reflects terribly poorly on him that he thinks it's perfectly reasonable to give a guy 5K on a 1.3MM win. That's what the issue here is. It's not like I'm advocating that he goes to jail. But he's a cheapskate.
The very fact that his agent is attempting damage control tells you all you need to know. IT LOOKS BAD, and there's a reason for that. And it wasn't Kuchar's idea to even give him an extra 15K, it was the agent's. He is apparently oblivious to the fact that it looks bad that he gave the caddie less than one half of one percent of his winnings. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vanexelent
Retired Number
Joined: 17 May 2005
Posts: 30081
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2019 9:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ChickenStu wrote: | | ^ I have no issue with a replacement caddie getting less than 10%. I have no issue with a set amount being agreed to beforehand, up to a point. But if you win the event or finish near the top and get a gigantic check, I'm sorry, I'm giving the dude at least 5%. That's just what I believe in and how I was raised. We took a family vacation to Jamaica when I was 17 and it was an all-inclusive deal. The company specifically told us not to tip the wait staff at their eateries. Well, my dad found out that the workers there made about $5 a day. He proceeded to tip them every time we went out to eat. He just felt it was the right thing to do. I just think that this falls under that category. There's a right way to treat people and a wrong way to treat people. |
But how do you feel about American wait staff or retail staff? Do you think they make the appropriate amount or do you feel the need to tip them more? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ChickenStu
Retired Number
Joined: 25 Apr 2015
Posts: 31921
Location: Anaheim, CA
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2019 9:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| vanexelent wrote: | | ChickenStu wrote: | | ^ I have no issue with a replacement caddie getting less than 10%. I have no issue with a set amount being agreed to beforehand, up to a point. But if you win the event or finish near the top and get a gigantic check, I'm sorry, I'm giving the dude at least 5%. That's just what I believe in and how I was raised. We took a family vacation to Jamaica when I was 17 and it was an all-inclusive deal. The company specifically told us not to tip the wait staff at their eateries. Well, my dad found out that the workers there made about $5 a day. He proceeded to tip them every time we went out to eat. He just felt it was the right thing to do. I just think that this falls under that category. There's a right way to treat people and a wrong way to treat people. |
But how do you feel about American wait staff or retail staff? Do you think they make the appropriate amount or do you feel the need to tip them more? |
Personally, I tip pretty generously to my waiter or waitress whenever I go to a restaurant, with the lone caveat being if they gave me truly terrible service, for some reason. That's happened maybe two times in my entire life. Otherwise, I'm basically a 20% guy, sometimes even higher. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
