Richard Curran: 'Delaney exit package marks another own goal by the FAI'

John Delaney departed the FAI last Saturday. Photo: Gerry Mooney

Richard Curran

John Delaney's fate at the FAI was sealed on March 23 this year. 'His fate' in this instance doesn't refer to his departure from the football association, but the fact that he would leave with somewhere between €350,000 and €500,000, as reported this week.

It was the night Ireland beat Gibraltar 1-0 in a Euro qualifier. The FAI announced that Delaney had stepped down as chief executive.

However, he was to stay on as executive vice-president of the association.

The decision to keep him on was always going to be an expensive one.

This was a newly created role which carried a new remuneration package and, presumably, a new detailed contract of employment.

Like any contract, I am sure it would have included clauses about the circumstances in which Delaney could or could not be fired, and what his entitlements were in the event of his departure from the association.

So when the president and vice-president of the FAI sat down to negotiate his exit from the association in recent weeks, they were doing so with one hand tied behind their back.

Chairman of the Oireachtas committee on sport Fergus O'Dowd said he wanted to know if Santa had come to see Delaney.

I suspect Santa came every month to the FAI chief, as he enjoyed an annual pay packet of €360,000, plus €3,000 per month in rent payments.

But Santa truly came early in March 2019, when he was given a new job by the FAI despite stepping down as its chief executive.

So, even if the FAI directors wanted to fire him in recent months, it could only relate to any possible actions he took when he was chief executive - a different job which he no longer held.

Had Delaney done anything as executive vice-president, since he was appointed to the new role in March, which would have allowed them to sack him?

It would appear not, especially since he spent most of it on gardening leave.

Firing the former chief executive would most likely have triggered a legal action from Delaney, which probably could not have focused on anything he may or may not have done while in his previous position.

So, from March 23 of this year, Delaney was in a very strong position, even while on gardening leave.

The fundamental mistake made by the FAI was back in March in allowing that new job to go ahead, rather than dealing with any legacy issues that may have arisen from Delaney's tenure as chief executive.

The fact that the FAI negotiated Delaney's exit package before publication of the first of several reports into financial issues at the association is a huge disappointment. This was a real own goal.

The first of these reports, commissioned for Sport Ireland, was due to be published in the next week.

If it paints a very negative picture of the financial situation at the FAI during Delaney's reign, as many expect that it will, then it might have weakened the former CEO's negotiating hand.

But, in reality, his position and financial entitlements as executive vice-president are most likely written down in his contract of employment for the new job.

Could he really be fired from a new position, for failures or actions he may have taken in a previous role?

This was always going to be one for the lawyers if the FAI pushed that button.

The risks and the costs would have been very high.

We also have to bear in mind that as things stand, very little is publicly known about what went on inside the FAI during Delaney's tenure.

We know he gave a loan of €100,000 to his employers in 2017 and it was paid back.

We know details of this loan did not feature in the published annual report.

And the precise circumstances of the loan have not yet been revealed.

We know that other payments to connected parties have been called into question, and we know there has been a referral to the ODCE on the basis of a possible breach of the Companies Act by the FAI when it came to keeping proper books of account.

Equally, there has been a lot of anecdotal evidence about spending and expenses on Delaney's part, but we have yet to see precisely what happened.

The FAI may have had few options in negotiating an exit package with Delaney, but it should have published the details of the agreement.

It would have laid down a marker on the body's intentions about how the organisation will be run in the future.

The details of the financial settlement will most likely emerge in time, so why not disclose them now?

One document which would make for very interesting reading is Delaney's contract of employment as executive vice-president, negotiated in March of this year.

Internal correspondence around that appointment would be very revealing about the workings of the organisation and how it has been run.

It all points to a situation where Delaney had a better hand to play (in the form of his undisclosed contract of employment for the new role) than many realise.

The bigger questions remain about what this latest chapter says about the corporate governance and culture challenges that exist in the football organisation.

Despite the setback of the undisclosed exit package, there has been some progress made.

The association should now be under no illusions about how serious its challenges are after the Delaney years.

It has a roadmap for improving corporate governance structures, which will now finally include four independent directors on the board.

The biggest challenges that lie ahead relate to its finances, appointment of a new chief executive and its culture.

The financial situation is not pretty.

It has around €29m of debt which will have to be refinanced.

It has to rebuild confidence of stakeholders, including the Government, to secure State funding.

It also has to convince its financial backers and Uefa that it is ready to be lent more money, as existing debts fall due.

The role of Uefa is particularly interesting. There is speculation that the European soccer body is going to lend it around €20m.

This would be an important financial shot in the arm but at what cost to the independence of Irish soccer?

It won't be hard to find a new chief executive. It will be difficult to find the best chief executive for the role.

This will only happen if that person is convinced that the right governance systems are in place, and they will be given the freedom and backing to implement their own change agenda.

Finally, there is the question of the culture at the top table of the organisation.

The culture comes from the top. The lack of transparency surrounding Delaney's exit package seems to say the culture has not changed enough.