Manchester United likes to think of itself as one big family. Former players often talk about how one of the biggest clubs in the world managed to retain that familial feeling. It's something they trade on. Why else would they have released an entire mini-series in the summer of 2023 about the 'United family' and what it really means?
Go down to Old Trafford or Carrington now and ask staff there what they think of the United family, and you'll get a very different answer. It should be a long, long time before anyone associated with United tries to portray this as being a family club again. If it is, it's a soulless family with the joy long since ripped out of it.
Morale among the workforce at this football club could not be lower, and they now have a decision-maker in charge for who sweating the small stuff is a phrase that should have been invented. Sir Jim Ratcliffe would take that as a compliment, but the ruthless, brutal cost-cutting measures he is introducing will mostly succeed in turning this from a family club to a soulless one.
READ MORE: Bernardo Silva has made feelings clear as Man United reach 'verbal agreement' for £50m ace
READ MORE: Ruben Amorim has done something Erik ten Hag wanted to do at Manchester United but didn’t
Ratcliffe is trying to address the debt racked up during Glazer's 20-year reign and the five years of losses that have left United facing financial ruin. At least, they must be on the edge of oblivion if the situation is as grim as Ineos is making out.
Why else would you need to slash Christmas bonuses and turn the cash into Marks & Spencer vouchers? Why else end perks associated with the club's success for most staff? Why else end free lunches at OId Trafford? Why else tell Carrington staff they will now be restricted to soup and bread for their lunch? Why else make 200 staff redundant less than a year after 250 were axed in what was, at the time, sold as a one-off measure?
Are things so bad that barely six months after those staff departed, up to a quarter of the workforce will lose their jobs again? Is that the response every time Ratcliffe and his politburo of advisers get things wrong? Like the doomed decision to keep faith with Erik ten Hag, hire and then fire Dan Ashworth, and spend £218million on transfers for a manager that nobody expected to last very long.
We've messed up again, better fire some cooks and some cleaners. That is how it is looking at Manchester United at the moment. Why else would such a substantial round of redundancies be required so soon after the last ended? This is something that United can't explain, which is why the news was broken on club channels on Monday like it was a major milestone on the path to success.
"United announce transformation plan," screamed the headline on the club's official website, which is an interesting message for the staff at risk to be confronted with.
"Manchester United is to transform its corporate structure as part of a series of additional measures to improve the club’s financial sustainability and enhance operational efficiency," the intro breathlessly told us.
This is business jargon for sacking a load of people again, something we only actually get to in the third paragraph. The good news is that "This will create a more solid financial platform from which the club can invest in men’s and women’s football success and improved infrastructure."
Hopefully the investment will go better than it did last year. United estimated that round of redundancies would save £40million to £45million a year, which would suggest the average salary of the 250 staff made redundant was £180,000-a-year. That always seemed a stretch.
Even £1million savings per year are now being pushed through, which is what an end to free lunches would bring about. That wouldn't quite cover Casemiro's monthly wage and would pay for just over two centimetres of Antony. But in United's era of cost-cutting, every penny counts.
Some of these savings will be entirely worthwhile. There is method to some, such as ending the annual payments to David Gill and Sir Alex Ferguson. The workforce probably was bloated, even if it's difficult to believe this club was employing 450 people too many.
But what will really transform the balance sheets at Old Trafford are two things. The Glazers to pay off their debts and the people in charge of the football to make some good decisions.
Failing that, the rank and file will pay the price again.
Sir Jim Ratcliffe might be successful at Manchester United. But at what cost? For starters, at the cost of corny cliches about this being a family club ever getting an airing again.
