Manchester United have cut 322 jobs in two years under co-owner Sir Jim Ratcliffe, reducing the workforce by almost 29 per cent, as the billionaire defends a cost-cutting programme that has made him deeply unpopular with many supporters and staff.
United's latest accounts show employee numbers fell from 1,127 to 805 in the two years to June 2026. Ratcliffe, who bought a 27.7 per cent stake for about £1.25 billion in 2024 and took control of football operations through his Ineos group, has argued the club was financially bloated and losing money, and that painful decisions were needed to restore it.
The restructuring went well beyond headcount. Earlier rounds of redundancies were accompanied by measures that became symbols of the new austerity, including closing the staff canteen, ending Sir Alex Ferguson's paid ambassador role and cancelling the staff Christmas party, while ticket prices were raised. Morale among remaining staff was widely reported to be at rock bottom.
Ratcliffe has recently claimed the benefits are now visible, describing United as highly profitable at operating level and saying unpopular decisions taken early are paying off. The accounts paint a more mixed picture: an operating turnaround set against a pre-tax loss of about £47 million and total liabilities, including transfer fee commitments, reported at around £1.15 billion.
His interventions have not been confined to the balance sheet. Ratcliffe's public comments on immigration and on Britain's direction have drawn criticism, including from United supporter groups, and prompted Gary Lineker to attack him in unusually personal terms. A Muslim supporters' group issued a statement of no confidence in the ownership, calling for both Ratcliffe and the Glazer family to leave.
On the pitch, the Ineos era has already burned through managers. Erik ten Hag was backed and then sacked, and his successor Ruben Amorim was dismissed in January 2026 after the club's worst Premier League season. Critics argue that a regime preaching long-term discipline has shown little patience where it matters most.
Ratcliffe, whose fortune is estimated at more than £15 billion and who moved to Monaco for tax purposes in 2020, presents the cuts as proof of seriousness: popularity, he says, is not the job. United's staff numbers prove the scale of what he has done. Whether history judges it as rescue or vandalism depends on results that, so far, have lagged well behind the rhetoric.
Supporters' groups have tried to separate two questions that the ownership keeps merging: whether United needed to spend less, and whether the way the savings were found — canteens, Christmas parties, long-serving staff — was proportionate for a club that still spends hundreds of millions on players and wages. That distinction is where Ratcliffe's public standing has suffered most. Even fans who accept the financial diagnosis have questioned the symbolism, and it is symbolism, as much as spreadsheets, that will colour how the Ineos years at Old Trafford are remembered.