Caterham F1 Gone?
Discussion
Why should an F1 team be above employment law? Why should they not be expected to meet their minimum obligations?
Why should an employee who is treated badly just "suck it up" simply because it's a "small industry?" That is ludicrous thinking really. The rules are there to protect all employees and I know I would have no issue employing someone who had just won a tribunal or was going through something like this. Especially as the information is out in the public domain and so it's fairly easy to see that actually, it's likely that Caterham have been naughty and so this isn't ex-employees acting badly, this is about holding a company to their basic obligations.
If they have played games with corporate structures to try and screw over their employees, then I hope they get absolutely crucified in a tribunal.
Why should an employee who is treated badly just "suck it up" simply because it's a "small industry?" That is ludicrous thinking really. The rules are there to protect all employees and I know I would have no issue employing someone who had just won a tribunal or was going through something like this. Especially as the information is out in the public domain and so it's fairly easy to see that actually, it's likely that Caterham have been naughty and so this isn't ex-employees acting badly, this is about holding a company to their basic obligations.
If they have played games with corporate structures to try and screw over their employees, then I hope they get absolutely crucified in a tribunal.
IforB said:
Why should an F1 team be above employment law? Why should they not be expected to meet their minimum obligations?
Why should an employee who is treated badly just "suck it up" simply because it's a "small industry?" That is ludicrous thinking really. The rules are there to protect all employees and I know I would have no issue employing someone who had just won a tribunal or was going through something like this. Especially as the information is out in the public domain and so it's fairly easy to see that actually, it's likely that Caterham have been naughty and so this isn't ex-employees acting badly, this is about holding a company to their basic obligations.
If they have played games with corporate structures to try and screw over their employees, then I hope they get absolutely crucified in a tribunal.
For the record, I agree. One wonders what other obligations the structure may allow them to walk away from?Why should an employee who is treated badly just "suck it up" simply because it's a "small industry?" That is ludicrous thinking really. The rules are there to protect all employees and I know I would have no issue employing someone who had just won a tribunal or was going through something like this. Especially as the information is out in the public domain and so it's fairly easy to see that actually, it's likely that Caterham have been naughty and so this isn't ex-employees acting badly, this is about holding a company to their basic obligations.
If they have played games with corporate structures to try and screw over their employees, then I hope they get absolutely crucified in a tribunal.
More and more we are seeing corporate bodies create labyrinthine structures of holding companies, subsidiaries, contractors etc etc in an effort to wangle and weasel their way out of their obligations under law and tax.
It is always wholly immoral - and sometimes illegal.
Hopefully, whenever these shenanigans end up being used as an excuse to escape obligations, tribunals and courts can see through the cloak of fog and legal hoops and order the company to behave properly and do the right thing.
It is always wholly immoral - and sometimes illegal.
Hopefully, whenever these shenanigans end up being used as an excuse to escape obligations, tribunals and courts can see through the cloak of fog and legal hoops and order the company to behave properly and do the right thing.
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff