Christian Horner
Discussion
Jasandjules said:
EddieSteadyGo said:
Jasandjules said:
Another one who thinks it is fine for a male boss to threaten the job of a female junior who won't pleasure them sexually I see.
...
Another strawman argument I see.......
Jasandjules said:
EddieSteadyGo said:
Jasandjules said:
Another one who thinks it is fine for a male boss to threaten the job of a female junior who won't pleasure them sexually I see.
...
Another strawman argument I see.......
Jasandjules said:
EddieSteadyGo said:
Jasandjules said:
Another one who thinks it is fine for a male boss to threaten the job of a female junior who won't pleasure them sexually I see.
...
Another strawman argument I see.......
maz8062 said:
Jasandjules said:
EddieSteadyGo said:
Jasandjules said:
Another one who thinks it is fine for a male boss to threaten the job of a female junior who won't pleasure them sexually I see.
...
Another strawman argument I see.......
maz8062 said:
For you it will remain an issue until your preferred form of retribution is handed down to CH. until then you’ll keep on harping on about it as if you’ve been personally wronged, are related to the PA,or have any to gain by him being ousted from his job. The rest of us have moved on.
None of the above apply I am afraid. I am just a person who thinks that when people are creepy sexual harassers who abuse their power, something shoul be done. Gazzab said:
Doesn’t matter if ‘the rest of us’ have moved on. The issue is still live within RB and could end up in an ET. So we will continue to see the PA’s issues being focussed on. I don’t know if the Jos, Marko, Austria etc issues will persist though.
Yeah, this.I don't really care about the political machinations or who controls RB. That's not a crime, it's petty power plays.
Jasandjules said:
None of the above apply I am afraid. I am just a person who thinks that when people are creepy sexual harassers who abuse their power, something shoul be done.
And this.I don't think something as bad as CH appears to have done should go unpunished. Many people feel the same.
And the funny thing is, all of you coming on this forum continually trying to absolve CH or claim it's now dealt with or forgotten are fanning the flames. You're literally doing your part in keeping it in people's consciousnesses.
Jasandjules said:
maz8062 said:
For you it will remain an issue until your preferred form of retribution is handed down to CH. until then you’ll keep on harping on about it as if you’ve been personally wronged, are related to the PA,or have any to gain by him being ousted from his job. The rest of us have moved on.
None of the above apply I am afraid. I am just a person who thinks that when people are creepy sexual harassers who abuse their power, something shoul be done. If you read between the lines there’s not actually an accusation of anything that we know of. A boss that’s being bossy, an a
hole, rude, domineering to a subordinate. Bosses do that sort of stuff. An office romance - it happens. A CEO shagging his PA. It happens. In the absence of any alleged criminality or the full facts, there really is nothing to see here. maz8062 said:
Jasandjules said:
maz8062 said:
For you it will remain an issue until your preferred form of retribution is handed down to CH. until then you’ll keep on harping on about it as if you’ve been personally wronged, are related to the PA,or have any to gain by him being ousted from his job. The rest of us have moved on.
None of the above apply I am afraid. I am just a person who thinks that when people are creepy sexual harassers who abuse their power, something shoul be done. If you read between the lines there’s not actually an accusation of anything that we know of. A boss that’s being bossy, an a
hole, rude, domineering to a subordinate. Bosses do that sort of stuff. An office romance - it happens. A CEO shagging his PA. It happens. In the absence of any alleged criminality or the full facts, there really is nothing to see here. Gazzab said:
Of course much of what you say might be true. Clearly it’s not a criminal matter - never has been suggested that it is such. So probably a pointless point to make. It is about a grievance relating to the behaviours of a senior leader. The PA continues to press this one, so there is potentially more to it. Maybe more credibility to her grievance. Many believe her grievance has merit. Many others don’t. No idea why people continue to argue like this is a black n white argument.
If the published messages are legitimate, then it’s very black and white, and the woman involved has a legitimate grievance. There’s no ‘context’ that CH could add, that somehow makes those messages okay. maz8062 said:
Jasandjules said:
maz8062 said:
For you it will remain an issue until your preferred form of retribution is handed down to CH. until then you’ll keep on harping on about it as if you’ve been personally wronged, are related to the PA,or have any to gain by him being ousted from his job. The rest of us have moved on.
None of the above apply I am afraid. I am just a person who thinks that when people are creepy sexual harassers who abuse their power, something shoul be done. If you read between the lines there’s not actually an accusation of anything that we know of. A boss that’s being bossy, an a
hole, rude, domineering to a subordinate. Bosses do that sort of stuff. An office romance - it happens. A CEO shagging his PA. It happens. In the absence of any alleged criminality or the full facts, there really is nothing to see here. Jasandjules said:
None of the above apply I am afraid. I am just a person who thinks that when people are creepy sexual harassers who abuse their power, something shoul be done.
Did someone touch you in an inappropriate place? You seem a bit shouty about this none of us know the real facts and things like this happen at work all the time ~ usually one person leaves. All we know is what has been leaked to the press and vanila PR releases that mean nothing.
maz8062 said:
Jasandjules said:
maz8062 said:
For you it will remain an issue until your preferred form of retribution is handed down to CH. until then you’ll keep on harping on about it as if you’ve been personally wronged, are related to the PA,or have any to gain by him being ousted from his job. The rest of us have moved on.
None of the above apply I am afraid. I am just a person who thinks that when people are creepy sexual harassers who abuse their power, something shoul be done. If you read between the lines there’s not actually an accusation of anything that we know of. A boss that’s being bossy, an a
hole, rude, domineering to a subordinate. Bosses do that sort of stuff. An office romance - it happens. A CEO shagging his PA. It happens. In the absence of any alleged criminality or the full facts, there really is nothing to see here. From the emails, it's appalling behaviour. There are no 'lines'. Shagging, yeah, nice word, his PA is not what the matter is about. It's about sexual pestering, about sending specific types of email when the receiver has stated, and clearly, they don't want them.
On your suggestion that this is what bosses do, I think is why legislation was brought in to stop such behaviour, and not before time. I doubt you are a boss, otherwise you'd know, but if you are, and if this is how you behave, you have a rude awakening coming. Best of luck with the defence of 'everyone does it'.
Derek Smith said:
Er, not to put too fine a point on it, there are interpretations, obvious and significant ones, that could make it a criminal matter in many EU countries, and the UK.
From the emails, it's appalling behaviour. There are no 'lines'. Shagging, yeah, nice word, his PA is not what the matter is about. It's about sexual pestering, about sending specific types of email when the receiver has stated, and clearly, they don't want them.
On your suggestion that this is what bosses do, I think is why legislation was brought in to stop such behaviour, and not before time. I doubt you are a boss, otherwise you'd know, but if you are, and if this is how you behave, you have a rude awakening coming. Best of luck with the defence of 'everyone does it'.
I am a manager and I treat my staff with respect, courtesy and humility. I’ve also once had an affair at work. It ended we moved on and that was that. I’ve also worked for tough, nasty and bullying types of bosses. They tend not to last long and are quietly moved on with a wadge of cash and polite obituaries.From the emails, it's appalling behaviour. There are no 'lines'. Shagging, yeah, nice word, his PA is not what the matter is about. It's about sexual pestering, about sending specific types of email when the receiver has stated, and clearly, they don't want them.
On your suggestion that this is what bosses do, I think is why legislation was brought in to stop such behaviour, and not before time. I doubt you are a boss, otherwise you'd know, but if you are, and if this is how you behave, you have a rude awakening coming. Best of luck with the defence of 'everyone does it'.
My point in all of this is that this is a company matter between employees of the same company. It has therefore been dealt with inline with that policy and CH is still there. In the absence of any criminality this case will remain a company affair and the company have already decided based on the evidence that they have, evidence that none of us have seen in its entirety.
For it to move outside of RBR the company, there would have to allegations that would warrant higher intervention. The FIA is one , the police another if allegations of criminality are made. Until then all the hand wringing and pontificating will not do anything unless RBR decide to do so.
Derek Smith said:
I doubt you are a boss, otherwise you'd know, but if you are, and if this is how you behave, you have a rude awakening coming. Best of luck with the defence of 'everyone does it'.
I think you’ve gone a bit far there none of us know the real facts and things like this happen at work places all the time.We only have half the story and he’s not been fired (yet) so there will be more to this than what we have read on some leaked messages.
maz8062 said:
Derek Smith said:
Er, not to put too fine a point on it, there are interpretations, obvious and significant ones, that could make it a criminal matter in many EU countries, and the UK.
From the emails, it's appalling behaviour. There are no 'lines'. Shagging, yeah, nice word, his PA is not what the matter is about. It's about sexual pestering, about sending specific types of email when the receiver has stated, and clearly, they don't want them.
On your suggestion that this is what bosses do, I think is why legislation was brought in to stop such behaviour, and not before time. I doubt you are a boss, otherwise you'd know, but if you are, and if this is how you behave, you have a rude awakening coming. Best of luck with the defence of 'everyone does it'.
I am a manager and I treat my staff with respect, courtesy and humility. I’ve also once had an affair at work. It ended we moved on and that was that. I’ve also worked for tough, nasty and bullying types of bosses. They tend not to last long and are quietly moved on with a wadge of cash and polite obituaries.From the emails, it's appalling behaviour. There are no 'lines'. Shagging, yeah, nice word, his PA is not what the matter is about. It's about sexual pestering, about sending specific types of email when the receiver has stated, and clearly, they don't want them.
On your suggestion that this is what bosses do, I think is why legislation was brought in to stop such behaviour, and not before time. I doubt you are a boss, otherwise you'd know, but if you are, and if this is how you behave, you have a rude awakening coming. Best of luck with the defence of 'everyone does it'.
My point in all of this is that this is a company matter between employees of the same company. It has therefore been dealt with inline with that policy and CH is still there. In the absence of any criminality this case will remain a company affair and the company have already decided based on the evidence that they have, evidence that none of us have seen in its entirety.
For it to move outside of RBR the company, there would have to allegations that would warrant higher intervention. The FIA is one , the police another if allegations of criminality are made. Until then all the hand wringing and pontificating will not do anything unless RBR decide to do so.
Step 1 is the internal complaint, which RB have already dismissed.
Step 2 the employee can appeal the original decision. RB will have to either double down on dismissing it, or uphold it and take some action.
Step 3 if not happy with step 2, the employee can take it to an employment tribunal.
We're at step 2, as reportedly the PA has already appealed.
If RB try to sweep it under the rug again and don't offer a payout to go away, then this is looking very likely to end up at a tribunal.
Despite quite a few on here sticking up for CH, those texts are pretty much a smoking gun for sexual harassment. And RB/CH get to have it all aired in public. There absolutely is more than enough to take this to an employment tribunal, but the employee has to go through all the steps first, and their legal team will have advised them of this.
maz8062 said:
I am a manager and I treat my staff with respect, courtesy and humility. I’ve also once had an affair at work. It ended we moved on and that was that. I’ve also worked for tough, nasty and bullying types of bosses. They tend not to last long and are quietly moved on with a wadge of cash and polite obituaries.
My point in all of this is that this is a company matter between employees of the same company. It has therefore been dealt with inline with that policy and CH is still there. In the absence of any criminality this case will remain a company affair and the company have already decided based on the evidence that they have, evidence that none of us have seen in its entirety.
For it to move outside of RBR the company, there would have to allegations that would warrant higher intervention. The FIA is one , the police another if allegations of criminality are made. Until then all the hand wringing and pontificating will not do anything unless RBR decide to do so.
Have you heard of an employment tribunal?My point in all of this is that this is a company matter between employees of the same company. It has therefore been dealt with inline with that policy and CH is still there. In the absence of any criminality this case will remain a company affair and the company have already decided based on the evidence that they have, evidence that none of us have seen in its entirety.
For it to move outside of RBR the company, there would have to allegations that would warrant higher intervention. The FIA is one , the police another if allegations of criminality are made. Until then all the hand wringing and pontificating will not do anything unless RBR decide to do so.
Jasandjules said:
Durzel said:
Gut feeling is that it's only a big deal in the minds of:
.
Another one who thinks it is fine for a male boss to threaten the job of a female junior who won't pleasure them sexually I see. .
This is a big deal in the mind of anyone with a sense of morality or decency.
If this was your daughter would you be so pleased?
And this is a sport that is supposed to be championing females FFS. How do think this helps?
You can’t prove the messages are legitimate any more than I can prove they’re not. The difference is I’m not condemning someone because I’ve just decided they are.
Durzel said:
Jasandjules said:
Durzel said:
Gut feeling is that it's only a big deal in the minds of:
.
Another one who thinks it is fine for a male boss to threaten the job of a female junior who won't pleasure them sexually I see. .
This is a big deal in the mind of anyone with a sense of morality or decency.
If this was your daughter would you be so pleased?
And this is a sport that is supposed to be championing females FFS. How do think this helps?
You can’t prove the messages are legitimate any more than I can prove they’re not. The difference is I’m not condemning someone because I’ve just decided they are.
I mean, think about it - a simple statement saying
“We dispute the authenticity of these messages and have reason to believe they have been fabricated”
Means that it turns from damage control to potentially fake news. That affects the credibility of the story and reduces the public pressure on your (innocent, in this scenario) CEO.
So the question is; if they’re not genuine, why not deny it?
Derek Smith said:
maz8062 said:
Jasandjules said:
maz8062 said:
For you it will remain an issue until your preferred form of retribution is handed down to CH. until then you’ll keep on harping on about it as if you’ve been personally wronged, are related to the PA,or have any to gain by him being ousted from his job. The rest of us have moved on.
None of the above apply I am afraid. I am just a person who thinks that when people are creepy sexual harassers who abuse their power, something shoul be done. If you read between the lines there’s not actually an accusation of anything that we know of. A boss that’s being bossy, an a
hole, rude, domineering to a subordinate. Bosses do that sort of stuff. An office romance - it happens. A CEO shagging his PA. It happens. In the absence of any alleged criminality or the full facts, there really is nothing to see here. rallycross said:
Derek Smith said:
I doubt you are a boss, otherwise you'd know, but if you are, and if this is how you behave, you have a rude awakening coming. Best of luck with the defence of 'everyone does it'.
I think you’ve gone a bit far there none of us know the real facts and things like this happen at work places all the time.We only have half the story and he’s not been fired (yet) so there will be more to this than what we have read on some leaked messages.
You seem to dismiss the leaked messages. No one has said they are in any way false. All RBR and Horner had to say was that they were made up, although, of course, had they and they turned out to be the truth, it's something to hit them with in any appeal and in the media, particularly the latter.
You suggest we've only had half the story. That's correct but I don't think in the way you mean. RBR's 'half' is that they set some lawyer on it and the matter was dismissed by internal decision. This has been touted by Horner as being cleared, when it obviously isn't.
What have we had from the victim in all of this? Where is her half? Has she stood up and said anything to the media, like RBR and Horner have done?
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff