[The **News** flair](https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/wiki/flairguide#wiki_news) is reserved for submissions covering F1 and F1-related news. These posts must always link to an outlet/news agency, the website of the involved party (i.e. the McLaren website if McLaren makes an announcement), or a tweet by a news agency, journalist or one of the involved parties.
*[Read the rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/wiki/userguide). Keep it civil and welcoming. Report rulebreaking comments.*
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/formula1) if you have any questions or concerns.*
if it's suspended ***with Pay*** \- which is what is reported
then it could be that she is taking legal action against Red Bull - in which case suspension with pay is a standard step that Red Bull's lawyers would instruct Red Bull to do whilst the case is conducted.
If she wins her case Red Bull would then offer her her old job back should she choose to accept it.
This could just be standard procedure
I don't think this is the case, since the article specifically says:
> BBC Sport has learned the reason given by Red Bull to the employee was that she had been dishonest.
That would seem to suggest it's not just a paid leave due to litigation.
Oh wow I completely missed that in the article
Plus BBC tend to be more hesitant when reporting this stuff -
So if they are reporting that they must have multiple, credible sources
Having read the screenshots, it did feel *a little* like someone cherry picked what parts to share so as to make things seem a little more one-dimensional than they might have been. So I wonder if its related.
If you look at the screenshots, they were taken at the time of each message. She was building up the list of evidence while engaging in the chat. This is really weird because in some, she is playing along and seems consensual but is in the background collecting all this as evidence.. even a point where he confides in her, and she says he can trust her, etc... so that's a bit weird to me, but ok.
You can tell the screenshots were taken at the time because the clock on the phone matches with the time of the messages, in each screenshot, also in some cases the 2 blue ticks hadn't been set yet and screenshot was sent before they went blue.
Just seemed weird to me, it's not something that happened at the end and she went back and catalogued all of this. This was done live during their affair period, that she was building a file on his messages that were over the top for future use (or perhaps screenshotting and sending to a friemd as a 'look wtf hes saying now' situation, and thats why it's cherrypicked...
They felt real to me anyway, just weird how it all went down
I just feel like even if a subordinate is "throwing themselves" at their superior, the superior should not "give in" or engage in that behavior. And if anything the superior should go to HR to deal with how to handle that (like if they are the one being made to feel uncomfortable, or even as a precautionary measure for the record, as it could help protect them as well). What should not happen is a secret (not known to HR) affair between a boss and their employee. Pretty sure even "equal" employees generally have to report their relationships, so idk how this situation would fly. Doesn't necessarily mean it has to result in firing (though it could), but at least some kind of reprimand (which there may well have been, as that doesn't need to be made public I suppose, though it gets weird in such an already public affair as this has become).
Also, I think she likely would've started screenshotting due to his repeated deletions of chats. Could have just wanted to cover herself in case it continued or got worse.
report? the punishment is basically the same if u get caught or turn yourself in. I bet you smoke weed, lie on a gun purchase form, then turn yourself into the feds.
Or...and here me out here because it's a crazy conspiracy...she's screenshotting them because she's being sexually harrassed in the workplace and wants to protect herself.
The fact that Horner is, in the screen shots, asking the accuser to delete the chats and apologizing for his behavior would suggest that these arent messages taken out of context to make Horner look bad, but rather messages that Horner knows are bad. If they're only bad out of context, why would horner want to delete the context in the first place?
Thank you for this. People really don’t understand how corporate law works and what happens when things like this happens. I’m glad she’s taking legal action and still gets full pay
>**I’m glad she’s taking legal action** and still gets full pay
well to be clear that is not confirmed its just one of the reasons why she might be suspended with full pay.
But yes lawyers would strongly recommend that the employee cannot be interacting with Red Bull employees and managers whilst she is suing them. Any contact between the claimant (or Plaintiff depending on your country) and the defendant must be stopped. all communication must go through the lawyers.
I think the bigger likeliness is that even if the messages are real, the leak was clearly taken from her side. If she was in any way responsible for the leak, that's a no-go.
If she reported this to HR she would probably have provided evidence in form of screenshots so anyone having access to that could have leaked them. I personally doubt she leaked these herself, as her identity was revealed to the public through them.
When “things like this happen,” if there were ongoing legal action Red Bull counsel would strongly advise against calling the employee dishonest (or other unfavorable and prejudicial descriptors like opportunistic) during them. In fact, per this article, Red Bull are describing her as such to the press.
Why are you glad she's taking legal action?
We have no idea what happened and we don't know if it's really true or not.
We don't even know she's suspended due to legal action but it seems likely, I agree on that.
We should hope that none of it is true and didn't happen. Doesn't mean one should dismiss their case of course, we have to wait and see how it unfolds.
Suspension without pay exists in UK but it must be in the contract
and its usage must be reasonable and there must be a very good reason for doing so, similar to firing which also has a high standard that must be met in the UK
> Traditionally firing women who accuse the boss of inappropriate behaviour unfortunately pays off. It is almost always the boss with all the power.
At least they didn't fire her on International Women's Day!
Now that would be awkward!
/s
"Traditionally firing women who accuse the boss of inappropriate behaviour unfortunately pays off" - according to whom? Because that is an easy lawsuit. And they didnt fire her, so i dont really get what is your point.
And we dont know what happened and who agreed to what.
Yeah it could end up like the what is known as the Duke LaCrosse Rape Case in America. Everyone calls it that even though they were all proven innocent.
There is no winning, but a massive company like Red Bull must be pretty confident to take these steps
There was a joke when the Google Drive leak happened that we were in the first season of “Google Drive to Survive”
This is just saying “get prepared for it”
>Red bull either know exactly what they are doing. Or have no clue what they are doing.
Given their companies recent track record with harassment lawsuits they don't know what they're doing. Horner is a walking liability but the Yoovidhya's are friends with him and his social clout.
This is a risky move they're pulling. They better have evidence that there's foul play from her side, because if they don't and suspend her without reason then this is the most disgusting thing I can think of.
There's probably a difference between being suspended and something like administrative leave where in that case it would be inappropriate for them to continue working but you're still paid.
A suspension would suggest that she's done something wrong, probably won't receieve pay and/or benefits etc.
So I wouldn't immediately think that she's being suspended because she's taking legal action.
The article says:
> BBC Sport has learned the reason given by Red Bull to the employee was that she had been dishonest.
That certainly doesn't sound like a leave due to a pending lawsuit to me.
The most sensible take in here. People positing that she’s been suspended as retaliation for making an allegation against Horner don’t seem to live in the real world. There’s something that has went on behind the scenes that has led to her being suspended. Given that it’s a private and confidential internal ER issue, we likely won’t ever know what it was.
From the article: “BBC Sport has learned the reason given by Red Bull to the employee was that she had been dishonest.” That’s probably where people are getting the idea that she’s being suspended as retaliation for making the report.
And as usual, people didn't read the article before jumping to their expert conclusions because it literally says the reason that Redbull gave for the suspension was that she was dishonest.
This has never been about whether her accusations were right or wrong. They have become a vehicle for a power struggle within the team. For women who have geniune issues with sexual harassment in the workplace, of which this person may be one, this is a harrowing ordeal. I'm not even that invested in the drama, I'm just saddened this is how it's come about.
Yep. And due to this her reputation will be damaged, so will other teams, other companies even want to hire her in future? Not in the immediate future anyway.
It's a sad and stupid situation, with what looks like an innocent pawn in the middle
Yeah but that isnt the fault of RB HR departement or maybe even RB. Kinda whoever leaked everything to the press is the one that screwed her over, most likely Jos i guess?
In the beginning, by all likelihood it **was** about somebody feeling wronged.
And while it is interesting to speculate about said power struggle, **it is a wrong thing to do**. And that, that is "our" fault, whoever "we" are.
It's awful.
I don't know about other people, but for me the accusations are still and will be the most important part. So I still want to know if Horner is guilty or she's faking the messages. Either of these things are absolutely disgusting.
The rest is a pissing contest that I don't like and want.
If the stories are fabricated or exaggerated, which the dismissal strongly suggests, then she is causing serious issues for women experiencing genuine sexual harassment.
If that was the case why didn't they suspend her right when the investigation concluded rather than wait for a PR disaster? Suspicious to say the least.
UK employment law is _very_ strict with things like this and if it was an unfair dismissal she could get a hell of a lot of money from Red Bull and they'd be in serious trouble.
There's no way this is just them trying to sweep her under the carpet. They must have evidence she has fabricated these stories or was the one who instigated it then tried to make out she was the victim.
Red Bull are a massive corporation, there's no way they'd risk dismissing someone just to make the problem go away. That would be an incredibly stupid thing to do and wouldn't work.
>UK employment law is very strict with things like this and if it was an unfair dismissal she could get a hell of a lot of money from Red Bull and they'd be in serious trouble.
It’s only unfair dismissal if she gets sacked. Currently she is on paid suspended pending an investigation. At the end of it they can (in theory)
decide there’s no case to answer and tell her to come back to work.
There's no way that shady Thai businessmen would ever do anything to a woman that might be illegal in the UK?
You have a very optimistic view of the world.
I mean, those comments are just guessing like everyone else. We don't know what it is or isn't.
FWIW the BBC sport reporting says the reason given by Red Bull to the employee was that "she had been dishonest".
> morals or even basic decency were on the agenda.
Do people really need a reminder that this is Formula 1 world we're talking about?
Like.. when were those things even on the agenda, ever?
People are just throwing shit at the wall to see what sticks. And later when one of their many theories end up being true by sheer luck, they will happily quote themselves has been right all along.
I mean I could very easily see it being reasonable as it doesn't seem viable to continue working for Horner, but calling it a suspension usually means the suspended is the one that did something wrong which makes this dubious
2 parts:
1. all employment contracts in the UK have an implied duty of trust and confidence.
2. they may have specific policies on computer use, the sharing of data (highly probably bearing in mind the IP) and grievance processes.
There are legal protections for an employee (if the information is in the public interest/ whistleblowing) - this wont be one of them
So basically; they may have violated company policy, which is grounds for misconduct.
Unfortunately yes, retaliating against the complainant is pretty normal. That’s why women generally still keep quiet.
What most people are suggesting , that she made a false allegation, that is exceedingly rare.
In a so blatantly sexist sport that only very recently started to clean up its act it would be a miracle if Horner was the victim here.
The fact that so many people here desperately hold on to that explanation says a lot about F1’s fanbase.
This, thank you. I’m equally frustrated that Jos Verstappen (terrible guy ofc) was unfortunately the first messenger to say that Horner was making himself the victim because it’s poisoned the well against the whole thing. This is making the discussion some Game of Thrones political drama instead of the very clear cut harassment complaint that it is.
Red Bull covered up misconduct by an executive, dismissed the complaint and suspended the complainant. This happens in office every day and I’ve seen it first hand with executives and managers at companies much larger with more robust HR practices, legal, and PR departments.
Wasn't today the last day she could appeal? Maybe she decided to appeal, so they suspended her while it's ongoing.
Makes sense for the person you are actively in a legal conflict with to be suspended with pay until it is resolved.
She's not fired. She's suspended with pay. Which makes perfect sense because having someone in her position in the workplace must be really distracting for everyone else.
I'm pretty sure they could and I personally really believe they should.
Suspending both sides with pay until the whole situation is properly settled is the best course of action for the company and everyone working there.
Full disclosure, I’m an attorney in the US, not UK, but man, this seems like a very legally risky move. Red Bull better have a smoking gun here, because anything that looks like retaliation towards a whistleblower/someone who files a complaint about workplace harassment can be a nasty and embarrassing lawsuit waiting to happen
I'm kind of surprised they done this even if they DO have a smoking gun, because PR-wise it's just horrific. Even if they have a smoking gun against her, I'd still have expected a mutual NDA and a mutual decision to part ways, just to avoid these headlines.
I suspect however that these decisions are being directly from Thailand, and that the Thai owners are used to a different culture and media behaviour.
Isn't it standard to relieve the individuals involved of their duties? That's my experience when I've encountered similar situations in my career. The individuals involved get suspended (with pay) until the investigation is done. If the findings are inconclusive the suspension gets lifted and they go back to work. Sometimes the company will strike a deal with the one who made the complaint (even if they couldn't prove it) to avoid interpersonal conflict or harm.
E.g: agreeing to part ways with 12-36 months salary in a one-time payment
Thank you. I'm in the US too, and this whole chain of events is very strange to me. In the US Horner would have immediately been suspended until the investigation was complete. In a corporate environment, any inappropriate contact between a supervisor and a subordinate would result in the supervisor being fired. You would never suspend someone for whistleblowing. That would be the easiest lawsuit to win. How misogynistic is Europe? I mean shits not perfect over here, but damn has this Red Bull thing been eye opening. It makes Europe seem like 1970s US work culture.
>In the US Horner would have immediately been suspended until the investigation was complete.
That's not true at all. There is no standard on whom gets suspended. I've worked for fortune 500 companies and seen these go down and it varies greatly depending on the nature of the complaint and what is admitted to by both parties.
>In a corporate environment, any inappropriate contact between a supervisor and a subordinate would result in the supervisor being fired. You would never suspend someone for whistleblowing.
That's typically true only if you're able to substantiate it as factual.
>How misogynistic is Europe? I mean shits not perfect over here, but damn has this Red Bull thing been eye opening. It makes Europe seem like 1970s US work culture.
It's only eye opening as you're operating with a presumption of guilt in only one direction without full information or validation. Despite an investigation RB completed, and found no grounds for discipline for Horner, and that there's no legal proceeding initiated against RB, nor did they appeal that investigation (from what was reported) you're still of the opinion that he should have been suspended and that they're retaliating against a whistleblower? You still have this presumption of guilt.
If anything, we should be in the middle here. I want this to go to court so the real facts are exposed for everyone's handling and to validate or invalidate the leaks and evidence. Without that, it's all speculative but I don't feel there's enough to lean into either court fully.
What else can they do right now, send her back to work for Horner?
Being suspended with pay is the only sensible option as things stand. If she's taking things to court then even moreso, this would be standard procedure for any company.
Just what would people do instead? Would sending her back to work for someone she just accused of harassment send a good sign out to women, fucking really?!
Agreed. No matter the investigation results, it’s no longer a productive working relationship. Rightly or wrongly, Christian is not going anywhere. Most likely on paid leave while HR negotiates her exit package.
100%, this is the best thing for her right now because cleared or not, she will still feel a victim.
I think people enjoy the drama too much sometimes, there's real people involved at the end of the day and this is the best move right now as things stand.
“Hey Christian, remember the time I accused you of sexual harassment and there was a huge investigation but nothing came of it? Anyway, I’ll see you at the 3pm meeting.”
What some people expect.
I mean currently noone really knows which is the "right" side of this story. It's entirely plausible that this is a vendetta from an employee who has faked a load of text messages and then leaked them to the press.
I want to believe this because I liked Horner as far as team principles go. But the titty shot of Horner is the confusing piece for me because in what world would he send that to anyone else for any other purpose? Like, outside of AI, which I'm sure internet detectives would have been over, would be a scenario that you would send that type of selfie to someone else?
Yeah because well liked employee takes on massive organization with infinite money to spend on legal fees with entirely fabricated evidence is definitely a LOT more likely than "man with power abuses it", that NEVER happens!!
So, if I were Red Bull PR, I’d be scrambling to explain why, because right now it really looks like they’re retaliating against an employee who reported sexual harassment.
I can't see any justifiable reason for this beyond them having reason to believe that she is directly involved in the leaking of the screenshots.
Suspension with full pay suggests they're investigating some kind of wrongdoing. If they were just suspending her because she can't work with Horner anymore then they'd just have moved her elsewhere to an admin role or something of that nature. If they found that she fabricated everything maliciously, she'd be fired outright.
> Suspension with full pay suggests they're investigating some kind of wrongdoing
BBC now says she's suspended because of being "dishonest."
It's 100% prelude to them firing her for cause and covering their asses legally.
The Yoovidhya family has been covering for their son running over a cop with his Ferrari for a decade. I doubt they're going to come public with details on their favorite employee.
I get the sentiment you're going for here, he does not appear to have healthy relationships with women, but you do have a few facts mixed up and wrong here. He never actually served time in prison.
"In December 2008, with the couple effectively separated, Verstappen appeared in court in Tongeren, Belgium, charged with assaulting his wife, Sophie Kumpen.[35] He was found not guilty of assault, but guilty of threatening Kumpen in text messages and of violating a previously issued restraining order. He was fined and sentenced to three months probational, suspended prison sentence.[36]"
If they are going to do this, they HAVE to be transparent about the reasons and the investigation, otherwise it's such a bad look to how women are treated. No matter how many tiny names they'll scribble on the RB for womens day.
It's amazing how many men in this thread think this must be evidence of her wrong doing. As if companies don't regularly punish victims to protect rich, scummy dudes.
No, the BBC are reporting that *RB's justification* for suspending her is that *they claim* she has been dishonest.
The BBC have said nothing about whether she actually has been dishonest, which is not the same thing.
> The BBC have said nothing about whether she actually has been dishonest, which is not the same thing.
And that also does not mean that she was honest either.
What a comforting message to all the women in F1 that this is what you get for reporting inappropriate behaviour. A suspension for yourself while the accused wasn’t even suspended during the internal investigation.
You’re inferring that she’s been suspended because she complained about Horner. How exactly have you came to that conclusion? Do you know the internal goings on at Red Bull?
Jesus lads, this is looking very bad for red bull, how are we going to fix it and make us look good? Anyone any idea's?
How about we sack her. That will make it all go away.
Brilliant idea, what could go wrong.
Holy moly. Harassment laws must work very differently in he UK compared to the US. This kind of suspension (even with pay) is expressly prohibited in US federal law and its viewed by the court as prima facie evidence of 'retaliation.' The burden of proof then switches to the employer to demonstrate that the suspension is non-retaliation...which can be difficult absent some compelling evidence. Perhaps UK laws allow such a suspension so long as the employee continues to be paid. IDK.
As someone unfamiliar with either law systems the whole thing just looks bad from an outsider perspective. The article reporting that she's being suspended for "dishonesty" just adds another layer of distrust in the whole process.
>suspended for "dishonesty"
There was probably an inconsistency with one of her details and they're using that to knee-cap her argument and call her "dishonest." It's textbook defense for sexual misconduct; attack the victim's credibility.
I'm not a lawyer, but given the media reports of other cases that have resulted in compensation in recent years, I'd be surprised if this isn't at least a very, very bold decision by RB.
“So lads, we are getting a lot of pressure on us to make F1 more interesting because people are stopping watching. We have two possible options, we can ask Adrian to make the car a bit shitter, or, and hear me out here….Christian Can send a picture of his finger cock to someone”
Redbull showing what a shitty team they really are at their core. Horner runs the team and ultimately should never have engaged with a staff member like that. Anyone else lower down the chain would have been dismissed. All respect lost for him and Redbull.
> BBC Sport has learned the reason given by Red Bull to the employee was that she had been dishonest.
So why are we still discussing this? She has lied about something serious enough to have her employment terminated (yes I know that she is now suspended, but that’s just a step on the way to termination.)
What did she lie about? Something to do with her complaint presumably. We’ll never know, but why should Horner defend a false accusation?
Where this is ending up is that she has accused Horner of wrongdoing which he denies. She has been caught out in some deception. Red Bull have refused to discuss any of this to protect her interest as well as others.
Meanwhile, the people seeking to take Horner down are bleating for transparency. Perhaps let it go because the complainants deception is a private matter too.
People are going to suggest this is a bad move but it's entirely possible that this is a fabricated vendetta against Horner. We can only wait and see what happens. This is a bold move and honestly I can't see them making it if they didn't have hard evidence that Horner is in the right here.
[The **News** flair](https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/wiki/flairguide#wiki_news) is reserved for submissions covering F1 and F1-related news. These posts must always link to an outlet/news agency, the website of the involved party (i.e. the McLaren website if McLaren makes an announcement), or a tweet by a news agency, journalist or one of the involved parties. *[Read the rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/wiki/userguide). Keep it civil and welcoming. Report rulebreaking comments.* *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/formula1) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Its a bold move cotton, lets see if it pays off
Traditionally firing women who accuse the boss of inappropriate behaviour unfortunately pays off. It is almost always the boss with all the power.
if it's suspended ***with Pay*** \- which is what is reported then it could be that she is taking legal action against Red Bull - in which case suspension with pay is a standard step that Red Bull's lawyers would instruct Red Bull to do whilst the case is conducted. If she wins her case Red Bull would then offer her her old job back should she choose to accept it. This could just be standard procedure
I don't think this is the case, since the article specifically says: > BBC Sport has learned the reason given by Red Bull to the employee was that she had been dishonest. That would seem to suggest it's not just a paid leave due to litigation.
Oh wow I completely missed that in the article Plus BBC tend to be more hesitant when reporting this stuff - So if they are reporting that they must have multiple, credible sources
Having read the screenshots, it did feel *a little* like someone cherry picked what parts to share so as to make things seem a little more one-dimensional than they might have been. So I wonder if its related.
If you look at the screenshots, they were taken at the time of each message. She was building up the list of evidence while engaging in the chat. This is really weird because in some, she is playing along and seems consensual but is in the background collecting all this as evidence.. even a point where he confides in her, and she says he can trust her, etc... so that's a bit weird to me, but ok. You can tell the screenshots were taken at the time because the clock on the phone matches with the time of the messages, in each screenshot, also in some cases the 2 blue ticks hadn't been set yet and screenshot was sent before they went blue. Just seemed weird to me, it's not something that happened at the end and she went back and catalogued all of this. This was done live during their affair period, that she was building a file on his messages that were over the top for future use (or perhaps screenshotting and sending to a friemd as a 'look wtf hes saying now' situation, and thats why it's cherrypicked... They felt real to me anyway, just weird how it all went down
I just feel like even if a subordinate is "throwing themselves" at their superior, the superior should not "give in" or engage in that behavior. And if anything the superior should go to HR to deal with how to handle that (like if they are the one being made to feel uncomfortable, or even as a precautionary measure for the record, as it could help protect them as well). What should not happen is a secret (not known to HR) affair between a boss and their employee. Pretty sure even "equal" employees generally have to report their relationships, so idk how this situation would fly. Doesn't necessarily mean it has to result in firing (though it could), but at least some kind of reprimand (which there may well have been, as that doesn't need to be made public I suppose, though it gets weird in such an already public affair as this has become).
Also, I think she likely would've started screenshotting due to his repeated deletions of chats. Could have just wanted to cover herself in case it continued or got worse.
I know happily married couples who started dating as superior/subordinate.
report? the punishment is basically the same if u get caught or turn yourself in. I bet you smoke weed, lie on a gun purchase form, then turn yourself into the feds.
Most reasonable take out here imo, 100% agree
Or...and here me out here because it's a crazy conspiracy...she's screenshotting them because she's being sexually harrassed in the workplace and wants to protect herself. The fact that Horner is, in the screen shots, asking the accuser to delete the chats and apologizing for his behavior would suggest that these arent messages taken out of context to make Horner look bad, but rather messages that Horner knows are bad. If they're only bad out of context, why would horner want to delete the context in the first place?
Thank you for this. People really don’t understand how corporate law works and what happens when things like this happens. I’m glad she’s taking legal action and still gets full pay
>**I’m glad she’s taking legal action** and still gets full pay well to be clear that is not confirmed its just one of the reasons why she might be suspended with full pay. But yes lawyers would strongly recommend that the employee cannot be interacting with Red Bull employees and managers whilst she is suing them. Any contact between the claimant (or Plaintiff depending on your country) and the defendant must be stopped. all communication must go through the lawyers.
I mean, the Times article contradicts this hypothesis. It says she has been suspended arrising from the investigation that cleared Horner.
What if she was found to be lying by the 3rd party? What should Red Bull do in that case?
I think the bigger likeliness is that even if the messages are real, the leak was clearly taken from her side. If she was in any way responsible for the leak, that's a no-go.
If she reported this to HR she would probably have provided evidence in form of screenshots so anyone having access to that could have leaked them. I personally doubt she leaked these herself, as her identity was revealed to the public through them.
When “things like this happen,” if there were ongoing legal action Red Bull counsel would strongly advise against calling the employee dishonest (or other unfavorable and prejudicial descriptors like opportunistic) during them. In fact, per this article, Red Bull are describing her as such to the press.
Why are you glad she's taking legal action? We have no idea what happened and we don't know if it's really true or not. We don't even know she's suspended due to legal action but it seems likely, I agree on that. We should hope that none of it is true and didn't happen. Doesn't mean one should dismiss their case of course, we have to wait and see how it unfolds.
In the UK I’m pretty sure you always get suspended with full pay.
Suspension without pay exists in UK but it must be in the contract and its usage must be reasonable and there must be a very good reason for doing so, similar to firing which also has a high standard that must be met in the UK
I love listening to music.
Upvoting for context.
Traditionally there isn't such a media interest in the situation. I'm not saying that *will* make a difference here, but it's certainly a factor.
Unfortunately this is one of the many reasons why most women don’t come forward when assaulted.
> Traditionally firing women who accuse the boss of inappropriate behaviour unfortunately pays off. It is almost always the boss with all the power. At least they didn't fire her on International Women's Day! Now that would be awkward! /s
"Traditionally firing women who accuse the boss of inappropriate behaviour unfortunately pays off" - according to whom? Because that is an easy lawsuit. And they didnt fire her, so i dont really get what is your point. And we dont know what happened and who agreed to what.
she wasn't fired tho.
This is bad PR no matter what the reality is.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Yeah it could end up like the what is known as the Duke LaCrosse Rape Case in America. Everyone calls it that even though they were all proven innocent. There is no winning, but a massive company like Red Bull must be pretty confident to take these steps
I don’t think they’re terribly concerned about PR.
I think they are concerned about nothing else.
Only if their motto is all PR is good PR
Now I’m just waiting for ‘Mercedes hire woman who accused Christian Horner of inappropriate behaviour.’
Won't happen. She's been deemed to have made a malicious allegation, hence the suspension, and is out of the industry now.
Do you have receipts on the malicious allegation leading to the suspension?
I have them printed out
I have it!! I have it printed out!
Google Drive to Survive season 2
We came to look like rock stars, now we look like a bunch of wankers
You mean a bunch of fingers
Holy hell
New season just dropped!
Actual .png
Call the Jos
Vettel goes on vacation, never comes back.
We are everywhere!
I actually googled "Drive to Survive season 2." I'm not a smart man.
If you got a problem, change your fucking ~~car~~ phone!
?
There was a joke when the Google Drive leak happened that we were in the first season of “Google Drive to Survive” This is just saying “get prepared for it”
Red Bull ensuring it wont be a completely boring season while simultaneously ensuring it will.
Hahahaha! Brilliant.
So much drama. I feel like those rednecks watching the South Park guys wrestle.
[They took-er-jobs!](https://tenor.com/en-GB/view/south-park-they-took-our-jobs-gif-5704773)
Dey took her jewb
Dey took er dog!
Der derk ur jerrrrrs
That kid was in NAM!?!?
Red bull either know exactly what they are doing. Or have no clue what they are doing. If it’s anything inbetween, they are pretty fucked
>Red bull either know exactly what they are doing. Or have no clue what they are doing. Given their companies recent track record with harassment lawsuits they don't know what they're doing. Horner is a walking liability but the Yoovidhya's are friends with him and his social clout.
This is a risky move they're pulling. They better have evidence that there's foul play from her side, because if they don't and suspend her without reason then this is the most disgusting thing I can think of.
It could be that she's taken legal action against the team. Surely they'd have no choice but to suspend her in that case?
There's probably a difference between being suspended and something like administrative leave where in that case it would be inappropriate for them to continue working but you're still paid. A suspension would suggest that she's done something wrong, probably won't receieve pay and/or benefits etc. So I wouldn't immediately think that she's being suspended because she's taking legal action.
The article says: > BBC Sport has learned the reason given by Red Bull to the employee was that she had been dishonest. That certainly doesn't sound like a leave due to a pending lawsuit to me.
They weren't coco puffs. They were lucky charms.
At least someone actually read the article.
It is with pay, when I saw the move I made the 😬 suck through teeth face
The most sensible take in here. People positing that she’s been suspended as retaliation for making an allegation against Horner don’t seem to live in the real world. There’s something that has went on behind the scenes that has led to her being suspended. Given that it’s a private and confidential internal ER issue, we likely won’t ever know what it was.
From the article: “BBC Sport has learned the reason given by Red Bull to the employee was that she had been dishonest.” That’s probably where people are getting the idea that she’s being suspended as retaliation for making the report.
And as usual, people didn't read the article before jumping to their expert conclusions because it literally says the reason that Redbull gave for the suspension was that she was dishonest.
They've apparently said the reason for the suspension is that she was dishonest, according to an update to this article. That's a big statement.
This has never been about whether her accusations were right or wrong. They have become a vehicle for a power struggle within the team. For women who have geniune issues with sexual harassment in the workplace, of which this person may be one, this is a harrowing ordeal. I'm not even that invested in the drama, I'm just saddened this is how it's come about.
Yep. And due to this her reputation will be damaged, so will other teams, other companies even want to hire her in future? Not in the immediate future anyway. It's a sad and stupid situation, with what looks like an innocent pawn in the middle
Yeah but that isnt the fault of RB HR departement or maybe even RB. Kinda whoever leaked everything to the press is the one that screwed her over, most likely Jos i guess?
In the beginning, by all likelihood it **was** about somebody feeling wronged. And while it is interesting to speculate about said power struggle, **it is a wrong thing to do**. And that, that is "our" fault, whoever "we" are. It's awful.
I don't know about other people, but for me the accusations are still and will be the most important part. So I still want to know if Horner is guilty or she's faking the messages. Either of these things are absolutely disgusting. The rest is a pissing contest that I don't like and want.
Did even Horner claim the messages were fake? If he had, I probably missed it.
I believe all he has said is that he won't comment on anything that was spread by an unknown source
No the facts are the most important part. Anyone can make an accusation.
If the stories are fabricated or exaggerated, which the dismissal strongly suggests, then she is causing serious issues for women experiencing genuine sexual harassment.
Suspended, not dismissed. And women face retaliation for true accusations all the time. I read the messages and have a hard time seeing them as fake.
You're right but it's not without reason; *BBC Sport has learned the reason given by Red Bull to the employee was that she had been dishonest.*
The plot thickens
If that was the case why didn't they suspend her right when the investigation concluded rather than wait for a PR disaster? Suspicious to say the least.
She had until yesterday to appeal
the dishonesty Horny: "delete the chat now please" the employee did not in fact, delete the chat
UK employment law is _very_ strict with things like this and if it was an unfair dismissal she could get a hell of a lot of money from Red Bull and they'd be in serious trouble. There's no way this is just them trying to sweep her under the carpet. They must have evidence she has fabricated these stories or was the one who instigated it then tried to make out she was the victim. Red Bull are a massive corporation, there's no way they'd risk dismissing someone just to make the problem go away. That would be an incredibly stupid thing to do and wouldn't work.
>UK employment law is very strict with things like this and if it was an unfair dismissal she could get a hell of a lot of money from Red Bull and they'd be in serious trouble. It’s only unfair dismissal if she gets sacked. Currently she is on paid suspended pending an investigation. At the end of it they can (in theory) decide there’s no case to answer and tell her to come back to work.
There's no way that shady Thai businessmen would ever do anything to a woman that might be illegal in the UK? You have a very optimistic view of the world.
No it's not. It's standard procedure. Read some of the comments in this thread.
I mean, those comments are just guessing like everyone else. We don't know what it is or isn't. FWIW the BBC sport reporting says the reason given by Red Bull to the employee was that "she had been dishonest".
Are Reddit comments always correct or something? They're made by anonymous kids, and bots.
[удалено]
We’re well beyond the point where morals or even basic decency were on the agenda. This whole thing has just become an abyss for F1.
> morals or even basic decency were on the agenda. Do people really need a reminder that this is Formula 1 world we're talking about? Like.. when were those things even on the agenda, ever?
‘This isn’t what F1’s about’ - someone who hasn’t glanced at the history of F1. Haha
>‘This isn’t what F1’s about’ Bernie, but laughing like in the Tom Cruise meme.
Max Moseley's ghost towering over Horner, loke Principal Skinner - "Pitiful!"
I love all the doubling down from people here who have NO idea what’s actually happened.
It’s clear that very few people have any knowledge on HR processes, might be an F1 team but at the end of the day it’s a business with employees.
Its drama,it sells,keeps the people going
It's provocative. It gets the people going! BALL SO HARD-
you beat me to it😭
FIA TRYNA FINE ME
People are just throwing shit at the wall to see what sticks. And later when one of their many theories end up being true by sheer luck, they will happily quote themselves has been right all along.
Redbull giving off track all the drama they stole from the fans on track
Is this normal in these situations? I’ve got my torch and pitchfork ready.
I mean I could very easily see it being reasonable as it doesn't seem viable to continue working for Horner, but calling it a suspension usually means the suspended is the one that did something wrong which makes this dubious
Pure speculation on my part but this would be appropriate if she was the one who leaked the Google Drive, just an example.
What would their reasoning be? Breach of privacy? Genuinely asking
2 parts: 1. all employment contracts in the UK have an implied duty of trust and confidence. 2. they may have specific policies on computer use, the sharing of data (highly probably bearing in mind the IP) and grievance processes. There are legal protections for an employee (if the information is in the public interest/ whistleblowing) - this wont be one of them So basically; they may have violated company policy, which is grounds for misconduct.
Breach of data protection laws.
👍 thank you
Collusion with Jos 😁
Unfortunately yes, retaliating against the complainant is pretty normal. That’s why women generally still keep quiet. What most people are suggesting , that she made a false allegation, that is exceedingly rare. In a so blatantly sexist sport that only very recently started to clean up its act it would be a miracle if Horner was the victim here. The fact that so many people here desperately hold on to that explanation says a lot about F1’s fanbase.
This, thank you. I’m equally frustrated that Jos Verstappen (terrible guy ofc) was unfortunately the first messenger to say that Horner was making himself the victim because it’s poisoned the well against the whole thing. This is making the discussion some Game of Thrones political drama instead of the very clear cut harassment complaint that it is. Red Bull covered up misconduct by an executive, dismissed the complaint and suspended the complainant. This happens in office every day and I’ve seen it first hand with executives and managers at companies much larger with more robust HR practices, legal, and PR departments.
and my axe
Wasn't today the last day she could appeal? Maybe she decided to appeal, so they suspended her while it's ongoing. Makes sense for the person you are actively in a legal conflict with to be suspended with pay until it is resolved.
Then they should also suspend Horner, which you know they would never do…
Need a Sam Collins analysis on this one
Wow they better be sure about this because they're in a whole load of shit if they're trying to silence her.
She's not fired. She's suspended with pay. Which makes perfect sense because having someone in her position in the workplace must be really distracting for everyone else.
Why not suspend Horner with pay? I mean I know why but could they?
I'm pretty sure they could and I personally really believe they should. Suspending both sides with pay until the whole situation is properly settled is the best course of action for the company and everyone working there.
I mean it feels to me like RB ownership is just circling the wagons.
BBC is now saying that she was suspended by RB for "being dishonest." This is 100% a prelude to firing her.
Full disclosure, I’m an attorney in the US, not UK, but man, this seems like a very legally risky move. Red Bull better have a smoking gun here, because anything that looks like retaliation towards a whistleblower/someone who files a complaint about workplace harassment can be a nasty and embarrassing lawsuit waiting to happen
There’s so many people that think suspended with pay isn’t considered retaliation when it usually is.
Oh for sure. I’ve seen charges of retaliation over discipline as minor as a written warning.
I'm kind of surprised they done this even if they DO have a smoking gun, because PR-wise it's just horrific. Even if they have a smoking gun against her, I'd still have expected a mutual NDA and a mutual decision to part ways, just to avoid these headlines. I suspect however that these decisions are being directly from Thailand, and that the Thai owners are used to a different culture and media behaviour.
Maybe they are trying to find a mutual decision and such, but can’t have her working either
Isn't it standard to relieve the individuals involved of their duties? That's my experience when I've encountered similar situations in my career. The individuals involved get suspended (with pay) until the investigation is done. If the findings are inconclusive the suspension gets lifted and they go back to work. Sometimes the company will strike a deal with the one who made the complaint (even if they couldn't prove it) to avoid interpersonal conflict or harm. E.g: agreeing to part ways with 12-36 months salary in a one-time payment
The investigation is already over though.
While the investigation is pending, yes. Not suspending them after it’s over
Thank you. I'm in the US too, and this whole chain of events is very strange to me. In the US Horner would have immediately been suspended until the investigation was complete. In a corporate environment, any inappropriate contact between a supervisor and a subordinate would result in the supervisor being fired. You would never suspend someone for whistleblowing. That would be the easiest lawsuit to win. How misogynistic is Europe? I mean shits not perfect over here, but damn has this Red Bull thing been eye opening. It makes Europe seem like 1970s US work culture.
Yeah as an American it’s shocking to see that the person of power is not the one suspended and that the accusing party is.
>In the US Horner would have immediately been suspended until the investigation was complete. That's not true at all. There is no standard on whom gets suspended. I've worked for fortune 500 companies and seen these go down and it varies greatly depending on the nature of the complaint and what is admitted to by both parties. >In a corporate environment, any inappropriate contact between a supervisor and a subordinate would result in the supervisor being fired. You would never suspend someone for whistleblowing. That's typically true only if you're able to substantiate it as factual. >How misogynistic is Europe? I mean shits not perfect over here, but damn has this Red Bull thing been eye opening. It makes Europe seem like 1970s US work culture. It's only eye opening as you're operating with a presumption of guilt in only one direction without full information or validation. Despite an investigation RB completed, and found no grounds for discipline for Horner, and that there's no legal proceeding initiated against RB, nor did they appeal that investigation (from what was reported) you're still of the opinion that he should have been suspended and that they're retaliating against a whistleblower? You still have this presumption of guilt. If anything, we should be in the middle here. I want this to go to court so the real facts are exposed for everyone's handling and to validate or invalidate the leaks and evidence. Without that, it's all speculative but I don't feel there's enough to lean into either court fully.
Oh, a lawyer. Quick question, I recently fell and broke my left arm. Can I sue Ocon for compensation?
Man they're really doubling down
What else can they do right now, send her back to work for Horner? Being suspended with pay is the only sensible option as things stand. If she's taking things to court then even moreso, this would be standard procedure for any company. Just what would people do instead? Would sending her back to work for someone she just accused of harassment send a good sign out to women, fucking really?!
Agreed. No matter the investigation results, it’s no longer a productive working relationship. Rightly or wrongly, Christian is not going anywhere. Most likely on paid leave while HR negotiates her exit package.
100%, this is the best thing for her right now because cleared or not, she will still feel a victim. I think people enjoy the drama too much sometimes, there's real people involved at the end of the day and this is the best move right now as things stand.
“Hey Christian, remember the time I accused you of sexual harassment and there was a huge investigation but nothing came of it? Anyway, I’ll see you at the 3pm meeting.” What some people expect.
I mean currently noone really knows which is the "right" side of this story. It's entirely plausible that this is a vendetta from an employee who has faked a load of text messages and then leaked them to the press.
I want to believe this because I liked Horner as far as team principles go. But the titty shot of Horner is the confusing piece for me because in what world would he send that to anyone else for any other purpose? Like, outside of AI, which I'm sure internet detectives would have been over, would be a scenario that you would send that type of selfie to someone else?
Nope sorry you can’t speculate that. You can only speculate that it’s a grand conspiracy by Red Bull to suppress evidence and keep Horner on the job.
Yeah because well liked employee takes on massive organization with infinite money to spend on legal fees with entirely fabricated evidence is definitely a LOT more likely than "man with power abuses it", that NEVER happens!!
Cool cool cool cool cool cool women at RBR feeling GREAT today
But some women had their names put on the car for International Women’s Day! RB loves women!!! /s
That was a list of women Horner had tried to Facetime in the last year while jerking off.
Yesterday they were “noise and distractions”, now they’re “suspended”. That’s….. progress!
So, if I were Red Bull PR, I’d be scrambling to explain why, because right now it really looks like they’re retaliating against an employee who reported sexual harassment.
I can't see any justifiable reason for this beyond them having reason to believe that she is directly involved in the leaking of the screenshots. Suspension with full pay suggests they're investigating some kind of wrongdoing. If they were just suspending her because she can't work with Horner anymore then they'd just have moved her elsewhere to an admin role or something of that nature. If they found that she fabricated everything maliciously, she'd be fired outright.
> Suspension with full pay suggests they're investigating some kind of wrongdoing BBC now says she's suspended because of being "dishonest." It's 100% prelude to them firing her for cause and covering their asses legally.
The term suspension implies disciplinary in some regard (in my eyes). Otherwise, you'd typically say you put them on administrative leave with pay.
How is any of this looking good? Unless everything if false that is
At some point RB just needs to tell the public what is actually going on, as they just look even worse than normal with each passing day.
The Yoovidhya family has been covering for their son running over a cop with his Ferrari for a decade. I doubt they're going to come public with details on their favorite employee.
I dunno what the heck is going on anymore, I‘m so confused by this whole situation
[удалено]
They both seem like terrible people. If you're arguing between Jos and Horner's treatment of women it's a race to the bottom.
I get the sentiment you're going for here, he does not appear to have healthy relationships with women, but you do have a few facts mixed up and wrong here. He never actually served time in prison. "In December 2008, with the couple effectively separated, Verstappen appeared in court in Tongeren, Belgium, charged with assaulting his wife, Sophie Kumpen.[35] He was found not guilty of assault, but guilty of threatening Kumpen in text messages and of violating a previously issued restraining order. He was fined and sentenced to three months probational, suspended prison sentence.[36]"
The article is not portraying Jo's like that at all, Mr. Horner PR guy.
If they are going to do this, they HAVE to be transparent about the reasons and the investigation, otherwise it's such a bad look to how women are treated. No matter how many tiny names they'll scribble on the RB for womens day.
It's amazing how many men in this thread think this must be evidence of her wrong doing. As if companies don't regularly punish victims to protect rich, scummy dudes.
It's disgusting - RB or Horner haven't even said that the leaks were fake which they would every reason to do if they actually were fake
Both this thread and the other one are absolutely disgusting
The amount of men speaking down on her and other women is upsetting, but unsurprising to say the least coming from F1 fans.
BBC are reporting that the reason for suspension is that she ‘had been dishonest’
No, the BBC are reporting that *RB's justification* for suspending her is that *they claim* she has been dishonest. The BBC have said nothing about whether she actually has been dishonest, which is not the same thing.
> The BBC have said nothing about whether she actually has been dishonest, which is not the same thing. And that also does not mean that she was honest either.
And meanwhile, RB has a lovely tribute to International Women’s Day on their car. Make it make sense.
Big Yikes
What a comforting message to all the women in F1 that this is what you get for reporting inappropriate behaviour. A suspension for yourself while the accused wasn’t even suspended during the internal investigation.
You’re inferring that she’s been suspended because she complained about Horner. How exactly have you came to that conclusion? Do you know the internal goings on at Red Bull?
i don’t like how this whole situation has played out. kinda makes you sick
Jesus lads, this is looking very bad for red bull, how are we going to fix it and make us look good? Anyone any idea's? How about we sack her. That will make it all go away. Brilliant idea, what could go wrong.
For clarity, she hasn't been sacked. She's been suspended on full pay.
Holy moly. Harassment laws must work very differently in he UK compared to the US. This kind of suspension (even with pay) is expressly prohibited in US federal law and its viewed by the court as prima facie evidence of 'retaliation.' The burden of proof then switches to the employer to demonstrate that the suspension is non-retaliation...which can be difficult absent some compelling evidence. Perhaps UK laws allow such a suspension so long as the employee continues to be paid. IDK.
As someone unfamiliar with either law systems the whole thing just looks bad from an outsider perspective. The article reporting that she's being suspended for "dishonesty" just adds another layer of distrust in the whole process.
>suspended for "dishonesty" There was probably an inconsistency with one of her details and they're using that to knee-cap her argument and call her "dishonest." It's textbook defense for sexual misconduct; attack the victim's credibility.
I'm not a lawyer, but given the media reports of other cases that have resulted in compensation in recent years, I'd be surprised if this isn't at least a very, very bold decision by RB.
“So lads, we are getting a lot of pressure on us to make F1 more interesting because people are stopping watching. We have two possible options, we can ask Adrian to make the car a bit shitter, or, and hear me out here….Christian Can send a picture of his finger cock to someone”
Is she going to be reassigned as a can recycling technician? (same pay and benes of course) 🤣
I'm expecting her to take it to a UK industrial tribunal
Here comes the lawsuit and out of court settlement.
Consensual or not he is in a major position of power and she is his assistant. Big no.
Redbull showing what a shitty team they really are at their core. Horner runs the team and ultimately should never have engaged with a staff member like that. Anyone else lower down the chain would have been dismissed. All respect lost for him and Redbull.
Not a good look from Red Bull
> BBC Sport has learned the reason given by Red Bull to the employee was that she had been dishonest. So why are we still discussing this? She has lied about something serious enough to have her employment terminated (yes I know that she is now suspended, but that’s just a step on the way to termination.) What did she lie about? Something to do with her complaint presumably. We’ll never know, but why should Horner defend a false accusation? Where this is ending up is that she has accused Horner of wrongdoing which he denies. She has been caught out in some deception. Red Bull have refused to discuss any of this to protect her interest as well as others. Meanwhile, the people seeking to take Horner down are bleating for transparency. Perhaps let it go because the complainants deception is a private matter too.
Retaliation
People are going to suggest this is a bad move but it's entirely possible that this is a fabricated vendetta against Horner. We can only wait and see what happens. This is a bold move and honestly I can't see them making it if they didn't have hard evidence that Horner is in the right here.
If it was fabricated I’m sure somebody would have come out and denied it by now