Christian Horner under Investigation

[morefirejules08]

Aggressive management style? Unless this is a case of sexual harassment (zero tolerance) or he choke slammed someone to ground for not listening to him, I don't see how this is different from most people managing things. High profile and high intensity jobs puts a lot of stress on people who are accountable to deliver results and if there is an individual who is annoying and doesn't exactly do what you want, the frustration and aggressive behavior is perfectly understandable. I have seen physical altercations at work place for which people have been remanded and warned, not fired.

So unless Horner either sexually or violently assaulted someone he didn’t really do anything wrong? Do some of you actually read what you write before posting?

[mendis]

Aggressive management style? Unless this is a case of sexual harassment (zero tolerance) or he choke slammed someone to ground for not listening to him, I don't see how this is different from most people managing things. High profile and high intensity jobs puts a lot of stress on people who are accountable to deliver results and if there is an individual who is annoying and doesn't exactly do what you want, the frustration and aggressive behavior is perfectly understandable. I have seen physical altercations at work place for which people have been remanded and warned, not fired.

So unless Horner either sexually or violently assaulted someone he didn’t really do anything wrong? Do some of you actually read what you write before posting?

Unless some of you have actual details of the incident, it's difficult to be more objective. I merely shared my opinion on what could be possible work place situations that I have witnessed and have fair share of experience of handling intense situations that challenged me and certainly people around me to the breaking point, and I stand by it. Feel free to share your opinion.

[ThijsMuis]

Aggressive management style? Unless this is a case of sexual harassment (zero tolerance) or he choke slammed someone to ground for not listening to him, I don't see how this is different from most people managing things. High profile and high intensity jobs puts a lot of stress on people who are accountable to deliver results and if there is an individual who is annoying and doesn't exactly do what you want, the frustration and aggressive behavior is perfectly understandable. I have seen physical altercations at work place for which people have been remanded and warned, not fired.

So unless Horner either sexually or violently assaulted someone he didn’t really do anything wrong? Do some of you actually read what you write before posting?

Unless some of you have actual details of the incident, it's difficult to be more objective. I merely shared my opinion on what could be possible work place situations that I have witnessed and have fair share of experience of handling intense situations that challenged me and certainly people around me to the breaking point, and I stand by it. Feel free to share your opinion.

If you witness a physical altercations does that validate the no firing, or is being aggressive to staff understandable?
You went to breaking point, nobody in life should be taken there for being at work.

[Stu]

It seems to me that speculation around the accusation(s) is being used to amplify the possibilities of what has been complained about (and is currently being investigated INDEPENDENTLY by Red Bull (GmbH).
It can be determined from the various posts that some forum users are using their own narrative to create scenarios coloured by their own desire to destroy personality. Be aware that when there was insinuation of wrong-doing in another team a few months ago the outcome of the official investigation was different to what many posters verbalised in this public space.

[Shakeman]

So it’s likely he raised his voice and a snowflake got offended. I never would’ve guessed Horner isn’t in the habit of suffering fools gladly. The only thing that will make this story interesting is if the complainant is Marko.

[bagajohny]

It seems to me that speculation around the accusation(s) is being used to amplify the possibilities of what has been complained about (and is currently being investigated INDEPENDENTLY by Red Bull (GmbH).
It can be determined from the various posts that some forum users are using their own narrative to create scenarios coloured by their own desire to destroy personality. Be aware that when there was insinuation of wrong-doing in another team a few months ago the outcome of the official investigation was different to what many posters verbalised in this public space.

You cannot just pin this solely on users. PR team of RB should have handled and worded it more appropriately. If you leave it open to people's interpretation then they can interpret what they feel like. The blame partly lies with the PR team also.

Also in the past incident which you are referring to, it was very clear what was the accusation. Nature of these two incidents is not the same.

[mwillems]

It seems to me that speculation around the accusation(s) is being used to amplify the possibilities of what has been complained about (and is currently being investigated INDEPENDENTLY by Red Bull (GmbH).
It can be determined from the various posts that some forum users are using their own narrative to create scenarios coloured by their own desire to destroy personality. Be aware that when there was insinuation of wrong-doing in another team a few months ago the outcome of the official investigation was different to what many posters verbalised in this public space.

You cannot just pin this solely on users. PR team of RB should have handled and worded it more appropriately. If you leave it open to people's interpretation then they can interpret what they feel like. The blame partly lies with the PR team also.

Also in the past incident which you are referring to, it was very clear what was the accusation. Nature of these two incidents is not the same.

I think the point is that you can't draw conclusions without facts and right now there are precious little, so wait and see. Some folks are using it to support their already established viewpoint. Although too be fair it didn't get to bad in here. There was a point yesterday evening when it looked it was going to descend to mudslinging but ultimately it didn't.

[Ground Effect]

I find it mind boggling that various outlets are reporting and alleging different things. From inappropriate behaviour to aggressive management style, inappropriate picture being sent.... what happened to journalism? Can all these reports be accurate? If there's nothing tangible with hard confirmation, surely it's best to go with the initial report of him being investigated for unknown reasons.

[mwillems]

I find it mind boggling that various outlets are reporting and alleging different things. From inappropriate behaviour to aggressive management style, inappropriate picture being sent.... what happened to journalism? Can all these reports be accurate? If there's nothing tangible with hard confirmation, surely it's best to go with the initial report of him being investigated for unknown reasons.

The suggestion can a number of those, I have an idea of what may be alleged, as I'm sure others do, but are sensibly not posting it here.

[Cs98]

It seems to me that speculation around the accusation(s) is being used to amplify the possibilities of what has been complained about (and is currently being investigated INDEPENDENTLY by Red Bull (GmbH).
It can be determined from the various posts that some forum users are using their own narrative to create scenarios coloured by their own desire to destroy personality. Be aware that when there was insinuation of wrong-doing in another team a few months ago the outcome of the official investigation was different to what many posters verbalised in this public space.

You cannot just pin this solely on users. PR team of RB should have handled and worded it more appropriately. If you leave it open to people's interpretation then they can interpret what they feel like. The blame partly lies with the PR team also.

Also in the past incident which you are referring to, it was very clear what was the accusation. Nature of these two incidents is not the same.

Pending further information, given there's an investigation, I would argue people shouldn't peddle theories based on feelings. I mean, we already have like 3 different stories, very low chance all of them are true, and there might be legal ramifications for outlets that made their feelings known so to speak and made stuff up.

[Venturiation]

[ThijsMuis]

[Cs98]

My point was, unless a more specific information comes from official source, with current version of official statement you cannot say that any one group of people are wrong or that the stuff is made up. At present, any one of those accusations falls within the bounds of official wording.

We have different values then. For a potentially serious issue like this, it's not appropriate to speculate on what happened when there's no evidence to back it up. We only know there's an investigation into some kind of behaviour, we can wait for the results of that before we start making up stories about what happened. There's a non-zero chance the speculation itself does more damage than what the original accusation even relates to, so it's just plain stupid to engage in it for non-trivial matters where there is no safe information.

People are not speculating things out of thin air.

https://i.ibb.co/9ptzLQb/image.png

They are only interpreting the meaning of the word.

There's a non-zero chance the speculation itself does more damage than what the original accusation even relates to, so it's just plain stupid to engage in it for non-trivial matters where there is no safe information.

All the more reason to not word your statements vaguely. My point is that RB also shares the blame here.

Well yes they are, the term "transgressive behaviour" didn't even come from the RB spokesperson. They said

"After being made aware of certain recent allegations, the company launched an independent investigation. This process, which is already underway, is being carried out by an external specialist barrister. The company takes these matters extremely seriously and the investigation will be completed as soon as practically possible. It would not be appropriate to comment further at this time."

So we know there have been allegations and that there is an investigation. Good, let's wait and see what the results of that investigation are before speculating on the specifics of what happened. Anything else would be putting the cart before the horse.

Not to mention. In that definition you published of "transgressive behaviour". It literally says it covers "every form of unwanted behaviour". So if that is what it is it could literally be anything, so again, inappropriate to make up a story in the absence of evidence.

[bagajohny]

We have different values then. For a potentially serious issue like this, it's not appropriate to speculate on what happened when there's no evidence to back it up. We only know there's an investigation into some kind of behaviour, we can wait for the results of that before we start making up stories about what happened. There's a non-zero chance the speculation itself does more damage than what the original accusation even relates to, so it's just plain stupid to engage in it for non-trivial matters where there is no safe information.

People are not speculating things out of thin air.

https://i.ibb.co/9ptzLQb/image.png

They are only interpreting the meaning of the word.

There's a non-zero chance the speculation itself does more damage than what the original accusation even relates to, so it's just plain stupid to engage in it for non-trivial matters where there is no safe information.

All the more reason to not word your statements vaguely. My point is that RB also shares the blame here.

Well yes they are, the term "transgressive behaviour" didn't even come from the RB spokesperson. They said

"After being made aware of certain recent allegations, the company launched an independent investigation. This process, which is already underway, is being carried out by an external specialist barrister. The company takes these matters extremely seriously and the investigation will be completed as soon as practically possible. It would not be appropriate to comment further at this time."

So we know there have been allegations and that there is an investigation. Good, let's wait and see what the results of that investigation are before speculating on the specifics of what happened. Anything else would be putting the cart before the horse.

Well the term is mentioned in the same article in which the official statement is published. So RB did not object to the term being used.

Not to mention. In that definition you published of "transgressive behaviour". It literally says it covers "every form of unwanted behaviour". So if that is what it is it could literally be anything, so again, inappropriate to make up a story in the absence of evidence.

Yeah well no one is accusing Horner of "murder" since the term does not cover it. So no, it could not be literally anything.

[Venturiation]

According to information from AMUS, a survey of those involved will take place in England on Friday. If the external investigators come to the conclusion that the compliance allegations make continued employment impossible, Red Bull will have to look for a new team boss at short notice

https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... an-horner/