Thanks for the corrections, all. I did read the Wikipedia article on the BBC before I posted but I must have not understood. Ignorance fought!
Don’t know myself, but David Mitchell points out on one of his panel show appearances that Clarkson was not fired. His contract was up and the Beeb didn’t renew it.
Yes. And I’m a fan of the old Top Gear and Grand Tour. Unless there were some extenuating circumstances, such as the other individual making a physical threat, Clarkson was properly fired.
I don’t know if it mitigates things but as I understand it he was suffering from low blood sugar after a long day of shooting.
If your employer were to give you the alternative of working with a colleague who assaulted you or one who merely sexually harassed you, you could walk out and recover substantial damages for constructive dismissal. It doesn’t matter how willing your are to believe that the producer deserved a punching. It doesn’t even matter how much he did deserve a punching. And it certainly doesn’t matter how objectionable Clarkson’s replacement was. You punch a co-worker, you get fired. This is not a guideline; it’s a rule, and it’s not one that any employer can afford to overlook.
I don’t know it just seems stupid to shoot the goose that lays the golden egg just because it bit you once.
True, though the decision not to renew was directly the result of the punching incident, so while it was not technically a firing (i.e., a cancellation of his contract), it effectively was. From a BBC press release:
That goose bit the BBC many, many times. It finally bit particularly hard in this occasion.
The Wikipedia article on Clarkson lists **fourteen **separate incidents in which Clarkson said something inflammatory or insulting, either on the show, or in public commentary, regularly leading to reprimands from the BBC. Also, he punched Piers Morgan in 2004 (though, hey, Morgan’s kind of a jerk, too).
This miscommunication happens because “government” is American English for just about the entire public sector. The President, the entirety of Congress (both parties), state agencies, local schools, the police, etc. are all “the government” to us.
.
I wouldn’t claim it be an expert but IIRC this is complete BS. The reason there was no hot food is that Clarkson hung around drinking in a pub long after completing the days’ shooting.
My point was that the BBC seems to not be very attentive during their hiring process. Both of these are things that can get you fired or in trouble with the law, and that’s fair (though, like I said, I have more of an issue with one than the other, personally).
But it’s mightily strange that you’d get two events of such magnitude from the same company in such a short duration, particularly after the UK basically admitted in totality that everyone had been letting celebrities get away with anything (molesting kids, etc,) rather than risk going up against the strict libel laws of the country. And then they turn around and hire a serial flasher.
Well done, BBC.
A weak analogy. It implies that other BBC employees aren’t watching and learning from the incident, and that it was a one-time thing that represents the worst damage that could possibly be done by an aggressor.
If they didn’t fire Clarkson, other employees would conclude that they can get away with fisticuffs too. And the damage isn’t restricted to just an annoying goose bite. Clarkson’s punch put his victim in the hospital. What if next time he puts someone in a coma?
Also, it’s seems much less stupid when you unpick the analogy: “I don’t know it just seems stupid to [fire a popular entertainer] just because [he physically assaulted his boss for no good reason].”
A few on those were undeserved due to remarks taken out of context and misreported. Others, however, were entirely deserved.
Now that’s a mitigating factor.
So how is Bill Cosby?
I would have though the party not being very attentive during the hiring process was Amazon.
That is where Amazon has an advantage over the BBC; it has a track record of hiring bat-shit crazy people with emotional issues even when they have no clear or visible talent. They just call them “Associates” and schedule them to my shift. :smack:
Getting back to the OP — I am one of those who feel the BBC should not have fired him. It isn’t like behavior like that is unique to him, and since you can’t/won’t fire every star who has lashed out in a fit of anger ----------------
Besides — I loved the show the way it was. They should have thrown the whole issue over to the courts and made their move after that decision was made.
I am a huge fan of Top Gear (the original show and the Clarkson reboot) and the Grand Tour. I’ve been a fan of Clarkson’s (as an entertainer, mind, not as a serious journalist) since I first encountered his back-page column in Performance Car magazine in 1991 (when I was nine).
He should absolutely have been fired by the BBC, and at the same time I don’t really have a problem with Amazon hiring him. It’s not as though they couldn’t have hired him away from the BBC years ago; he earned about half a million pounds a year doing Top Gear (which made him the BBC’s highest-paid employee by some distance) and is earning more than ten million for TGT.
For what it’s worth, I am enjoying TGT but not as much as TG. I especially miss the crap used car challenges, though frankly I am perfectly happy to see a couple of celebrities explode each week rather than be interviewed; with a very few exceptions (e.g., Slash, Boris Becker, Schumacher and the other F1 guys) I generally skipped the Star In a Reasonably Priced Car segments.
Number One Rule is ‘look after the talent. If it wants steak and chips at two in the morning you make sure it gets steak and chips at two in the morning’.
Hardly short duration.
Chris Evans has been working for the BBC since the '90s, and is still working there now, much to my irritation. In fact, most of the flashing allegations are from back then, but it was all sort of brushed off as lads being lads, and was very much in theme with the -highly annoying- shows he was attached to.
I couldn’t stand his breakfast show back when he was on Radio 1; I used to have my radio alarm clock tuned to it because that was guaranteed to make me wake up and turn it off, but now I switched to mostly Radio 2, the git’s there as well, ruining my commute.
Rule Number Two is fire the talent when it punches other employees and uses racial slurs during filming.
Both Jezza and May are getting on in years, and the hamster is only a few years behind. At some point hooning around in hyper cars or hot hatchbacks are going to make them really uncomfortable and start thinking about doing straight documentaries. Failing to renew Jezza’s contract would have given the BBC a head start in the next generation TG, when May and Hammond lined up with Clarkson.
So far TG 3.0 S1 seems to be a bust, and we will have to wait till the next season comes on, to find out if they learned anything and adjust the programming. Even then, we will have to wait till S3 before that show starts to get its legs.
On the actual incident, had they been practical, they would have lied and kept Clarkson, and the team onboard until such time as they retired, but they for what ever reason, decided to go all HR and treat everyone as equal under the law. To me, that sounds like in the discussions prior to letting Clarkson go, a conversation was had regarding the show’s future and rose tinted glasses about a plug and play replacement crew.
Seems to me that, any future actions by personal and the beeb, depending on the monetary output of the show, will be directly affected by the Clarkson affair.