Jermaine Jenas sacked by BBC

[Twonewcats]

For inappropriate behaviour. No further details yet as to what specifically he has allegedly done.

How arrogant are these men to assume they won’t get found out . Glad the BBC have ( for once ) acted quickly . Married men sending ( allegedly) unsolicited inappropriate messages 🙄 Also l think that sending an unsolicited dick pic is how a sexual criminal offence?

Yes it is now an offence, one of the ones introduced under the Online Safety Act, irrespective of whether you sent it to cause distress to the receiver or it was for gratification.

Bear with me. Anyone who sends unwanted pics should be sacked immediately. He has definitely been stupid but I would really like to know context. I’ve just been reading about the bbc drivers. It’s not a good time for them. I wonder what else will come out,

@Ilovetowander

”With regard to his employment the texts given what has been said do not sound obscene or threatening or illegal and therefore I do not think it should be the end of his role at the BBC.”

And if he had sent them to a woman he met in the pub who was nothing to do with work, he probably wouldn’t have lost his job.

But he did it at work, and one employee complained. The BBC lawyers will have reviewed and considered it sufficient to dismiss.

If a manager sent you messages that were “mild” in respect of obscenity but made you very uncomfortable, like “hey, nice tits” or “your arse looks good in that skirt” and you took them to HR, you would want the company to seriously consider dismissing the manager for creating a hostile and sexist workplace, wouldn’t you?

It's amazing really (but not at all surprising) that he initially responded with anger and arrogance "my lawyers will deal with it". The lawyers obviously then told him he didn't have a leg to stand on, so he's gone for a half arsed grovelling apology.

I say half arsed, because these men always assume it will be enough, but the language is very telling. "I accept responsibility" is the overall message sure enough, but the undercurrent of "I'm having therapy" (so it's not really my fault) "I'm self destructive" (You see, I can't help it) and "two consenting adults" which is the most interesting one. Clearly, he wants to get across that there was no illegality or the persons weren't under age. But texts between "consenting" adults doesn't end with dismissal for inappropriate behaviour, mate. His use of the word consenting is annoying, as he means it to be 'they were fully grown women, therefore they were fair game'

As adults, we all know our responsibilities in the workplace and in public. Inappropriate behaviour at work can and does fall under gross misconduct. I cannot see an argument otherwise. I guess it depends where people have worked before as to their understanding of this (ex civil servant here, our contracts were crystal clear. We were also reminded at Christmas that work parties outside the office were an extension of the workplace and to behave as we would at work)

I was thinking what if Graham Norton is a wrong un. Yet the bbc loved him and pay him still a crazy amount. But if while he was doing the radio and chat snow when it was on virtually all the time. 100% it would have been covered up by the bbc. For example complaints from staff or sexual harassment.
That's just what happens. BBC for a while acted like Rylan was the nearest huge star. They get it wrong so many times putting their eggs in one basket.
Alex Scott is another one where they give them every gig going for a few years. It's madness. Presenting jobs should be given to lots of different people.

Just saying in theory what if . Its just typical bbc loving their talent. And giving them too muxh money.

Just cos your the supposed top talent you should be fired for wrong doings. And the public should know about it.
Ant mcpartlin is another I was stunned how everyone seemed to shrug off what he did after missing just one series of I'm a celeb.
He should never have worked again on TV imo.
His problem had been going on for years covered up.

I have a feeling all the female staff at the one show threatened to quit if something wasn't done immediately.
This is BBC after all. Probably had been going on ages.

That is interesting, my first thought was they've jumped quickly because of the criticism they've had about the previous cases and hopefully they've got it right. Reacting too fast can be as bad as too slow, it is a fine balance.

I suppose it is like men who have multiple accusations against them of rape or sexual assault but are never prosecuted by the cps and then go on to rape yet again and murder before they are finally held to account. You would think a run in with the police for the first accusation would stop them but it doesn’t. They are too arrogant and too fixated on what they want to do to stop.
Saville was interviewed (eventually) by the police but no action taken and he continued with his perversion.
Ian Huntley had multiple accusations of rape before he went on to murder (and probably rape although evidence was not possible) little Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman.

There have been quotes from "sources" (🤷🏼‍♀️) who say that staff were shocked when they found out, as they had received a text message to tell them.
Presumably because the DM was going to break the news before the staff had been told.

Oh, i wonder if it's relevant that it was the head of BBC Sport who sent the text to staff, as opposed to the head of the One Show's department.

After the recent bbc issues, i don't believe for a second that GN would be protected.

HE had allegations against him, involving the police, and was on sick leave. It's very very difficult for an employer to do anything disciplinary in those circumstances.
If they didn't happen at work, and if the BBC hadn't seen the alleged texts, then it was all allegations and rumours.

Presumably, like with Graz, there was hard evidence of what JJ had done, and it was deemed to be sackable.

And as I said previously, JJ was being lined up for the MOTD job. He wasn't unimportant to the BBC

But we don't know what the messages were. And why should he be allowed to stay if HR have deemed it to be gross misconduct and other staff members have complained? Why should JJ stay and continue to earn a huge salary while the women walk on eggshells around him?

Well said,

Firstly they didn't say harassed. Secondly, if you were JJ, you'd rightly expect your ex-employer to give you the privacy that you deserve under contract/disciplinary guidelines.

I don’t know exactly but not all parts of the BBC are the same. So he might (making this up) be employed by BBC Sport as his management line but also do work for, say, BBC Entertainment. Meaning comms would come from the right part of management.

Those who are playing down the seriousness of this, are you forgetting that his agent also dumped him when they saw what had happened? They didn't publicly defend or diminish what JJ had done or attempt damage limitation- they dumped him.

TalkSport were happy for him to go on air as the news broke, but the almost immediately released a statement saying there were no plans for him to be on air again.

Yes that makes sense. Thanks.

The Sun.

The Sun leaked the story before the Head of Sport had told his colleagues.

From that Sun article today -

"They then “frantically” sexted over 24 hours but he claims it ended amicably." Frantically sexted 🤮

"These were consenting adults I was texting.” As PP said, they were adults. If both were consenting, neither would have complained.

"The overriding panic by a mile was that I could lose my family." Yep, there we have it.

If this were a general member of the public who sent inappropriate texts which were not illegal to a colleague then that is workplace misconduct and they absolutely should lose their job, and not be re-employed by the company. Why do you think the BBC should have different rules?