Greg Wallace

[mjr]

But Banijay did employ him. And they are now conducting an internal review. [actually I think they are now employing external lawyers to do this, but that's just from my recollection!] See this news article:

https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radi ... llegations

[...] A BBC spokesperson thanked those who “had the courage to speak out” over allegations about Wallace. It told Newsnight that Banijay UK had launched a review because it had the contractual relationship with Wallace.

“He is not employed by the BBC. When issues have been raised with the BBC we have taken action, referring issues to the relevant production company and challenging his behaviour directly as has been widely reported.”

That comment by an unnamed BBC spokesperson directly contradicts an allegation by named producer-director Dawn Elrick who said "the BBC suggested each individual would have to make their own direct complaint to the corporation [...] she received no further contact". I guess we might find out who was telling the truth in the future.

[mattheus]

<snippage> ...
That comment by an unnamed BBC spokesperson directly contradicts an allegation by named producer-director Dawn Elrick who said "the BBC suggested each individual would have to make their own direct complaint to the corporation [...] she received no further contact". I guess we might find out who was telling the truth in the future.

Quite possibly - but that's not why I posted.

I'm really just saying (and I think you made a similar point) that SOMEONE [employed|contracted] Wallace, so it's perfectly possible for Jane/John Doe to make a complaint, and SOMEONE will have a responsiblity to deal with it. Especially if multiple complaints are recieved across - say - 2017-2023 (or longer).

[mjr]

<snippage> ...
That comment by an unnamed BBC spokesperson directly contradicts an allegation by named producer-director Dawn Elrick who said "the BBC suggested each individual would have to make their own direct complaint to the corporation [...] she received no further contact". I guess we might find out who was telling the truth in the future.

Quite possibly - but that's not why I posted.

I'm really just saying (and I think you made a similar point) that SOMEONE [employed|contracted] Wallace, so it's perfectly possible for Jane/John Doe to make a complaint, and SOMEONE will have a responsiblity to deal with it. Especially if multiple complaints are recieved across - say - 2017-2023 (or longer).

And it will have been the BBC employing or contracting him for his I'm-not-wearing-any-underwear appearance on Strictly Come Dancing in 2014. While it may be strictly true for the BBC to say "he is not employed by the BBC" now, he has been employed or contracted directly by a BBC division in the past.

They seem to be spinning faster than a turntable!

[Bonefishblues]

Very true.

But Banijay did employ him. And they are now conducting an internal review. [actually I think they are now employing external lawyers to do this, but that's just from my recollection!] See this news article:

https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radi ... llegations

They didn't employ him either, he was a worker, contracted by the production company.

EDIT: to head off further pedantry (I hope) employee is a specific legal term in the UK. But anyone who is paid to do work has been employed by someone. In this case it may be more precise to say Wallace was "contracted" to do the work; but they are synonyms!

So: Yes. That's what i said in the first line of my answer.

Then the BBC said it in the article I quoted!

I'm sorry you thought it pedantic. Sometimes accurate use of words is important - ask the employment lawyers, tax lawyers, and Tribunal Chairmen who would be very interested to hear that Mr Wallace had been 'employed' (to say nothing of HMRC with their avaricious gaze on the IR35 Regulations) Any one of those would have little truck with the statement that they were synonyms - nor me, who spent a good part of his career ensuring that those in organisations were contracted correctly. The status of the individual has a major bearing on complaints & resolution processes and potential sanctions.

In this case, process and accountability were clearly muddy (see what I did there...) and to the huge detriment of those affected, who overcame the inherent power imbalance, made complaint, and whose complaints were not addressed as they should have been (I'm rather assuming that he is guilty of some or all of the behaviours alleged, but anyone who watched the interview with his Ghostwriter on Newsnight last night would be hard-pressed to pick holes in her detailed account, supported by contemporaneous notes, I'd suggest)

[mattheus]

People are attacking the BBC because people complained to the BBC about Wallace and they don't feel that the complaints were handled properly, including one letter from a producer detailing many incidents where the reply was that the victims would have to contact the BBC individually, with apparently no attempt made by the BBC to contact the alleged victims.

It also seems that the BBC were not aware of how many complaints had been made and, basically, weren't really checking properly what they were buying with taxpayer money.

If this was one or two complaints made recently only to the production company then the BBC might be able to hide behind the production company, but it seems it's been going on years and complaints were made to the BBC directly so that's not gonna work.

If someone has complaints about a company's employee then they need to complain to that company , not to the purchasers of its products. Customers are not responsible for the actions of supplying company employees.

Gregg Wallace is neither an employee of the BBC or of the Production Company.

Who do I complain to please?

What do you want to complain about?

[pwa]

Not anymore he doesn't. He made inappropriate remarks about women in one factory and then he left the programme. Not clear if quit or fired. https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-ente ... 48024.html

I didn't know that.

Mentioned back on page 2 viewtopic.php?p=1883373#p1883373

Ah, right. His noisy and fake enthusiasm tended to deter me from watching that programme. But on a couple of occasions I have seen factory workers looking a bit uncomfortable, and less than amused by his banter. Which now makes me wonder what other banter he used off-camera in an effort to break the ice.

[pliptrot]

I've never watched master chef but he was a key presenter in some shows about farming and food manufacturing. He came across as a braying idiot but I hold the producers of the show for the assininity of it. Very, very dispiriting. He may be a useful idiot for such a vehicle. He'd never make it to Radio 4, which - for me- is the last bastion of good broadcasting. I know there needs to populist appeal to attract viewers, but this twit? Please.

[Tangled Metal]

i liken the situation to own brand supermarket food. The supermarket does not make it but is responsible for complaints about it which they they pass to actual manufacturer to investigate with the supermarket controlling the process.

We were a toll producer for a large company once. When the end customer complained we carried out our investigations but it was controlled by to the company we produced for. Transferring to this situation we were like the production company who was like a toll producer for the BBC. WIth the customer being the networks that show the programme and the final customer being the viewers. Whatever the case the toll producer is not the responsible organisation ultimately but the BBC (as one of the networks showing the programme and as the organisation supplying to the networks by using the toll production company.

Convoluted responsibility chain? Certainly but at no stage in the chain can any organisation absolve themselves of the responsibility for Wallace's actions. How many of us have seen the programmes he has been in and got that eurgh feeling about him? I have and it is why I have always chosen not to watch programmes he is part of or to turn over when he comes on.

[axel_knutt]

i liken the situation to own brand supermarket food. The supermarket does not make it but is responsible for complaints about it which they they pass to actual manufacturer to investigate with the supermarket controlling the process.

Even with branded products you make guarantee claims to the retailer because that's who your contract is with, the retailer's claim is against the manufacturer.

[mattheus]

People are attacking the BBC because people complained to the BBC about Wallace and they don't feel that the complaints were handled properly, including one letter from a producer detailing many incidents where the reply was that the victims would have to contact the BBC individually, with apparently no attempt made by the BBC to contact the alleged victims.

It also seems that the BBC were not aware of how many complaints had been made and, basically, weren't really checking properly what they were buying with taxpayer money.

If this was one or two complaints made recently only to the production company then the BBC might be able to hide behind the production company, but it seems it's been going on years and complaints were made to the BBC directly so that's not gonna work.

If someone has complaints about a company's employee then they need to complain to that company , not to the purchasers of its products. Customers are not responsible for the actions of supplying company employees.

Gregg Wallace is neither an employee of the BBC or of the Production Company.

Who do I complain to please?

What do you want to complain about?

[mjr]

And now the voicemails start coming to light: https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radi ... wtab-en-gb
Also mentions that after the Wallace-hosted event that sparked the voicemails, The Grocer's editor made Wallace a "do not hire".

And Loose Women give more detail on one set of allegations: https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radi ... harassment

What next, do you reckon? Emails or online chats?

[axel_knutt]

Has Gomit made any comments yet?

[in4time]

Too much time on your hands guys?!

[mjr]

Too much time on your hands guys?!

What do you mean? Does it take you hours to post links?

[sjs]

Has Gomit made any comments yet?

I think he has (if you mean Mr Torode). Apparently it's all very upsetting. More interesting would be a comment from their associate Monica Galetti.