Latest news with #workplacebehavior
Yahoo
3 days ago
- Entertainment
- Yahoo
Celebrity MasterChef star asks why John Torode didn't speak up over Gregg Wallace
What did you miss? Former Celebrity MasterChef contestant Aasmah Mir has spoken of her shock that John Torode did not react to Gregg Wallace's sexually inappropriate comments to her on the show, saying: "There was no emotion... maybe he was just used to it." The former BBC Radio 4 journalist took part in Celebrity MasterChef in 2017, and when allegations about Wallace's behaviour on the show emerged last year, she opened up on the complaint she had made about him after her experiences. Wallace has since been sacked from the show. In the wake of Torode also being fired from MasterChef after an allegation that he used "extremely offensive" racist language was upheld, Mir has reflected back on her time on the show and admitted she was surprised at his lack of reaction over Wallace's comments at the time. What, how and why? Mir appeared on Thursday, 17 July's Good Morning Britain, where hosts Richard Madeley and Kate Garraway asked her how she felt about the claims over Torode's behaviour, and she admitted: "I'm very surprised." However, she added that she had wondered why he did not address Wallace's comments when she was on Celebrity MasterChef. Talking about a sexually inappropriate comment Wallace had made to her as she presented her first dish in the competition, Mir said: "No one said anything and then Gregg Wallace and John Torode just looked completely blank, poker-faced, like nothing had happened." Asked whether Torode had heard the comment, she said: "Yes, he definitely heard it." Madeley acknowledged that Mir had not complained about Torode, but asked: "You do have issues about his non-intervention?" "I absolutely do," she replied. "I don't know how many of the allegations and how many of the substantiated allegations he witnessed... what I do know is, Gregg Wallace used an incredibly inappropriate term, and John Torode didn't do anything. "There was no emotion. That could be a lot of things; it could be that it was 2017, it had been going on since 2005, there was a complaint made by Kirsty Wark in 2005, so maybe he had become used to it. I don't know. "You would expect some emotion on his face, but maybe he was just used to it. That's not his fault necessarily, that's Gregg Wallace's for putting him in that position." Mir later added: "I feel sorry for Gregg Wallace, I do feel sorry for him because of the neurodivergence, which is quite obvious here. Someone, the production company, should have stepped in earlier and said this is not acceptable. And do you know what, we wouldn't have the mess we're in today." Read more: MasterChef controversy BBC responds to claims final MasterChef series with Gregg Wallace and John Torode 'will still air' amid axe (The Standard, 3 min read) John Torode 'preparing to sue' BBC for 'unfair' MasterChef sacking (The Independent, 2 min read) How much is MasterChef worth to the BBC as both hosts axed from hit show? (The Independent, 4 min read) A report commissioned by production company Banijay into complaints about Wallace found 45 out of 83 allegations were upheld. Mir said, "I'm pretty sure one of them was mine, but no one actually told me that it was, so you have to second-guess the report." Responding to the news of his exit from MasterChef, Torode wrote on Instagram: "Although I haven't heard from anyone at the BBC or Banijay — I am seeing and reading that I've been 'sacked' from MasterChef, and I repeat that I have no recollection of what I'm accused of. The enquiry could not even state the date or the year of when I am meant to have said something wrong. "I'd hoped that I'd have some say in my exit from a show I've worked on since its relaunch in 2005, but events in the last few days seems to have prevented that. Over the past few months, I have been considering my life and the shape of it now and in the future. "Celebrity MasterChef, which I recently filmed with Grace Dent, along with two fantastic Christmas specials, will be my last. Personally, I have loved every minute of working on MasterChef but it's time to pass the cutlery to someone else. For whoever takes over, love it as I have. "I will watch fondly from afar as I now focus on the many other exciting projects that I have been working towards. My tummy will be grateful for a rest after 20 years of eating, but what a joy it has been. Life is ever-changing and ever-moving & sometimes personal happiness and fulfilment lay elsewhere. Thank you for many years of MasterChef." The fallout over MasterChef continues with reports that John Torode plans to sue the BBC after he was fired and is determined to clear his name following the allegation that he used an 'extremely offensive racist term' in 2018. Broadcaster Aasmah Mir appeared on Celebrity… — Good Morning Britain (@GMB) July 17, 2025 Meanwhile, Wallace said of the report's findings: "For eight months, my family and I have lived under a cloud. Trial by media, fuelled by rumour and clickbait. "None of the serious allegations against me were upheld. I challenged the remaining issue of unwanted touching but have had to accept a difference in perception, and I am deeply sorry for any distress caused. It was never intended." What had Aasmah Mir said about her Gregg Wallace complaint? Mir first spoke about her experiences on Celebrity MasterChef to Good Morning Britain in December 2024. She said: "I put my first dish down... my hands were shaking, they paused to reset. In front of everybody, the judges, the crew, the other contestants... Gregg Wallace said to me, 'oh, do you work at Radio 4?' "I thought, how nice, he's doing that presenter thing, he's relaxing you. I said, 'Yes, I do work at Radio 4.' 'Do you know X?' 'Yes, I do.' He said, 'Tell her from me' I thought he was going to say hi, 'Tell her from me, she's a sexy b***h'. "There was a silence, and then I laughed awkwardly. I just remember thinking this is mad. I wish I hadn't laughed, but I did. No one said anything, and then they just went right, let's start again, and they tasted my dish. I just remember thinking, am I going mad? I'm not using the excuse, but when you've just had a baby, you do think everything is a bit mad. "I remember thinking, did I imagine that? What happened there? So I went back and I muddled through for a couple of days, and then I was eliminated. It was in my head for many months, and I thought I can't complain about this because it's going to look like sour grapes because I was first out, so I kept quiet." Mir added: "Then I heard from another contestant that there had been other things that had gone on. That Gregg Wallace had gone up to one of the contestants who didn't like handling fish. Of course, they'd given her some fish to gut, because it's TV. He went up to her and said, 'watching you trying to gut a fish is like watching a rapist doing foreplay.'" The journalist continued that she had later run into another contestant from the series who told her about the incident: "One of the contestants said she was so upset that she walked away, and the production crew did come up to her because she walked away. I should have walked away, probably. Gregg Wallace was made to apologise to her for that, which he did. But he shouldn't have said it in the first place. "When she told me that, I thought I need to do something about this because I'm a journalist, I know how this works. Someone is going to say down the years, why did you not complain at the time. It's classic, I get loads of that online anyway." Good Morning Britain airs on ITV1 at 6am on weekdays.
Forbes
3 days ago
- Entertainment
- Forbes
The ‘Gen Z Stare': What It Means And What's Underneath It At Work
It's more than a blank, disengaged expression. It's called the "Gen Z stare," a new TikTok trend ... More making waves in the workplace with deeper meaning than meets the eye that employers can't afford to ignore. The Gen Z generation is getting a lot of press lately, sending shock waves through the work world with something called the 'Gen Z stare.' It's described as a long, blank and expressionless stare in a variety of social situations. Although many critics reduce the look to a silly, disengaged expression, experts argue that surface interpretations are short-sighted and Gen Zers are being misjudged. Experts contend that the 'Gen Z Stare' represents something deeper, more meaningful and far more serious than what you see on the surface. What Is The 'Gen Z Stare'? Recently, a young Gen Zer served me coffee at Starbucks, and I noticed it: the 'Gen Z stare"--her flat, zombie-like look that was difficult to read. Thankfully, I had heard about the trend making waves on TikTok. The blank, disengaged expression has been showing up during workplace meetings and daily interactions with customers. Critics often assail the stare, making snap judgments about what it means: boredom, indifference, superiority, judgment or just sheer silliness--even a death stare. Perhaps the declining Gen Z reputation provides a negative context for the snap judgments. In the past, Gen Z has been labeled as oppositional and difficult to manage. They are willing to quit a job if it doesn't prioritize work-life balance and a healthy culture and expect a promotion in one year or less. But sometimes the criticisms leveled against them are too harsh and one-sided. Experts say the blank stare in social situations--when a verbal response is more typical--reveals more about shifting workplace culture, communication gaps across generations and a growing disconnect between Gen Z and traditional office culture. I spoke with Vistage chief research officer Joe Galvin, who told me that the unblinking look can often be misinterpreted as disengagement, disinterest or even defiance. 'Similar to past trends such as 'quiet quitting,' the 'Gen Z stare' is more than just a viral buzzword; it is not a new problem, but it is a pervasive one, highlighting a larger issue in today's workplace: a growing generational disconnect in employee communication and expectations,' Galvin asserts. Younger generations are approaching work differently. During the pandemic, the Gen Z computer screens replaced face-to-face contact, depriving them of normal social interactions during critical stages of development. As a result, some experts believe Gen Z is unsure how to engage in small talk or interact with people they don't know. In fact, the frozen expression does resemble the third trauma 'freeze' reaction, like a deer caught in the headlights. In a way, the frozen look resembles a social disability, resulting from deprived social interactions during the Gen Z formative years. Galvin says the facial expression is a subtle cue from a digital-native generation raised on screens, fast content and online communication. 'For many Gen Zers, constant eye contact doesn't always signal attentiveness the way it might for older colleagues,' he explains. 'What a Boomer or Gen X manager may perceive as checked-out might actually be Gen Z's version of active listening.' Sujay Saha, president of Cortico-X agrees. 'Gen Z entered the workforce in an era defined by screens, social distancing and remote communication, and companies must now close the experience gap with empathy-focused onboarding and support, not judgment,' he told me. Why Employers Need To Understand The 'Gen Z Stare' Listen up, employers. It's easy to see how the 'Gen Z stare' could be misread in the workplace, but drawing conclusions without evidence can be harmful for an employee. The old adage, 'Don't judge a book by its cover' applies here. The 'Gen Z stare' is another in a long string of misjudgments targeting the younger generation in which established older generations draw unfounded, negative conclusions. Galvin advises leaders to move beyond snap judgments and take a closer look at how they interpret employee behavior. 'Are team members truly disengaged, or are leaders relying on outdated ideas of what attentiveness and participation should look like?' he asks. 'Just as importantly, they must ask themselves whether they're creating an environment that encourages open communication across different styles and generations.' Galvin argues that the real challenge lies in the widening gap between evolving employee behaviors and long-standing workplace norms. He says in today's multi-generational workforce, there's no one-size-fits-all definition of engagement. 'Misreading body language or communication styles can create unnecessary confusion and frustration, as well as missed opportunities to connect.' Saha stresses that it's important for employers to understand how to connect with the Gen Z population. He suggests using observational research to see how gen Z employees in a fast casual restaurant interact with gen Z customers to identify what an authentic interaction looks like to them, both as an employee and a customer, and then use what you learn to help build your training program for employees. Saha also advocates reframing the negative reputation that follows Gen Z into the workplace. 'Instead of saying the GenZ workforce lacks direction or purpose or is difficult to work with (lower loyalty and higher expectations), re-frame the conversation to understand how their unique context can help push firms in a newer direction.' A Final Wrap On The 'Gen Z Stare' According to Galvin, younger workers thrive in environments that prioritize authenticity, flexibility, transparency and a shared purpose. 'They want mentorship, not micromanagement. They value meaningful work, not just a paycheck,' he points out. 'To better engage Gen Z, leaders must cultivate a culture of open dialogue, set clear expectations and be willing to evolve how they lead as younger generations continue to enter the workforce and rise through the ranks.' News outlets are mocking the "Gen Z stare,' some calling it a catatonic state and mimicking schizophrenic eye-rolling, just as they parodied the 'hey-hanging" trend last year. It's human nature for people to laugh at or make fun of phenomena they don't understand. But experts collectively believe that employers cannot afford to misunderstand and misjudge the future generation that will dominate the workplace by 2030.
Forbes
6 days ago
- General
- Forbes
Why Gaslighting At Work Can Be Worse Than Passive Aggressive Behavior
Why Gaslighting At Work Can Be Worse Than Passive Aggressive Behavior If you have ever walked out of a meeting questioning your memory, your judgment, or even your value, you are not alone. You might be experiencing gaslighting or passive-aggressive behavior at work. Both are more common than most people realize and both can quietly chip away at your confidence. What is gaslighting? The term gaslighting comes from a 1944 movie where a husband tries to drive his wife crazy by convincing her she's imagining things. In the workplace, gaslighting isn't always so obvious, but the effects can be just as harmful. Passive-aggressive behavior may seem less severe at first, but over time it creates resentment and confusion. The two behaviors both damage communication and trust. Understanding how they work, how to spot them, and what to do when they appear is key to protecting your emotional well-being and your professional growth. These behaviors can erode curiosity, silence good ideas, and drive talented people out the door. And when that happens, performance and culture both suffer. What Do Gaslighting And Passive Aggressive Behavior Look Like At Work? What Do Gaslighting And Passive Aggressive Behavior Look Like At Work? Workplace gaslighting is a psychological tactic used to manipulate others into doubting their own perception of reality. Think about that for a moment. Someone deliberately tries to make you believe something that is an intentional distortion rather than disagreement. It happens when someone repeatedly invalidates another person's concerns, blames them for things they did not do, or pretends a conversation never happened. That might sound cruel, and sometimes it is not even intentional, but it can be damaging. On the surface, gaslighting and passive-aggressive behavior can seem similar. Both leave you questioning what just happened. But they are fundamentally different. Passive-aggressive behavior is usually an indirect expression of frustration, like sarcasm, procrastination, or silent resistance. Gaslighting is an attempt to make you question your reality. One avoids conflict. The other manipulates perception. And while both are toxic, gaslighting can be much more destabilizing. Here are a few examples of passive-aggressive behavior at work: Here are a few examples of gaslighting at work: In many cases, the person being gaslit starts to internalize the blame. That is what makes it so effective and so dangerous. As Dr. Robin Stern, psychologist and author of The Gaslight Effect, explains, victims often doubt themselves and their instincts. When this happens at work, it creates confusion, self-doubt, and disengagement. Why Are Gaslighting And Passive Aggressive Behavior So Damaging To Workplace Culture? Why Are Gaslighting And Passive Aggressive Behavior So Damaging To Workplace Culture? Gaslighting creates fear, and fear kills curiosity. When people feel unsafe speaking up, they go silent, innovation stalls, and mistakes go unreported. Employees who once felt energized by their work start to pull back emotionally or leave altogether. Passive-aggressive behavior also contributes to a toxic work environment. While it may seem less intense, its persistent nature fosters resentment, confusion, and a breakdown in communication. A study from the Workplace Bullying Institute found that more than 30% of employees have experienced some form of bullying at work, and gaslighting was a common thread. This is especially problematic because gaslighting often hides behind power structures. A senior leader might be the one doing it, intentionally or not. And because they have influence, others might defend or excuse the behavior. What makes gaslighting more damaging is its effect on a person's identity and psychological stability. While passive-aggressive behavior often triggers frustration, gaslighting can trigger self-doubt, anxiety, and even trauma. It not only changes how someone feels about work, it can alter how they see themselves. These behaviors also create a ripple effect. Once one person is treated this way, others take note. They learn it is not safe to challenge, to question, or to think independently. Over time, that kind of environment becomes hostile to curiosity and psychological safety. People learn to adapt rather than engage, and that hurts business. How Can You Respond To Gaslighting And Passive Aggressive Behavior At Work? How Can You Respond To Gaslighting And Passive Aggressive Behavior At Work? If you suspect gaslighting or passive-aggressive behavior is happening to you or someone you manage, there are steps you can take to bring clarity back into your workplace interactions. Start by documenting conversations and decisions. That can ensure clarity. Keep written records of assignments, expectations, and performance discussions. Use email to confirm verbal conversations. Paraphrasing back what you have heard is a very effective technique to ensure understanding, and it is especially helpful if you suspect gaslighting. If someone tries to claim a conversation never happened, you will have something neutral to refer back to. Next, you do not have to accuse someone of gaslighting or being passive-aggressive, but you can call out inconsistencies in a factual, calm tone. For example, say, 'I want to be sure we are on the same page. I remember that conversation differently. Here is what I have in my notes.' Curiosity is powerful here. It allows you to challenge distortion without escalating into confrontation. It also helps to build allies. Isolation is one of the goals of gaslighting. Counter it by staying connected to people who can validate your experiences. That might include HR, a mentor, or even a peer who witnessed the behavior. These behaviors lose their grip when the person being targeted is not alone. If you are in a leadership role, be proactive. These behaviors often thrive in ambiguity. Create channels where employees can speak up without fear. Train managers on how to handle feedback and conflict without resorting to psychological tactics. Promote transparency and reward open communication. Why Curiosity Helps Protect You From Both Gaslighting And Passive Aggression Why Curiosity Helps Protect You From Both Gaslighting And Passive Aggression Curiosity creates space to explore rather than assume. When someone says something that contradicts your experience, a curious question like, 'Can you help me understand how you saw that?' shifts the conversation from confrontation to collaboration. It also gives you a moment to pause, reflect, and stay grounded in what you know to be true. In my research on workplace curiosity, I found that one of the biggest blockers is fear. Fear of being wrong. Fear of being dismissed. Fear of speaking up. Gaslighting and passive-aggressive behavior exploit all of those fears. That is why building a culture of curiosity is a safeguard against manipulation. It reinforces psychological safety and helps people separate facts from spin. The Bottom Line On Gaslighting And Passive Aggressive Behavior At Work The Bottom Line On Gaslighting And Passive Aggressive Behavior At Work Gaslighting and passive-aggressive behavior are real threats to employee well-being and organizational health. While both undermine communication and trust, gaslighting causes deeper harm because it leads people to question their own thinking and reality. That level of psychological manipulation has a more lasting impact, not just on individuals, but on culture and performance. Recognizing these behaviors, addressing them early, and creating systems that support psychological safety can restore trust and reignite curiosity. People do their best work when they are confident, heard, and clear about what is real. That starts with having the courage to name what is happening, and the curiosity to explore what comes next.
Telegraph
11-07-2025
- Entertainment
- Telegraph
The proof that BBC turned a blind eye to Gregg Wallace
The BBC warned Gregg Wallace six years ago that he would be sacked if he continued behaving inappropriately, but failed to act when further concerns were raised about his conduct. A BBC executive wrote to Wallace in 2019, following complaints about his behaviour, and said they would cut ties with him if they learnt of any further allegations. However, when the BBC was subsequently told about Wallace's inappropriate behaviour, the corporation did not follow through on its threat. Wallace has now been sacked by the BBC ahead of the expected publication of a report into his behaviour, commissioned by Banijay, an independent production company, and conducted by law firm Lewis Silkin. The BBC is now facing fresh questions over why Wallace was allowed to keep working amid mounting complaints. Kate Phillips, the BBC's chief content officer, warned the MasterChef host in 2019 that the corporation would 'seriously consider its future working relationship' with him if he did not heed warnings about his behaviour. In a letter, she said that the BBC ' will not tolerate behaviour to occur on any productions that is inappropriate, unprofessional and/or has the effect on individuals to feel sexually harassed'. She added: 'It would be regrettable and disappointing to learn of any further incidents, and in such circumstances, the BBC would need to seriously consider its future working relationship with you.' Her letter followed complaints about behaviour on at least two of his shows: Impossible Celebrities and Celebrity MasterChef. In 2023, on Inside the Factory, another of Wallace's shows, the presenter allegedly made inappropriate remarks about the weight of people working at a Nestle plant. After filming took place in February that year, Nestle's head of media relations told its staff that it had 'spoken to the BBC to bring our unacceptable experience to their attention in the hope that it is not repeated in other workplaces around the UK'. Wallace left Inside the Factory afterwards. According to a source, the production company that makes Inside the Factory carried out an HR investigation but did not make a finding against him. However, the BBC did not end its working relationship with him as threatened, and he continued working on multiple other shows, including MasterChef, his biggest platform. MasterChef is made by Banijay, but is on the BBC's list of eight 'flagship programmes'. The same year, a former policeman who said he witnessed Wallace making inappropriate sexual comments at a charity event in 2023 told BBC News he complained to the corporation online, as well as attempting to call on the phone, but never heard back. There have been reports of at least two other incidents during this period, although there is no evidence that they were reported to the BBC. A producer working on MasterChef told The Telegraph that at the end of 2019, they saw a runner crying after apparently being asked to enter Wallace's dressing room when he was only wearing underwear. In 2022, a 19-year-old MasterChef staff member also tried to complain about Wallace's comments regarding her body, according to BBC News. Wallace was only taken off air in late 2024. The BBC sent a letter to Wallace this week, reminding him of the written warning by Ms Philips and enumerating other occasions when corporation executives had warned him over his behaviour. According to the BBC's letter, corporation executives spoke to him about their concerns in the late 2000s, and twice in 2013, including about an incident where he punched a member of the public. The Telegraph has also learnt of an additional incident on MasterChef more than a decade ago, where BBC bosses were made aware of his alleged inappropriate behaviour. 'Tried to cover up his behaviour' A young woman working on the show told The Telegraph that she was pulled aside by a BBC executive who used to visit the set of the cookery show regularly. She claimed that the individual asked her if she 'needed help' because of Wallace's 'inappropriate' behaviour. Although she declined the offer for fear of losing her job, the woman, who has asked to remain anonymous, said she now wonders if the executive was trying to 'cover' themselves by offering help. She believes the BBC staff member should have reprimanded Wallace in any case. She said: 'The BBC should have taken action earlier…It seems like they tried to cover up his behaviour as they tried to protect the 'talent'.' When The Telegraph approached the BBC executive in question, they said that they did not remember the conversation with the young woman, but did confirm that they had been aware of 'inappropriate' conduct by Wallace. Wallace's behaviour was brought to the attention of Ms Phillips in 2017, when she was controller of entertainment. Aasmah Mir, a radio presenter and Celebrity MasterChef contestant, wrote to her about two incidents on the show. In the first, Wallace allegedly told Ms Mir that a woman of her acquaintance was a 'sexy bitch'. She also alleged that the former greengrocer had been forced to apologise to contestants after telling a rape 'joke'. Ms Phillips assured Ms Mir that she would make it clear to Wallace and his agent that 'this type of behaviour is unacceptable and cannot continue'. However, Ms Phillips cautioned Wallace again in 2018, following an incident on Impossible Celebrities. His BBC career only came to an end this week when he was sacked following the legal inquiry into his behaviour. Banijay has not yet published the report or its conclusions, but Wallace said on social media this week that he had been cleared of serious wrongdoing. He admitted that his 'humour and language' could be inappropriate at times and apologised, but he also described himself as the victim of an 'incredible injustice'. He said: 'The most damaging claims… were found to be baseless after a full and forensic six-month investigation.' Wallace also suggested that some of his behaviour was down to autism and criticised bosses for failing to take that into account. He said: 'My neurodiversity, now formally diagnosed as autism, was suspected and discussed by colleagues across countless seasons of MasterChef. 'I will not go quietly. I will not be cancelled for convenience. I was tried by the media and hung out to dry well before the facts were established. The full story of this incredible injustice must be told and it is very much a matter of public interest.' A BBC spokesman said: 'Banijay UK instructed the law firm Lewis Silkin to run an investigation into allegations against Gregg Wallace. We are not going to comment until the investigation is complete and the findings are published.'
Irish Times
11-07-2025
- Entertainment
- Irish Times
Gregg Wallace dropped by BBC over doubts he could ‘change behaviour'
Gregg Wallace was dropped from the BBC after bosses concluded they had no confidence he could 'change what seems to be learned behaviour', the corporation has told him. A letter of dismissal to the former MasterChef presenter from the head of compliance for BBC television states she cannot be sure his presence on a show would allow for 'a sufficiently safe and respectful environment' for others, the Telegraph reported. The letter from Claire Powell, head of compliance for BBC Television, states that she took into consideration his recent diagnosis of autism , which Wallace himself suggested had made the MasterChef set a 'dangerous environment' for him. She concluded that he 'struggled to distinguish the boundaries between appropriate and inappropriate behaviour in the workplace', despite being given relevant training in 2019. READ MORE Wallace stood aside from presenting MasterChef in November after BBC News reported a series of allegations being made against him by 13 people, who worked with Wallace across a 17-year period. A report on his behaviour, overseen by law firm Lewis Silkin, was then commissioned by MasterChef's producers Banijay. The report's findings are expected imminently. On Tuesday the BBC said in a statement: 'Banijay UK instructed the law firm Lewis Silkin to run an investigation into allegations against Gregg Wallace. We are not going to comment until the investigation is complete and the findings are published.' Wallace has already admitted using inappropriate language and apologised, but claimed earlier this week to have been cleared of 'the most serious and sensational accusations made against me'. Powell's letter, obtained by the Telegraph, said the corporation had taken into account that Wallace was a presenter on a flagship BBC show and referred to the 'impact that your comments had on the BBC's reputation'. 'I have also taken into account whether your behaviour could be improved with training and/or coaching,' she stated. 'However, having reviewed the 2025 findings, I do not have the confidence that you can change what seems to be learned behaviour for you to make what you perceive to be jokes in the working environment, without understanding the boundaries of what is appropriate. 'I also have to consider the fact that various people in the BBC have spoken to you about your behaviour over the course of your career, and that you also already received training/coaching in 2019. 'I do not have confidence that your behaviour can change to ensure there is a sufficiently safe and respectful environment for others working with you in the types of programmes the BBC has engaged you to present. 'Such productions are not heavily scripted programmes and involve sound and consistent levels of judgment in relation to interactions with others which cannot constantly be monitored or supervised.' The Telegraph also reported Wallace was preparing to sue the BBC for discrimination. The 60-year-old has revealed a recent autism diagnosis. In a statement early this week, he accused the BBC of failing 'to investigate my disability or protect me from what I now realise was a dangerous environment for over 20 years'. - Guardian
