by: Jill Gandingco

There has been a media circus over alleged inappropriate behavior exhibited by Christian Horner (Horner), the team principal of Red Bull Racing Formula 1 team (Red Bull Racing), towards a female colleague (complainant).

Horner is a prominent figure in the motorsport industry, has been on every season of Netflix’s “Drive to Survive,” and is the husband of Ginger Spice of the Spice Girls.

Unfortunately, there has not been enough facts and information made available to the public. What we do have is a timeline of events based on a news article from Sky Sports:

• On February 5, 2024, around the time that Lewis Hamilton made headlines for signing with Ferrari next season, Horner had been under investigation for alleged inappropriate behavior towards the complainant. Red Bull Racing’s parent company confirmed this through an official statement about a then ongoing independent investigation carried out by an external specialist barrister. 

• On February 9, 2024, Horner attended a first meeting with the external specialist barrister in London. The article stated that no resolution was reached.

• On February 15, 2024, Red Bull Racing launched their 2024 challenger. During the car launch, Horner faced the media and publicly denied the allegations against him.

• On February 18 and 19, 2024, Formula 1 (F1) and Federation Internationale de l’Automobile (FIA) separately issued their statements on the Horner situation.

In its official statement, F1 supported the investigation and hoped for a “fair and thorough process.”  

The FIA, which is the governing body of F1, stated that it remained “committed to upholding the highest standards of integrity, fairness and inclusivity within the sport.”

Both F1 and FIA refused to comment further on the matter.

• On February 20, 2024, Horner attended pre-season testing in Bahrain. He spoke to the media on February 22, 2024, or during the first official F1 press conference of the year.

• On February 28, 2024, it was announced that the allegations against Horner were dismissed and that he would remain as team principal of Red Bull Racing. All reports and materials related to the investigation were kept confidential.

• The next day, material purporting to be alleged evidence in the investigation were leaked to the media and various F1 team principals.

• The season-opening race in Bahrain saw another strong performance from reigning world champion Max Verstappen and Red Bull Racing. 

• On March 3, 2024, Max Verstappen’s father spoke to the media and commented that tensions existed within Red Bull Racing and that Horner’s continued tenure as team principal endangered the entire team.

• On March 7, 2024, the complainant was suspended on full pay. 

• Days later, the media circus on Max Verstappen’s future with Red Bull Racing amid the Horner controversy spiraled and spilled over to the next race weekend in the F1 calendar.

• On March 16, 2024, the complainant appealed the decision by Red Bull Racing to F1’s parent company. The FIA is also evaluating the matter.

Due in part to the confidentiality of the matter, but also to the public relations spin by the media and strategists, F1 fans and the public in general only know that the investigation is for “alleged inappropriate behavior” by Horner on the complainant, and that the complainant is exhausting all available modes of appeal.

But it’s 2024.

Let’s call it what it is: sexual harassment.

Philippine Laws: Republic Act Nos. 7877 and 11313

The workplace is a unique environment because it must not only be conducive for work, but must also be a safe space for all. Philippine laws recognize this fact and mandate the condemnation of all forms of sexual harassment in workplace environments. 

If this controversy faced by Horner, Red Bull Racing, and F1 happened in the Philippines, there may be two applicable laws: (1) Republic Act No. 7877 or the “Anti-Sexual Harassment Act of 1995”; ^[1] and (2) Republic Act No. 11313 or the “Safe Spaces Act”.^[2]

Republic Act No. 7877 defines work-related harassment as that “committed by an employer, employee, manager, supervisor, agent of the employer, . . . or any other person who, having authority, influence or moral ascendancy over another in a work . . . environment, demands, requests or otherwise requires any sexual favor from the other, regardless of whether the demand, request or requirement for submission is accepted by the object of said Act.” 

No similar definition is provided under Republic Act No. 11313. However, this law expands the concept of discrimination and protects persons of diverse sexual orientation, gender identity and/or expression. At its core, Republic Act No. 11313 has absolutely zero-tolerance for catcalling, wolf-whistling, unwanted sexual advances, stalking, and other forms of sexual harassment by any person in public places, including a workplace environment.

In the case Escandor v. People,^[3] the Supreme Court harmonized both laws and ruled that:

The Safe Spaces Act does not undo or abandon the definition of sexual harassment under the Anti-Sexual Harassment Law of 1995. The gravamen of the offenses punished under the Safe Spaces Act is the act of sexually harassing a person on the basis of his/her sexual orientation, gender identity and/or expression, while that of the offense punished under the Anti-Sexual Harassment Act of 1995 is abuse of one’s authority, influence or moral ascendancy so as to enable the sexual harassment of a subordinate.

Under Republic Act No. 7877, Horner is a manager or supervisor with influence or moral ascendancy who allegedly exhibited inappropriate behavior towards the complainant. On the other hand, the complainant, whose sexual orientation, gender identity and/or expression is unknown, may also find redress under Republic Act No. 11313. Intent is immaterial under both special laws.

Punishable Acts

Both laws specify the acts considered as workplace-related sexual harassment, as follows:

Republic Act No. 7877Anti-Sexual Harassment Law of 1995

Republic Act No. 11313Safe Spaces Act

SEC. 3. Work, Education or Training-related Sexual Harassment Defined. – . . . . In a work-related or employment environment, sexual harassment is committed when: The sexual favor is made as a condition in the hiring or in the employment, re-employment or continued employment of said individual, or in granting said individual favorable compensation, terms, conditions, promotions, or privileges; or the refusal to grant the sexual favor results in limiting, segregating or classifying the employee which in any way would discriminate, deprive or diminish employment opportunities or otherwise adversely affect said employee; The above acts would impair the employee’s rights or privileges under existing labor laws; or (3)   The above acts would result in an intimidating, hostile, or offensive environment for the employee.

Section 16. Gender-Based Sexual Harassment in the Workplace. – The crime of gender-based sexual harassment in the workplace includes the following: An act or series of acts involving any unwelcome sexual advances, requests or demand for sexual favors or any act of sexual nature, whether done verbally, physically or through the use of technology such as text messaging or electronic mail or through any other forms of information and communication systems, that has or could have a detrimental effect on the conditions of an individual’s employment or education, job performance or opportunities; A conduct of sexual nature and other conduct-based on sex affecting the dignity of a person, which is unwelcome, unreasonable, and offensive to the recipient, whether done verbally, physically or through the use of technology such as text messaging or electronic mail or through any other forms of information and communication systems; A conduct that is unwelcome and pervasive and creates an intimidating, hostile or humiliating environment for the recipient: Provided, That the crime of gender-based sexual harassment may also be committed between peers and those committed to a superior officer by a subordinate, or to a teacher by a student, or to a trainer by a trainee; and Information and communication system refers to a system for generating, sending, receiving, storing or otherwise processing electronic data messages or electronic documents and includes the computer system or other similar devices by or in which data are recorded or stored and any procedure related to the recording or storage of electronic data messages or electronic documents.

Given the vagueness of the allegation against Horner, it is possible that his inappropriate behavior falls under one of the specific acts enumerated above. 

In a previous article on the Safe Spaces Act, we gave the following example:

Working as an employee for a sports team when the boss makes unwelcome sexual advances, requests or demand for sexual favors, or other conduct untoward to the recipient? As long as the act or series of acts has or could have the effect of altering working conditions, then it is punishable under Section 16 because the workplace is a public space.

Duty of Employers or Heads of Work-Related Environments

Red Bull Racing and F1 likewise have a duty to ensure that sexual harassment is prevented or deterred. As employers or heads of work-related environments, they are required to: (1) promulgate rules and regulations; (2) create a committee on decorum and investigation of cases on sexual harassment; (3) post a copy of Republic Act No. 11313 in a conspicuous place; (4) conduct seminars; (5) create an internal mechanism to address gender-based sexual harassment; and (6) provide a code of conduct or workplace policy.

Both laws mandate employers or heads of work-related environments to do the following:

Republic Act No. 7877Anti-Sexual Harassment Law of 1995

Republic Act No. 11313Safe Spaces Act

SEC. 4. Duty of the Employer or Head of Office in a Work-related, Education or Training Environment. – It shall be the duty of the employer or the head of the work-related,educational or training environment or institution, to prevent or deter the commission of acts of sexual harassment and to provide the procedures for the resolution, settlement or prosecution of acts of sexual harassment. Towards this end, the employer or head of office shall: Promulgate appropriate rules and regulations in consultation with and jointly approved by the employees or students or trainees, through their duly designated representatives, prescribing the procedure for the investigation of sexual harassment cases and the administrative sanctions therefor. Administrative sanctions shall not be a bar to prosecution in the proper courts for unlawful acts of sexual harassment. The said rules and regulations issued pursuant to this subsection (a) shall include, among others, guidelines on proper decorum in the workplace and educational or training institutions. Create a committee on decorum and investigation of cases on sexual harassment. The committee shall conduct meetings, as the case may be, with officers and employees, teachers, instructors, professors, coaches, trainors and students or trainees to increase understanding and prevent incidents of sexual harassment. It shall also conduct the investigation of alleged cases constituting sexual harassment. In the case of a work-related environment, the committee shall be composed of at least one (1) representative each from the management, the union, if any, the employees from the supervisory rank, and from the rank and file employees. In the case of the educational or training institution, the committee shall be composed of at least one (1) representative from the administration, the trainors, teachers, instructors, professors or coaches and students or trainees, as the case may be. The employer or head of office, educational or training institution shall disseminate or post [a] copy of this Act for the information of all concerned.

Section 17. Duties of Employers. – Employers or other persons of authority, influence or moral ascendancy in a workplace shall have the duty to prevent, deter, or punish the performance of acts of gender-based sexual harassment in the workplace. Towards this end, the employer or person of authority, influence or moral ascendancy shall: Disseminate or post in a conspicuous place a copy of this Act to all persons in the workplace; Provide measures to prevent gender-based sexual harassment in the workplace, such as the conduct of anti-sexual harassment seminars; Create an independent internal mechanism or a committee on decorum and investigation to investigate and address complaints of gender-based sexual harassment which shall: Adequately represent the management, the employees from the supervisory rank, the rank-and-file employees, and the union, if any;Designate a woman as its head and not less than half of its members should be women;Be composed of members who should be impartial and not connected or related to the alleged perpetrator;Investigate and decide on the complaints within ten (10) days or less upon receipt thereof;Observe due process;Protect the complainant from retaliation; andGuarantee confidentiality to the greatest extent possible; Provide and disseminate, in consultation with all persons in the workplace, a code of conduct or workplace policy which shall: Expressly reiterate the prohibition on gender-based sexual harassment; Describe the procedures of the internal mechanism created under Section 17(c) of this Act; and Set administrative penalties.

Applying the laws to Horner’s situation and based on the limited information published in the same news article from Sky Sports, it seems that Red Bull Racing fulfilled its duties under the laws. Similarly, F1 has an existing Code of Conduct generally discussing its commitment to workplace safety. But they shouldn’t stop there. Proactive measures and full transparency in ensuring workplace safety are absolutely necessary! 

Liability of Employers

Non-compliance with the laws or inaction may subject Red Bull Racing and F1 to damages or penalties, which include imprisonment for up to six months or a fine ranging from ₱5,000.00 to ₱20,000.00. 

The applicable provisions of law respectively state:

Republic Act No. 7877Anti-Sexual Harassment Law of 1995	Republic Act No. 11313Safe Spaces Act
SEC. 5. Liability of the Employer, Head of Office, Educational or Training Institution. – The employer or head of office, educational or training institution shall be solidarily liable for damages arising from the acts of sexual harassment committed in the employment, education or training environment if the employer or head of office, educational or training institution is informed of such acts by the offended party and no immediate action is taken thereon.	Section 19. Liability of Employers.— In addition to liabilities for committing acts of gender-based sexual harassment, employers may also be held responsible for: Non-implementation of their duties under Section 17 of this Act, as provided in the penal provisions; or (b)   Not taking action on reported acts of gender-based sexual harassment committed in the workplace. Any person who violates subsection (a) of this section, shall upon conviction, be penalized with a fine of not less than Five thousand pesos (₱5,000.00) nor more than Ten thousand pesos (₱10,000.00). Any person who violates subsection (b) of this section, shall upon conviction, be penalized with a fine of not less than Ten thousand pesos (₱10,000.00) nor more than Fifteen thousand pesos (₱15,000.00).
SEC 7. Penalties. – Any person who violates the provisions of this Act shall, upon conviction, be penalized by imprisonment of not less than one (1) month nor more than six (6) months, or a fine of not less than Ten thousand pesos (P 10,000) nor more than Twenty thousand pesos (P 20,000), or both such fine and imprisonment at the discretion of the court. Any action arising from the violation of the provisions of this Act shall prescribe in three (3) years.

A toxic workplace environment can negatively affect both the employees and the company as a whole. It is high time for employers, leagues, and industries to promote best practices that foster safe spaces for everyone. 

Jill Gandingco recently watched the closing nights of Taylor Swift’s The Eras Tour in Tokyo and Singapore. She made over 250 friendship bracelets and now has a blank space that she can’t shake off.

---

^[1]   Approved: February 14, 1995. 

^[2]   Approved: April 17, 2019. 

^[3]   876 Phil. 119 (2020) [Per J. Leonen, Third Division].