planetf1.com

It is currently Sat Dec 16, 2017 2:40 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Sat Sep 30, 2017 8:49 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 4279
ReservoirDog wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
ReservoirDog wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Learn to speak to people with respect. You're insulting someone despite the fact that it is you who doesn't understand a very simple analogy. To make it less abstract; in football, basketball or baseball, for example, there are tampering rules for the different leagues; which govern when it is acceptable to negotiate with or sign players. The FIA has the capacity to make their own rules for their own series. Even non-sports can have non-compete clauses written into employment contracts. This is actually not a complicated concept. Now go take your medication like a good little boy.


Can't respect stupidity. Non-competes have to be held up by courts. You are just making stuff up at this point. I can give you the example of California, for example. You can write all the non-competes you want, the court would simply throw them out. Happens on an every day basis on the tech. industry. Companies still put them in the hope a person wouldn't have the money or will to fight in courts.

This is how it works little boy - you write a contract, it is enforced by courts, and they can throw out illegal crap in there. Since you don't have the mental capacity, if company's could put in any arbitrary length of gardening leave in contracts, the Swiss wouldn't have a law in place since that'd be worthless. It's put a cap on them.

Lol wow, so now your argument is that they could make the rules but that (in your expert legal opinion) the rules wouldn't be upheld by a court? This despite the fact that there are already several sports with these types of rules in place and several other business entities with similar non-compete regulations in place? I'm sure you already know that's a pile of complete nonsense. Hence your unusually disrespectful and aggressive tone in your responses. You seem like the type of guy who likes to act tough on the internet but would curl up into the fetal position if I was to ever approach you in real life. Lots of guys like you these days...



LOL WOW? Is that the level of your argument? This is not twitter. Just because your arguments are at the same level of a child, doesn't mean you resort to LOL LOL LOL. At least pretend to be smarter. I didn't the rest of your drivel, so in a way it's good you started with something as puerile as LOL LOL.

Ah so you have no legitimate response huh? More insults (insults that meet the level of a high school student mind you) but nothing in the way of an actual response. Since you've obviously realized that your claims are blatantly incorrect and can be unproven with a 10 second google search, I'll leave you to go back to watching Transformers 9 or playing Call of Duty 15 or whatever morons like you do to kill time.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 01, 2017 12:00 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2003 11:31 am
Posts: 1630
sandman1347 wrote:
ReservoirDog wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
ReservoirDog wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Learn to speak to people with respect. You're insulting someone despite the fact that it is you who doesn't understand a very simple analogy. To make it less abstract; in football, basketball or baseball, for example, there are tampering rules for the different leagues; which govern when it is acceptable to negotiate with or sign players. The FIA has the capacity to make their own rules for their own series. Even non-sports can have non-compete clauses written into employment contracts. This is actually not a complicated concept. Now go take your medication like a good little boy.


Can't respect stupidity. Non-competes have to be held up by courts. You are just making stuff up at this point. I can give you the example of California, for example. You can write all the non-competes you want, the court would simply throw them out. Happens on an every day basis on the tech. industry. Companies still put them in the hope a person wouldn't have the money or will to fight in courts.

This is how it works little boy - you write a contract, it is enforced by courts, and they can throw out illegal crap in there. Since you don't have the mental capacity, if company's could put in any arbitrary length of gardening leave in contracts, the Swiss wouldn't have a law in place since that'd be worthless. It's put a cap on them.

Lol wow, so now your argument is that they could make the rules but that (in your expert legal opinion) the rules wouldn't be upheld by a court? This despite the fact that there are already several sports with these types of rules in place and several other business entities with similar non-compete regulations in place? I'm sure you already know that's a pile of complete nonsense. Hence your unusually disrespectful and aggressive tone in your responses. You seem like the type of guy who likes to act tough on the internet but would curl up into the fetal position if I was to ever approach you in real life. Lots of guys like you these days...



LOL WOW? Is that the level of your argument? This is not twitter. Just because your arguments are at the same level of a child, doesn't mean you resort to LOL LOL LOL. At least pretend to be smarter. I didn't the rest of your drivel, so in a way it's good you started with something as puerile as LOL LOL.

Ah so you have no legitimate response huh? More insults (insults that meet the level of a high school student mind you) but nothing in the way of an actual response. Since you've obviously realized that your claims are blatantly incorrect and can be unproven with a 10 second google search, I'll leave you to go back to watching Transformers 9 or playing Call of Duty 15 or whatever morons like you do to kill time.


You do realize I am not reading your responses anymore, right?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 01, 2017 3:06 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 4279
ReservoirDog wrote:

You do realize I am not reading your responses anymore, right?

Awww. Take your ball and go home now.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 01, 2017 9:53 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2012 9:20 pm
Posts: 1778
mikeyg123 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
moby wrote:
To put this in better perspective than some of the above, it is like the admin clerk of a doctors practice going to the local medical insurance company. They know not only what is, but what is not and what can be.

He knows who did what with the trick suspension and WHY it was disallowed, and what can be done to get it accepted.
So (say) Renault can know what Ferrari did with the tricks and make it slightly different so that it is accepted, even though the Ferrari version was rejected. He also knows what others are using and why it is accepted, and also how much room for improvement there is and still get it through

I see what you are trying to say but I don't think it's the same for the very important reason that not allowing him would effectively mean banning him from F1, where he's built up his work experience. I have my doubts a court would tolerate that


You just prohibit teams from hiring him in the rules. I think you could do that. Rather than put the rules on him.

It's the same outcome for him personally, and would be very easily overturned in the courts.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 01, 2017 10:12 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 27, 2008 7:23 pm
Posts: 260
i don't know how it works in America, but in Europe, hiring and firing is very very regulated.

All in all, you can put whatever clause you want in a contract, but it will be 0 in any court or arbirtration, and it will strictly based on the national law.

I think this being a sporting forum, we are of different ages, and for some young ones the lack of practical experience with business, contracts, and professional work in general, makes them believe everything is black or white.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 01, 2017 10:36 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 9:22 pm
Posts: 7798
paul_gmb wrote:
i don't know how it works in America, but in Europe, hiring and firing is very very regulated.

All in all, you can put whatever clause you want in a contract, but it will be 0 in any court or arbirtration, and it will strictly based on the national law.

I think this being a sporting forum, we are of different ages, and for some young ones the lack of practical experience with business, contracts, and professional work in general, makes them believe everything is black or white.


Do you recall 'spycatcher'? This involved rules agreed to in employment several years after he had finished there. (Peter Wright telling tales)

Edit for those not familiar with it. It involved tales being told after non disclosure was signed. It dragged on for years and eventually found in his favour everywhere except the country where the paper was signed.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Oct 01, 2017 5:30 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 27, 2008 7:23 pm
Posts: 260
moby wrote:
paul_gmb wrote:
i don't know how it works in America, but in Europe, hiring and firing is very very regulated.

All in all, you can put whatever clause you want in a contract, but it will be 0 in any court or arbirtration, and it will strictly based on the national law.

I think this being a sporting forum, we are of different ages, and for some young ones the lack of practical experience with business, contracts, and professional work in general, makes them believe everything is black or white.


Do you recall 'spycatcher'? This involved rules agreed to in employment several years after he had finished there. (Peter Wright telling tales)

Edit for those not familiar with it. It involved tales being told after non disclosure was signed. It dragged on for years and eventually found in his favour everywhere except the country where the paper was signed.


I have got to the point in which I think most regulations, NDA's and other clauses, are respected more like a gentlemen agreement rather than seeing them as a starting point for legal action.

Yes, it can get to that, but the one party that doesn't respect the clause knows it is doing that, the one sueing knows it will be a long road ahead.

A judge will judge based on law, they don't care about clauses, unless the clauses mean breaking the law. Of course, it's more "gray" than I made it sound, hence the long judicial process.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 02, 2017 12:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 9:22 pm
Posts: 7798
The latest.
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/top-six-f1-teams-lobby-todt-and-carey-on-budkowski-case-960465/

Including a telling photo



Image
Source of picture- as link above


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 02, 2017 5:48 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2007 11:51 am
Posts: 4225
Zoue wrote:
I can understand the teams being upset, but OTOH the guy has to make a living. What's he supposed to do?

:thumbup:

_________________
The end is near


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 03, 2017 8:03 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 4561
Location: Michigan, USA
Lt. Drebin wrote:
Zoue wrote:
I can understand the teams being upset, but OTOH the guy has to make a living. What's he supposed to do?

:thumbup:

He wasn't making a living at the FIA? Because considering how long he worked there, it seemed like he was doing well enough. He wasn't fired, he resigned specifically to join Renault. I don't see the sympathy card working for him.

I think the teams have every right to feel betrayed and angered by this, and it's going to make it very hard for them to entrust the FIA with their technical secrets in the future.

_________________
PF1 PICK 10 COMPETITION (3 wins, 12 podiums): 2017: 19th| 2016: 3rd| 2015: 4th
PF1 TOP THREE TEAM CHAMPIONSHIP (No Limit Excedrin Racing): 2017: 2nd| 2015: 1st
AUTOSPORT GP PREDICTOR: 2017 United States Champion! (world #3)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 03, 2017 9:07 am 
Online

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 21003
Exediron wrote:
Lt. Drebin wrote:
Zoue wrote:
I can understand the teams being upset, but OTOH the guy has to make a living. What's he supposed to do?

:thumbup:

He wasn't making a living at the FIA? Because considering how long he worked there, it seemed like he was doing well enough. He wasn't fired, he resigned specifically to join Renault. I don't see the sympathy card working for him.

I think the teams have every right to feel betrayed and angered by this, and it's going to make it very hard for them to entrust the FIA with their technical secrets in the future.

what, so he has to stay at the same organisation forever? Maybe the other company offered better benefits, maybe he was passed over for promotion, we don't know the story. But he shouldn't have to be indentured just to make a living


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 03, 2017 12:29 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 6:33 pm
Posts: 9720
Location: Ireland
If it's all above board and it's done by the letter of the law (sporting and national/European) then I can't say I have any problem with it. If them's the rules and Renault are playing by them then that's that. It's one hell of a coup for Renault

It will certainly undermine the trust that the teams have in the FIA. And that's a problem for the FIA to fix

_________________
I don't rely entirely on God
ImageImage
I rely on Prost



FA#14


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 04, 2017 7:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 5:38 pm
Posts: 1585
Location: Miami, Florida
Exediron wrote:
Lt. Drebin wrote:
Zoue wrote:
I can understand the teams being upset, but OTOH the guy has to make a living. What's he supposed to do?

:thumbup:

He wasn't making a living at the FIA? Because considering how long he worked there, it seemed like he was doing well enough. He wasn't fired, he resigned specifically to join Renault. I don't see the sympathy card working for him.

I think the teams have every right to feel betrayed and angered by this, and it's going to make it very hard for them to entrust the FIA with their technical secrets in the future.

Seriously, how is this any different than Wolff Joining Mercedes from Williams, or Paddy Joining Mercedes, and now Williams?

It isn't. Just like myself, everywhere I've worked I've picked up a few tidbits of processes and procedure as well as a few new methods of how to do things and all that adds to my experience, and as a great boss I had when I was 20 told me, people can hire and fire you as they wish, but the one thing they can never take away from you is your experience. That includes trade secrets. If you work for a company that does things a certain way and you leave to go work for a competitor, you can apply the previously gained knowledge to do your job. That's completely different than giving a competitor a stack of company documents from your former employer so they can utilize it to their advantage. I know it seems like its the same thing, but it isn't. You may have been paid a wage to do a job, but a really good employee is someone who learns and absorbs information they can pass on to other employees more efficiently. As such said processes or secrets are lodged in your memory.

And it's funny how companies don't want you to share their stuff, but they don't have any qualms in wanting to learn what others do from new hires. Companies expect 2-weeks notice because it's the right thing to do yet they don't have to and rarely extend that same courtesy to employees. Sorry, I don't play that game unless a company has been particularly good and fair with me which has been quite rare.

_________________
HAMILTON :: VETTEL :: ROSBERG :: RAIKKONEN :: VERSTAPPEN :: SAINZ :: MASSA :: BOTTAS :: NASR
ALONSO :: BUTTON :: PEREZ :: RICCIARDO :: GROSJEAN :: KVYAT :: HULKENBERG :: MALDONADO
THE REST… THERE ARE FAR BETTER DRIVERS THAT SHOULD BE IN FORMULA 1


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 04, 2017 9:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 4561
Location: Michigan, USA
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
Exediron wrote:
Lt. Drebin wrote:
Zoue wrote:
I can understand the teams being upset, but OTOH the guy has to make a living. What's he supposed to do?

:thumbup:

He wasn't making a living at the FIA? Because considering how long he worked there, it seemed like he was doing well enough. He wasn't fired, he resigned specifically to join Renault. I don't see the sympathy card working for him.

I think the teams have every right to feel betrayed and angered by this, and it's going to make it very hard for them to entrust the FIA with their technical secrets in the future.

Seriously, how is this any different than Wolff Joining Mercedes from Williams, or Paddy Joining Mercedes, and now Williams?

It isn't. Just like myself, everywhere I've worked I've picked up a few tidbits of processes and procedure as well as a few new methods of how to do things and all that adds to my experience, and as a great boss I had when I was 20 told me, people can hire and fire you as they wish, but the one thing they can never take away from you is your experience. That includes trade secrets. If you work for a company that does things a certain way and you leave to go work for a competitor, you can apply the previously gained knowledge to do your job. That's completely different than giving a competitor a stack of company documents from your former employer so they can utilize it to their advantage. I know it seems like its the same thing, but it isn't. You may have been paid a wage to do a job, but a really good employee is someone who learns and absorbs information they can pass on to other employees more efficiently. As such said processes or secrets are lodged in your memory.

And it's funny how companies don't want you to share their stuff, but they don't have any qualms in wanting to learn what others do from new hires. Companies expect 2-weeks notice because it's the right thing to do yet they don't have to and rarely extend that same courtesy to employees. Sorry, I don't play that game unless a company has been particularly good and fair with me which has been quite rare.

It absolutely is different! The information he has is information the teams gave to the FIA in confidence under the (justified, at the time) assumption that it would never make it beyond the FIA. He's like an IRS agent quitting and selling the confidential information he handled during his job to an advertiser. If the FIA is unable to stop its employees from turning mercenary, how can any team ever trust them with confidential data again?

I don't get why people seem to think this is the same as a normal situation where someone leaves an employer and takes the knowledge of how that company does things. He's taking third-party information that was entrusted to his former employer in confidence. It's not information that should be his to sell, and the FIA forced those teams to give it to them.

_________________
PF1 PICK 10 COMPETITION (3 wins, 12 podiums): 2017: 19th| 2016: 3rd| 2015: 4th
PF1 TOP THREE TEAM CHAMPIONSHIP (No Limit Excedrin Racing): 2017: 2nd| 2015: 1st
AUTOSPORT GP PREDICTOR: 2017 United States Champion! (world #3)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 05, 2017 2:27 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2016 12:13 pm
Posts: 1135
Flash2k11 wrote:
Eh, If Renault have offered him the earth, fair play. The rest will only gherkin and whine because they didn't get in there first. If the FIA dont have proper gardening leave or NDA's in place, then the big boys should have been waving some big cheques long before now.


I fully agree.

This is a very typical pattern in Formula One, someone discovers a huge loophole, walks right through it, and the rest look foolish because they didn't think of it first.

What really makes my sense of humor wrinkle up in glee is that these teams all talk about only having to follow the rules, not the spirit of the regulations when things get sticky. That too is a typical pattern, the one who snookered the rest waves the rule book and tells everyone else to get stuffed, while the rest drag out the worn excuse that the spirit of the rules should be followed.
The absolute and disgusting hypocrisy gives off a very foul odor because all the teams practice following just the rules and not the spirit of the rules.

Hats off to Renault, they found a way to strike back at the people who are attempting to stomp that team into the mud.

_________________
Only dogs, mothers, and quality undergarments give unconditional support.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 05, 2017 10:01 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 9:22 pm
Posts: 7798
It seems that he has not yet confirmed, so 3 months will put him well past the window for designing next years car, so it is not as bad as some of the press would have us believe. I did not like the idea of him turning up and them making a new car with everyone else's trick bits, but it is not going to be on next years car, which is the same as if he had 6 months off really, so I think it has been a little over blown.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 05, 2017 8:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2012 9:20 pm
Posts: 1778
The issue here lies with the FIA not having an appropriate notice period.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 06, 2017 8:31 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 9:22 pm
Posts: 7798
Renault is ready to delay the arrival of former FIA man Marcin Budkowski by an extra three months, in a bid to appease concerns about secrets he may potentially bring with him.

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/renault-open-to-delaying-budkowski-s-arrival-962025/?s=1

Fair dues to them, even if they probably did get some stick, (and maybe some assistance) from FIA

(Abiteboul)
"From a contractual point of view he could be available as soon as early next year [January], but we have had constructive discussions with the FIA. I believe that we are close to reaching an agreement for a start date that would make everyone be comfortable.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 06, 2017 9:07 am 
Online

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 21003
moby wrote:
Renault is ready to delay the arrival of former FIA man Marcin Budkowski by an extra three months, in a bid to appease concerns about secrets he may potentially bring with him.

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/renault-open-to-delaying-budkowski-s-arrival-962025/?s=1

Fair dues to them, even if they probably did get some stick, (and maybe some assistance) from FIA

(Abiteboul)
"From a contractual point of view he could be available as soon as early next year [January], but we have had constructive discussions with the FIA. I believe that we are close to reaching an agreement for a start date that would make everyone be comfortable.

Call me a cynic but I suspect that's just for public consumption as a sop to appease the other teams. If he's going to start at Renault anyway it's almost inconceivable that he's not going to have some "friendly chats" where he can dispense free advice with certain key personnel beforehand. In practical terms, I don't think the length of gardening leave will make a difference


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 06, 2017 10:58 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:07 pm
Posts: 8894
Exediron wrote:
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
Exediron wrote:
Lt. Drebin wrote:
Zoue wrote:
I can understand the teams being upset, but OTOH the guy has to make a living. What's he supposed to do?

:thumbup:

He wasn't making a living at the FIA? Because considering how long he worked there, it seemed like he was doing well enough. He wasn't fired, he resigned specifically to join Renault. I don't see the sympathy card working for him.

I think the teams have every right to feel betrayed and angered by this, and it's going to make it very hard for them to entrust the FIA with their technical secrets in the future.

Seriously, how is this any different than Wolff Joining Mercedes from Williams, or Paddy Joining Mercedes, and now Williams?

It isn't. Just like myself, everywhere I've worked I've picked up a few tidbits of processes and procedure as well as a few new methods of how to do things and all that adds to my experience, and as a great boss I had when I was 20 told me, people can hire and fire you as they wish, but the one thing they can never take away from you is your experience. That includes trade secrets. If you work for a company that does things a certain way and you leave to go work for a competitor, you can apply the previously gained knowledge to do your job. That's completely different than giving a competitor a stack of company documents from your former employer so they can utilize it to their advantage. I know it seems like its the same thing, but it isn't. You may have been paid a wage to do a job, but a really good employee is someone who learns and absorbs information they can pass on to other employees more efficiently. As such said processes or secrets are lodged in your memory.

And it's funny how companies don't want you to share their stuff, but they don't have any qualms in wanting to learn what others do from new hires. Companies expect 2-weeks notice because it's the right thing to do yet they don't have to and rarely extend that same courtesy to employees. Sorry, I don't play that game unless a company has been particularly good and fair with me which has been quite rare.

It absolutely is different! The information he has is information the teams gave to the FIA in confidence under the (justified, at the time) assumption that it would never make it beyond the FIA. He's like an IRS agent quitting and selling the confidential information he handled during his job to an advertiser. If the FIA is unable to stop its employees from turning mercenary, how can any team ever trust them with confidential data again?

I don't get why people seem to think this is the same as a normal situation where someone leaves an employer and takes the knowledge of how that company does things. He's taking third-party information that was entrusted to his former employer in confidence. It's not information that should be his to sell, and the FIA forced those teams to give it to them.

Playing the devil's advocate here but the team personnel also have information given to them by the team in confidence under the assumption that it would never make it beyond the team. So from a practical (not ethical) point of view I think it is the same thing.
Or have I missed some piece of info where the FIA have told the teams they'll never pass on the information on a scout's honour?

_________________
Räikkönen - Vettel - Bottas
Thank you Nico - You´re the champ!

PF1 Pick 10 Competition 2016: CHAMPION (2 wins, 8 podiums)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 06, 2017 10:59 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 13, 2011 4:09 pm
Posts: 4151
Location: LONDON...!
Massive egg on the face of the FIA.

Stop comparing this to a TP joining from one team to another, its completely different. This guy has been trusted with all teams innovated ideas, seen their wind tunnels etc now is joining a competitor.

Teams are in their right to be angry.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 06, 2017 11:03 am 
Online

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 21003
Clarky wrote:
Massive egg on the face of the FIA.

Stop comparing this to a TP joining from one team to another, its completely different. This guy has been trusted with all teams innovated ideas, seen their wind tunnels etc now is joining a competitor.

Teams are in their right to be angry.

they may be within their rights to feel frustrated, but as long as it's legal they don't have much to be angry about


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 06, 2017 11:37 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2013 4:42 pm
Posts: 1829
Zoue wrote:
Clarky wrote:
Massive egg on the face of the FIA.

Stop comparing this to a TP joining from one team to another, its completely different. This guy has been trusted with all teams innovated ideas, seen their wind tunnels etc now is joining a competitor.

Teams are in their right to be angry.

they may be within their rights to feel frustrated, but as long as it's legal they don't have much to be angry about


Correct.

I think (hope) the FIA will learn from this, and give his successor a longer notice period/gardening leave.

_________________
Group Pick 'Em 2016 Champion


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 06, 2017 4:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 9:22 pm
Posts: 7798
Herb wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Clarky wrote:
Massive egg on the face of the FIA.

Stop comparing this to a TP joining from one team to another, its completely different. This guy has been trusted with all teams innovated ideas, seen their wind tunnels etc now is joining a competitor.

Teams are in their right to be angry.

they may be within their rights to feel frustrated, but as long as it's legal they don't have much to be angry about


Correct.

I think (hope) the FIA will learn from this, and give his successor a longer notice period/gardening leave.


It depends on what 'assurances' they were originally given by FIA. Although, it is probably one of those things that just grew out of a relitivly minor job. When he started doing it it was probably the time when just looking at the opposition car could give most of the secrets away, and time just compounded the amount of data coming to him, and out of site out of mind as everyone was happy with him.

At least, the FIA have acknowledged something needs to be looked at for the future.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 06, 2017 5:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 5:38 pm
Posts: 1585
Location: Miami, Florida
Covalent wrote:
Exediron wrote:
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
Seriously, how is this any different than Wolff Joining Mercedes from Williams, or Paddy Joining Mercedes, and now Williams?

It isn't. Just like myself, everywhere I've worked I've picked up a few tidbits of processes and procedure as well as a few new methods of how to do things and all that adds to my experience, and as a great boss I had when I was 20 told me, people can hire and fire you as they wish, but the one thing they can never take away from you is your experience. That includes trade secrets. If you work for a company that does things a certain way and you leave to go work for a competitor, you can apply the previously gained knowledge to do your job. That's completely different than giving a competitor a stack of company documents from your former employer so they can utilize it to their advantage. I know it seems like its the same thing, but it isn't. You may have been paid a wage to do a job, but a really good employee is someone who learns and absorbs information they can pass on to other employees more efficiently. As such said processes or secrets are lodged in your memory.

And it's funny how companies don't want you to share their stuff, but they don't have any qualms in wanting to learn what others do from new hires. Companies expect 2-weeks notice because it's the right thing to do yet they don't have to and rarely extend that same courtesy to employees. Sorry, I don't play that game unless a company has been particularly good and fair with me which has been quite rare.

It absolutely is different! The information he has is information the teams gave to the FIA in confidence under the (justified, at the time) assumption that it would never make it beyond the FIA. He's like an IRS agent quitting and selling the confidential information he handled during his job to an advertiser. If the FIA is unable to stop its employees from turning mercenary, how can any team ever trust them with confidential data again?

I don't get why people seem to think this is the same as a normal situation where someone leaves an employer and takes the knowledge of how that company does things. He's taking third-party information that was entrusted to his former employer in confidence. It's not information that should be his to sell, and the FIA forced those teams to give it to them.

Playing the devil's advocate here but the team personnel also have information given to them by the team in confidence under the assumption that it would never make it beyond the team. So from a practical (not ethical) point of view I think it is the same thing.
Or have I missed some piece of info where the FIA have told the teams they'll never pass on the information on a scout's honour?

It's not playing Devil's advocate. It's common sense to me which is why I asked how it was different in the opening of my statement.

It's not. The only difference is where the individual was employed.

And if you want to be really nit picky with the subject matter, personnel the likes of Lowe, Allison, and the like are FAR more threatening because they have intimately in-depth knowledge of the information they have from every possible aspect where as Budkowski has whatever bits he received on paper and most likely doesn't have a complete understanding of the "secrets" everyone is worried about.

_________________
HAMILTON :: VETTEL :: ROSBERG :: RAIKKONEN :: VERSTAPPEN :: SAINZ :: MASSA :: BOTTAS :: NASR
ALONSO :: BUTTON :: PEREZ :: RICCIARDO :: GROSJEAN :: KVYAT :: HULKENBERG :: MALDONADO
THE REST… THERE ARE FAR BETTER DRIVERS THAT SHOULD BE IN FORMULA 1


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 06, 2017 5:22 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 9:22 pm
Posts: 7798
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
Covalent wrote:
Exediron wrote:
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
Seriously, how is this any different than Wolff Joining Mercedes from Williams, or Paddy Joining Mercedes, and now Williams?

It isn't. Just like myself, everywhere I've worked I've picked up a few tidbits of processes and procedure as well as a few new methods of how to do things and all that adds to my experience, and as a great boss I had when I was 20 told me, people can hire and fire you as they wish, but the one thing they can never take away from you is your experience. That includes trade secrets. If you work for a company that does things a certain way and you leave to go work for a competitor, you can apply the previously gained knowledge to do your job. That's completely different than giving a competitor a stack of company documents from your former employer so they can utilize it to their advantage. I know it seems like its the same thing, but it isn't. You may have been paid a wage to do a job, but a really good employee is someone who learns and absorbs information they can pass on to other employees more efficiently. As such said processes or secrets are lodged in your memory.

And it's funny how companies don't want you to share their stuff, but they don't have any qualms in wanting to learn what others do from new hires. Companies expect 2-weeks notice because it's the right thing to do yet they don't have to and rarely extend that same courtesy to employees. Sorry, I don't play that game unless a company has been particularly good and fair with me which has been quite rare.

It absolutely is different! The information he has is information the teams gave to the FIA in confidence under the (justified, at the time) assumption that it would never make it beyond the FIA. He's like an IRS agent quitting and selling the confidential information he handled during his job to an advertiser. If the FIA is unable to stop its employees from turning mercenary, how can any team ever trust them with confidential data again?

I don't get why people seem to think this is the same as a normal situation where someone leaves an employer and takes the knowledge of how that company does things. He's taking third-party information that was entrusted to his former employer in confidence. It's not information that should be his to sell, and the FIA forced those teams to give it to them.

Playing the devil's advocate here but the team personnel also have information given to them by the team in confidence under the assumption that it would never make it beyond the team. So from a practical (not ethical) point of view I think it is the same thing.
Or have I missed some piece of info where the FIA have told the teams they'll never pass on the information on a scout's honour?

It's not playing Devil's advocate. It's common sense to me which is why I asked how it was different in the opening of my statement.

It's not. The only difference is where the individual was employed.

And if you want to be really nit picky with the subject matter, personnel the likes of Lowe, Allison, and the like are FAR more threatening because they have intimately in-depth knowledge of the information they have from every possible aspect where as Budkowski has whatever bits he received on paper and most likely doesn't have a complete understanding of the "secrets" everyone is worried about.


But take as an example the Ferrari suspension that was bombed out by FIA. Ferrari know they can not use it, as do Merc etc.
This guy knows what it is, both Merc and Ferrari, and whay they were not allowed. He may know that part of the Ferrari one was unacceptable because of 'this' and part of the Merc one because of 'that'.

He knows why not, and what of this can replace that and with a small tweak be accepted.

There are many areas where things are rejected that may need minor adjustments to be acceptable. Renault will now know how far they can push the boundary and what can be done to something that was rejected. Also, they know what all the other teams have submitted or asked for clarification on so have a whole new book of tricks to try


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 06, 2017 5:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 3620
Clarky wrote:
Massive egg on the face of the FIA.

Stop comparing this to a TP joining from one team to another, its completely different. This guy has been trusted with all teams innovated ideas, seen their wind tunnels etc now is joining a competitor.

Teams are in their right to be angry.


Because they didn't get in there first no doubt.

_________________
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 06, 2017 7:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:07 pm
Posts: 8894
Lotus49 wrote:
Clarky wrote:
Massive egg on the face of the FIA.

Stop comparing this to a TP joining from one team to another, its completely different. This guy has been trusted with all teams innovated ideas, seen their wind tunnels etc now is joining a competitor.

Teams are in their right to be angry.


Because they didn't get in there first no doubt.

Exactly. Well played by Renault IMO.

_________________
Räikkönen - Vettel - Bottas
Thank you Nico - You´re the champ!

PF1 Pick 10 Competition 2016: CHAMPION (2 wins, 8 podiums)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 06, 2017 9:44 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 4561
Location: Michigan, USA
Covalent wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
Clarky wrote:
Massive egg on the face of the FIA.

Stop comparing this to a TP joining from one team to another, its completely different. This guy has been trusted with all teams innovated ideas, seen their wind tunnels etc now is joining a competitor.

Teams are in their right to be angry.

Because they didn't get in there first no doubt.

Exactly. Well played by Renault IMO.

I'd still be annoyed if Macca had done it. But apparently nobody else thinks it's an issue, so I guess I'll leave it. x(

_________________
PF1 PICK 10 COMPETITION (3 wins, 12 podiums): 2017: 19th| 2016: 3rd| 2015: 4th
PF1 TOP THREE TEAM CHAMPIONSHIP (No Limit Excedrin Racing): 2017: 2nd| 2015: 1st
AUTOSPORT GP PREDICTOR: 2017 United States Champion! (world #3)


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ennis, Zoue and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group