If we have learnt nothing else from the Frost/Dunne case it is the value of employee voice and that a basic level of procedure protects all within any working environment; alleged aggressor and victim alike.
There are flaws throughout the case, leaked documents, poor judgement and poor practice. There have been failures by organisations that should have demonstrated themselves as competent, efficient and strong. They were unfortunately, for both parties involved, found lacking. These industry organisations should be leading the way in demonstrating good practice. The culture highlighted here is as concerning as any aspersions cast in the direction of the weighing room, both being thrust in to the spotlight by the case.
The British Horseracing Authority (BHA) were slow to react and process the disciplinary investigation and procedure. The Professional Jockeys Association (PJA) demonstrated a lack of support for one of their members and a positively biased level of support for another. The chief executive of the PJA has since resigned, a person with a huge amount of experience in the industry and someone who, with the right support, could be a huge asset to effect change.
Are we not missing the point here? Behaviour as outlined in the Frost/Dunne case is not acceptable in today’s society, arguably it was never acceptable, but may have been accepted in some quarters in the past. There is no defence to be found in the argument that traditionally the weighing room was self-policing, with senior jockeys dealing with such issues as they saw fit….how can that be offered as a suitable, sustainable model? Relying only on seniority and an innate ability to manage people is surely not right, people build whole careers around people management, why are senior jockeys deemed proficient without any training?
The industry remains defensive and reactive. As demonstrated by the PJA and jockeys’ reaction to the word ‘rancid’ being used in the court summary of the case. The solicitor didn’t say the weighing room occupants and culture were rancid, he said ‘if’ the allegations were true then the word ‘rancid’ would be appropriate. I agree that an environment where death threats are levied at colleagues as means of intimidation sounds rancid. Any of us within the industry would have a very hard time arguing to the contrary. The argument that the weighing room is in some way ‘different’ and that normal rules of decency do not apply is not correct.
How can there be confidence in the industry’s leadership when insecurities, internal conflicts and lack of vision cause issues time and time again. If racing cannot police its own workplace in a better fashion, how can it possibly present a united image to the general public when navigating a path through the challenges faced.
This should not be the revolutionary idea that it will sound but why doesn’t the industry confront these issues in a pragmatic, evidence based, measured way leading to the development of good practice and procedure. Done well, this can then be applied confidently to future situations. Or wouldn’t it be even better if the industry took a proactive rather than solely reactive approach to such issues and glanced a critical eye in its own direction more often, it might be unsettling but that is not a reason not to do it, it may be the only way.