Top
230°

Former Rockstar Designer Says Former Top Executive Groped Him

When Colin Bundschu first started at Rockstar Games in November of 2014, he says his new colleagues offered a warning: Don’t cross Jeronimo Barrera. Barrera, the vice president of product development, would often fly in from New York to visit Rockstar’s offices in Carlsbad, California, where they were all working on the Western game Red Dead Redemption 2. Bundschu was told to be cautious when Barrera came to town. Mind how you talk to him, multiple coworkers and managers said. Barrera, one of Rockstar’s top executives, had a reputation for screaming at people, and there were rumors that he had shouted at staff who’d rubbed him the wrong way, telling them they were fired.

The story is too old to be commented.
traumadisaster52d ago (Edited 52d ago )

Management should not be partying with staff, such an easy solution. If you are the employee you say I’ve got a sick aunt I care for every day and can’t go out. Give little details of your personal life.

As a manager you need your own friends, not staff after hours.

rainslacker52d ago

Or, as an employee, just say you don't want to go if you don't. If a manager gets mad at that, there is probably someone above them, and R* is a huge company with real HR people that have hard line rules about staying in line with the law on what's acceptable for termination, so there would be recourse if even a top executive decided he didn't like you not attending.

No need to make stuff up.

Otherwise, I agree with what you say. Management and staff should be separate. You can mingle together, but they should always be at office events, not with selected members.

traumadisaster52d ago

If you read the article it makes it clear HR was compromised. So you have to lie to weasel your way out of after work invitations, and do that in a way that does not offend the management jerk.

If you say I can't go I have to workout, or spend time with the kids, or tell the truth he will manipulate through those things and make it your fault. You also can't use a verifiable lie that could get you caught, like saying you are coaching a baseball team.

You look right in his eyes and say my aunt has been shitting herself all day and I have to clean her up, give her medicine and rehab, so no thank you sir. This way you have the moral ground. In addition, as I wrote earlier only give as little details as possible to reduce getting caught. If they ask say it's too much for me to talk about.

I've worked for decades in many corporations and I can attest real life has this crap in it it and the little guy is not protected. I've seen HR and Risk Management departments buckle under VP pressure, it's a huge political game in some places. It's not always the way it's taught in college...

jznrpg51d ago (Edited 51d ago )

What sucks is many companies have cliques and you get promotions based on how well you get along with upper management and if your their bro instead of how hard you work or how well you do your job. I am in my mid 40s and I’ve seen it so many times and got tired of shit like that so I started my own business. I never wanted to hang out or kiss ass to get paid more or promoted and unfortunately that’s how it is in way too many companies. I am glad I’m not a woman because they had it worse at the companies I worked for generally (not always) . The rule is not to mix business with pleasure but when management holds your livelihood in their hands and wants you to show up at these things it’s not as easy to just say no.

traumadisaster51d ago

I’ve seen and agree with your thoughts, that’s why I recommend an excuse that can’t be verified and has the moral authority.

Something like caring for a chronic sick aunt works well cause it’s not a spouse or child that you will have to verify later. The aunt can go away over night to another city and family member if needed.

Tapani47d ago

And then suddenly, there were hundreds of people cleaning after their chronic sick aunts.

343_Guilty_Spark52d ago

If you want NUTS 🥜 grab a can of Planters!

yomfweeee52d ago

If this happened, I feel for the guy.

But from a legal perspective - it is 100% he said-he said. No one corroborated this guys story. Even the people who were there with him, no one confirmed seeing anything.

All the other stuff about the guy being a nightmare prick boss, that's all irrelevant to what happened. Does nothing to prove some kind of sexual assault occurred.

SolidGamerX52d ago

Funny how a she said - he said always gets a guy fired and his life ruined though

rainslacker52d ago (Edited 52d ago )

Not typically in a court of law. Maybe in the court of public opinion, but people in general like to go with their feelings, and not think things through. My wife deals with cases like this as an attorney. She said she would be hard pressed to even get a grand jury to grant a case if it didn't have corroborating evidence.

She also said anyone seeking legal remedy would probably ruin their case if they decided to go public with it before seeking legal recourse...which happens a lot now due to social media. The courts have found that those that do so end up getting a lot of people who support them, but when it gets to court, they find that they have stories that aren't like the original statements, because their recollection of the events is clouded by those that give their own stories. So, there has to be a lot more physical or corroborating evidence to win the case.

UltraNova52d ago

Rain,

You almost make it seem that law is impartial and unwaiveringly fair to both sides...

Well, here is a true story for you. A friend caught his fiance with another guy on their bed one morning a year ago or so. He left her immediately but she beat him to the divorce filling. A year later the case was over and she was granted the house, their son, the dog and half his money for her trouble.

She claimed in the court of law that he did not "fulfill her emotionally anymore".

Well is it me, the cynic, that feels law is not that impartial after all?

Cobra95151d ago

UltraNova, if there are kids involved, that's usually the way it goes, other things being equal (or unprovably different). Courts will side with the mother in most cases.

Also, which is it, fiance or wife? If they were not legally married, it's a different ballgame.

UltraNova51d ago (Edited 51d ago )

@cobra

His wife*

That's some f**** up situation to live through...the guy went off the map since then...I'm telling you man life is hard and unfair to both women and men, yet equality carries a lot more gravity in the case of women most of the time

rainslacker51d ago

@Ultra

Law isn't incorruptible, and things certainly fall through the cracks. Grand Jury's are made up of people, and those people will be influenced by their feelings. Divorce proceedings don't require a grand jury, even if there is a question of fiscal recourse involved.

But, courts aren't like what you see on TV crime drama. They're very bureaucratic, and dogmatic, and it's usually pretty cut and dry, as a good attorney, which big companies will have to protect themselves, are damn good at pointing out lack of evidence for a case to proceed. Even the stereotype that public defenders are mostly incompetent isn't true, as they will know the laws relevant to defend their clients, they just don't always fight to hard to get them more than a plea bargain, because they have too much on their plate, and they get paid either way.

More sexual harassment discrimination cases are thrown out or never make it to trial in a month, than are heard by a court in an entire year across the US. And I'm not talking about them getting settled out of court, but actual ones that get to the point of needing to go to trial. That's why settlement isn't as common as people think, and is only done if there is a belief it will go to court, because the settlement is typically cheaper than the cost involved in a trial, regardless of the trial outcome. There is also the companies that want to avoid public attention on the matter who will settle, but that is becoming more rare for them to just give in to such things, as it's been abused by some to get easy money. The dishonest screw over those who really do deserve justice I'm afraid.

Divorce is a different matter than the case here. It's a case that will be heard regardless, or at least mediated, as it's basically a legal way to end a legally binding document. You can't just get a divorce, it has to be approved by someone. Some places it's just a magistrate, others it has to be a judge. The trial isn't for granting the divorce, although sometimes that can be forced if one won't sign the papers. It's more to decide who gets what. My wife doesn't deal with such things though, as it's not really what she became a lawyer for. Other attorneys in her firm take divorce cases, but her firm focuses on civil rights cases than straight up civil lawsuits. Much of her work is pro bono, and her firm is funded by civil rights groups from around the world. The divorce cases tend to be ones where domestic abuse is present, or in some cases, unfair distribution of marital gains or custody of children. They're pretty selective in those cases though.

She's good at what she does. She's a damn impressive speaker during litigation, and commands respect from everyone in the room. She's an adamant feminist, but she's a good one, because she isn't trying to soap box to ruin everyone else's life with her own ideals, just change things for the better where it's important.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 51d ago
AshleeEmerson52d ago

You feel for the guy? Lol... Got it! He did too...

All jokes aside... Well, honestly that's all I had to say. Continue your convo good sirs...

Cobra95151d ago

It's tough without evidence other than his own testimony; but a civil lawsuit is about making the jury believe one party more than the other, not about going beyond a reasonable doubt. Without better evidence, going public up front I think was a mistake. It would have been better to have his attorney have a sit down with their management, giving them a credible rundown of how things were going to be exposed in court in the lawsuit he was going to file if his client was not made whole. At some point, whether before or after the lawsuit gets filed, depositions, and all the unpleasant pre-trial rot, a settlement offer would likely come along. That's the reality of our litigious society. No big company wants a case like this to go to trial if there's a significant possibility that it will be a crapshoot rather than a slam-dunk for them.

Tankbusta4052d ago

What a time we live in where dudes are groping dudes

skiggy3452d ago

Right?!?!? WTF happened?? The snowflakes happened. I mean why did this guy even sit on his lap?

killswitch8052d ago

back in my day this was a good game or no one will know

SharpCT52d ago

Everybody and there mama has a sob story nowadays. Lmao!

skiggy3452d ago

Seriously. Pretty soon if someone gives you a shoulder bump people will call that sexual harassment.

UltraNova52d ago

Try touching a female coworker's shoulder that doesn't like you that much these days...if you dare.

mogwaii51d ago

He did grab the guys crotch, far from a shoulder bump.

Show all comments (46)
The story is too old to be commented.