Whistle blowing

krd

A hypothetical situation.

I have sought advice on this before and was pretty unsatisfied with the answer.

An individual working in a company, becomes aware of very serious behaviour by senior management. This behaviour appears to be either large scale fraud or incredible mismanagement. On investigation by the individual, they discover these managers have previous form.

Other stakeholders in the company become aware of Fraud/Mismanagement and are in the process of trying to establish either fraud or mismangement.

The individual realises that the scale of the mismanagement is too large for any possible future for the company. And wants out on fair terms.

As the only bargaining chip the individual has, is insider information, that if made public will result in all hell breaking loose for many senior stakeholders, who were asleep at the switch. The individual seeks legal advice. And is advised that their best bet is to shut their little mouth and walk empty handed. Or if the individual attempts to seek fair severance they can be hit with a libel case, or worse a criminal case for extortion.

The individual is holding a grenade. The remaining management also know this. They would like to fire the individual, but are afraid they will pull the grenade pin. So instead they're creating an intolerable work environment, hoping the individual will walk, and keep quite out of fear.

At this point, the individual is as angry as hell and facing destitution. How can the individual get fair severance, without going to jail.

The individual has been in a similar situation before. Where they walked, and still has difficulties with malicous references from their previous dishonest managers. Is either going to whistle blow for maximum destruction, including self immolation, or get a nice severance.

The question is how, as the individual has been declined legal representation.

Rhonda9000

krd wrote: »

A hypothetical situation.....

..... The question is how, as the individual has been declined legal representation.

As this isnt a place for legal advice, might as well keep it general.

The hypothetical individual seems hellbent on getting paid off OR landing the management in it. Since the only morally right option of those is reporting the management and buying the popcorn to watch the show, the individual wanting to use 'grenades' etc. to get paid off seems as bad as the corrupt management they are so frustrated with.

Interesting touch at the end with individual being declined legal representation. In the real world, individual could always get legal advice if they wanted it

pirelli

http://www.dataprotection.ie/viewprint.asp?fn=/documents/guidance/Whistleblowers.htm

Under the theft and fraud act 2001 would you not be committing passive corruption under section 44 and liable for an indictable sentence.
There are whistblowing scheme's and your company might have a system in place. If that system is there which more than likely it is then you must use that system and then you will not be liable for conviction otherwise you might be have a hard time getting your cut and avoiding jail.

dermot_sheehan

pirelli wrote: »

http://www.dataprotection.ie/viewprint.asp?fn=/documents/guidance/Whistleblowers.htm

Under the theft and fraud act 2001 would you not be committing passive corruption under section 44 and liable for an indictable sentence.
There are whistblowing scheme's and your company might have a system in place. If that system is there which more than likely it is then you must use that system and then you will not be liable for conviction otherwise you might be have a hard time getting your cut and avoiding jail.

Only possible if the person was an EU official defrauding the european union

pirelli

gabhain7 wrote: »

Only possible if the person was an EU official defrauding the european union

Well it cover ethics in public office also.
I was thinking along the lines of...

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1995/en/act/pub/0022/index.html#zza22y1995

I would imagine that the section here would cover it better.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2001/en/act/pub/0050/sec0059.html#partix-sec59

Tom Young

I'd get a solicitor and I'd do so quickly.

Whistleblowers in general (the below is not legal advice):

There are significant provisions under the Competition Acts which deal with this matter if of course the matter is market oriented or in some way dealing with cartel or collusive behaviours, S. 50 of the 2002 Competition Act.

Revenue Regulation Act of 1890, S. 32.

Under company law see the ODCE website and the Company Law Enforcement Act of 2001 ss 7 to 12 and Companies (Auditing and Accounting) Act, 2003, S. 51.

Theft and Fraud Offences S.3.

krd

Tom Young wrote: »

I'd get a solicitor and I'd do so quickly.

Theft and Fraud Offences S.3.

As I must state again -- This is a Hypothetical situation. I am not seeking legal advice, just comment. The details of the example I am giving are hypothetical and do not relate to a real world situation.

For the sake of argument. Proving fraud can be incredibly difficult. Especially when carried out by people who know how to cover their tracks. As far as I am aware, if it can be presented as business mismanagement. Without a confession or written proof of a fraud, even though a small child would have trouble believing it not to be fraud. The bandits cannot be nailed for it. And anyone who shouts fraud, without concrete proof (like documentary evidence), even though the money is missing. If it can be presented as a gross lack of prudence on behalf of management, instead of fraud. That person can get done for libel or even attempted extortion (which would entail joytime ,,, that is time in the joy,,, mountjoy).


For example, a far flung fantastic tale of fiction:

Biz Guru Bill comes along to the cleverest guy in the room. Investor Bob. Bill convinces Bob of a great business investment. Bob thinks he's very clever, and thinks he's above being tricked. He's way too clever for that. But has no realisation that Bill is actually a giant lizard in a sharp suit. (he should've spotted the giveaway telltale signs; the forked tongue, the long tail, the inhuman slit eyes. But he didn't. As Bob has been to the best schools money can buy, and speaks at least five Europe languages, menu Mandarin, and can order a whore and a coke in Arabic. He would've seen through any disguise. After All, He's a genius). Bob gives Bill some money (the currency is in Smeg -- symbol ) 10million:) .

Bill sets about doing his magic (he can make just about anything disappear) . The business involves Bill, funding a service which is provided by Norbert VanDerhoven (a fictitious character for the sake of narrative).

The way it works is. Norbert gets money from Bill, and when Norbert gets paid for his hocus pocus, he returns the money to Bill. Plus a nice fat fee. On paper to Bob, this looks nearly too good to be true, the fee is dazzlingly fat. Bob for all his education has never read much Shakespeare, and is unaware, that not all that glisters is gold (as dogsh*t can shine by the moonlight).

Year one, Bill does a lot of business with Norbert. He gives Norbert the whole 10m:) . At the end of the year, Bill presents Bob with a very 'post modern' balance sheet. This displays the expected return from the business with Norbert as yielding massive 'revenue' for the year. Bob is dazzled. (in the way as many rabbits are dazzled by German Automotive engineering). Bob goes to Bill, 'You're obviously such an 'incredible' business genius. Why don't I set up a credit facility with some bank in my name, for say 40M:) -- and let you do your magic Bill,,,,,.

Bill continues to do his magic. And over a period of years magics the 40:) credit facility dry. Business with Norbert is roaring.

Each year Bob is presented with balance sheets from Bills 'enterprise' and the 'revenues' just grow like crazy. The return on investment is just 'unbelievable'.
Then one day Bob calls up Bill and says 'Hey, I'd like to draw down some of the money you've got piled up for me there,, business buddy!!!'. Bill doesn't like to hear this and makes some excuses, coughs and hangs up the phone. But Bob turns up, a little nervous, and asks for access to the cash (the glittering accumulated golden horde). Bill says Bob lacks faith in majic, and just doesn't believe in the power of positive thinking, and alternative medicine, and don't be such a negative Nelly!!. Bob gets agitated. And asks 'Bill where is my f**king money'. Bill says 'Well if that's the way you feel about it, here's the full books. I'm off home, no need to be so bloody rude,,,, if you want me I'll be sulking,,,,,,in my 5m:) Malahide pad.'.

Bob pours over the books. And he can find how the money flows out to Norbert, but not where it flows back. He calls Norbert. Norbert mumbles something about business not being so good and 'y'know how sh*t happens' and that Bill never said anything about wanting the money back, if things didn't go to plan. And that Bill had his little army of smurfs carry all the compliance controls on all transactions,,,,,,,everything signed off as kosher. As far as Bills documentation goes, Norbert did his best. It's not like he didn't try,, it's just too bad things don't always work out,,,,,it's not like he broke the law or anything.

He tells bob he must go now. And disappears in a puff of purple smoke and bankruptcy proceedings.

Slowly it dawns on Bob, what's happened. Losing his own 10M:) was bad, but maybe he could live with that. The 40m:) credit facility is a different story. And other arrangements Bill has secured against Bob slowly start bobbing to the surface,,,,,,,, like lake Victoria after a few days Rwandan madness .

Bob feels unwell. --- One of the Smurfs approaches Bob (this is brainy smurf who only realises now, in the chaos of Bills departure, after accessing files previously unavailable to them. The true vibrant colours of Bills majic -- this by the way is the only smurf who has put all the pieces together) and says 'Bob, you're f**king going down,,, I want out,, you're going down, and I've no intention of going down with you,,, as it's you're fault in the first place, all I want is a fair severance package and some minor assurances,,,,,,just because it's over for you, doesn't mean we all have to be thrown to the wolves

---

and the wolves are at the door and all we've left is stale bread and galtee cheese'.

Bob smiles, and attempts to assure the smurf everything is going to be fine. The smurf doesn't believe bob, and seeks legal advice. The smurfs legal advisor, advises them they have no legal rights, and the smurf should just shut their little mouth and crawl away on their belly. The law, after all, is just to protect the smurf owners from the smurfs. Not the other way round.

The smurf is not happy. and is having difficultly securing another job. Day by day, the smurf discovers more and more exposure. and it's not just Bob,,, but a few banks,,, that at this moment in time can Ill afford to have any of Bills majic rabbit holes appearing in their balance sheets.

Bob is trying now trying to get rid of clever smurf. By terrorising them with bullying and humiliation tactics, into walking and silence, . The Smurf knows the end is nigh anyhow, but can't just walk this minute. And knows Bob is too afraid of them just to fire them.

Smurf knows the full scale of the damage. Knows who's going to get hurt, who the show is over for, for whom the bell tolls. But Smurf doesn't want accept that just because they're a smurf, and not some awful piss pants paddy whack Irish manager smurf, or a Belevedere/Clongowes/Blackrock old boy, they should just cow their head down, and limit the damage for the nice people (who get to have nice weddings in places like dromoland castle).

The smurf just wants a fair slice of the cake. And not to get burned by others malfeasance.

On the other hand Smurf knows; If people want a bonfire of the vanities,,, they should keep pushing and they will get one.


Smurf does not exist. And this story is a complete fiction. But if Smurf did exist, they would love to be directed to a legal practice, that could actually do something for them.

GUIGuy

Where's Gargamel?

krd

GUIGuy wrote: »

Where's Gargamel?

For the sake of brevitity. I have ommitted Gargamel from the story.

Gargamel is there though. There's always at least one in middle management. How can someone be a team leader, if they can't even take a piss without staining their pants.

pirelli

I dont know if it is a public office that your theory is based on as their is a code of ethics and the irish stock exchange aspect would fit in there.
It seems to involve bank's and it involves client's.I would guess that you in theory would be having trouble getting legal asistance. It involves a perhaps a legal firm that have made some poor investment's. It is the insider trading that has me confused. Pehaps you know of a company that is going to have a poor quarterly??.Please explain the insider trading aspect.I mean if Bill is so clueless and Bob is so bad then Bill would be the sucker you wouldnt have that type of information unless BILL is found himself in the position that all He does have is this insider information and BOB has run off with the money and now he wants to invest the money to recoup his losses.How can Bill be so complacent about losing 50 milion.OR I TAKE IT Now he wants to risk the entire company on recouping the lost money using the insider information.Or face going to the police and get nothing otherwise Surely bill would get the police to arrest Bob. Look if its another northern rock type situation. DO not crash the market. The Central Bank of Ireland will support the loss. Bob will be arrested and Bill will have to find a way to explain how he was hustled.

Victor

Two things:

Get a good written reference (checked by your solicitor), noting your good work through difficult times.

Sue for constructive dismissal.

krd

The thing is. Malfeasance can have a domino effect. It's also impossible to sue a bankrupted and liquidated business entity.

KRDs Domino effect of Malfeasance Theorem:
A small hole of 50m, can snowball into a bigger hole, of say 500m, or even more. PLC's have interlinked relationships through investment. If a PLC announces loses through malfeasance or incompetence, the markets will react badly to the PLC. Also, this has the effect of forcing other PLC's, who've invested in the PLC who's come a cropper, to write down their own profits. Which has the effect of causing other PLC's, who've invested in the PLC who've invested in the enterprise who's the victim of the original malfeasance, to write down theirs. Effectively creating a multiplier effect. The net effect can be to wipe out a massive multiple of value comparative to the original bilked amount. The domino effect is that far removed prudent and responsible stakeholders feel the pain, of actions that are well beyond their sphere of influence or control (that's why society in general expects the rule law to function -- to mitigate against unnecessary risks) (well actually truth be told,,, society in general operates on auto pilot,,. Where the average maturity and intelligence of the actors is that of a slightly dumb 12 year old child.........And there is psychological research data to back up that assertion)

What the smurf originally went looking for in terms of legal advice was effectively third party advocacy. To remove themselves from the high emotion and denial, in a situation of negotiation with a back drop of crisis. Also to for protection in the event of a spasmodic reprisal.

The Smurf has insider information. That if released to the public domain, will cause considerable damage. The smurf, also, has absolute confidence that there is absolutely no way this information will not come out eventually. And that any attempts to suppress this information are purely actions of denial and desperation. The Smurf just wishes to quietly get off the powder keg, before the fuse burns down.

The smurf believes in non-negotiable emperical laws. That you can never bargain with gravity. That you can only brace yourself for the fall.