Posted by
JennyTeo
16 yrs ago
A colleague has been claiming allowances from the company although he does not qualify for them. The total may have amounted to $1m, I think. My conscience is torn between the act of dishonesty and the guy losing his job or even going to jail.He is such a personable guy, always friendly and sweet to everyone. Would you let it go or bring this matter to the authorities?
Please support our advertisers:
i say mind ur own business. People dont do that anymore. Everyone gotta be all up in someone elses business. If its not hurting you, stay away from the situation
Please support our advertisers:
how you know his allowance is not something he has agreed with the company???
somebody approves these things and this person should know. except in crystal clear situation, i would tread carefully
Please support our advertisers:
I'm with the "caution" camp. Unless you have very clear evidence of wrong-doing, don't say anything.
Please support our advertisers:
I am 100 percent sure that he is doing this. It isn't a spur of the moment thing but a very well hatched out plan. That's why the company is not aware of it. Without going into the details, I can pretty much tell you that I am absolutely certain that what he did is against the company rules.
I know what you mean about minding my own business - but on the other hand, if one were to witness a man being pick pocketed on the street we would alert the victim but just because he's stealing from a company we tend to close an eye.
Why is it any different? Stealing is stealing. In this case, I think it could even be considered as fraud!
We've all have had to take pay cuts in this economic situation. The money he has taken could well have paid someone's salary!
If you knew that your colleague was embezzling would you report him?
I'm torn!
Please support our advertisers:
What if he carries on doing what he is doing, you don't report it, and the company ends up having financial problems. You could all lose your jobs because of this dishonest act. You've said yourself that you've all had to take pay cuts etc.. You'd better report it before it gets any worse!
Please support our advertisers:
Write an anonymous letter as jobin suggests.
Please support our advertisers:
Have you thought about actually speaking to the man first before you start levelling accusations at him.
You may be right, and he may be stealing, but you need to confirm it and see what his response is. Looking at something from the outside is often very misleading.
Without saying trust the person, because that is not what I am advocating, I would verify your suspicion first, and that includes unfortunately making him aware that you think you know what is going on.
It's not the same as pickpocketing, because you simply could not be aware of everything the person has going on, and if there is doubt, before you level an accusation, probably ensure he loses his job and goes to jail or at the very least has a big cloud hanging over his head and perhaps police involvement, then you need to talk to him first before making any movement whatsoever.
Forget being torn between reporting someone you like. I would be more worried I had it wrong and was accusing someone who might be innocent.
You seem to be very sure of yourself without specifically saying you have spoken to him on the matter, and honestly speaking that concerns me greatly and in the end you would be ruining a man's life. Before you do that
(1) Give him the chance to explain himself
(2) If He fails to adequately do so, then let him know he leaves you no option.
An anonymous letter is a little weak in my view. If you say you are doing this for the morality of it. Then have the decency to face the man you accuse and certainly thrust the dagger into his chest rather than into his back.
If you cannot do that, then all it tells me is really you are not completely sure yourself.
Please support our advertisers:
He or she is not liable, particularly if notes or a record are made of the conversation. I think if the accuser ends up reporting the offence, One would be very hard pressed to make any sort of reasonable case that they with intent to aid and abet the crime tipped the individual off.
Its completely reasonable to confront someone before reporting them, and if you ask me completely unreasonable not too
That is a little fantastic if you ask me. To much CSI or Boston Legal in that thinking.
Before screwing with someone's life, on a 99 per cent certainty, one has a moral obligation to increase the certainty level with which they level the accusation and that means confrontation.
Particularly if they are claiming that they wish to report the person for moral reasons.
If you have values, then they need to be consistent and not selective, otherwise it smacks to me of doing the right thing for the wrong reasons. I have sleep problems as it is, and I would not want yet another thing to keep me up late at night.
Please support our advertisers:
I know for certain that he is indeed guilty. I don't want to go into the details but I have the evidence. He knows himself that what he has done is unlawful but he still did it. What should I say if I were to confront him? What if he says its none of my business or does 'something' to me?
Please support our advertisers:
If you confront him, and he says its none of your business, well then you tell him you have evidence which suggests illegal behaviour and you are ethically and morally forced to report the evidence to your superiors.
That will force his hand. Unless he is a very good liar it will increase your certainty level. But all men and women are entitled to the chance to explain their actions and they should be allowed to look their accuser in the eye.
That is part of the essence of a free and fair society.
The fact that certain people have the ability to lie extremely well does not change that fact as far as I am concerned.
Now you could cover your face or not reveal yourself, but that casts doubt on yourself, which TBH the accused can exploit to their advantage. If it becomes a police case, you won't even have the luxury of hiding. If he pleads innocent, you will have to face him in court, because I have no doubt the police in their investigation will work out whom you are or at the very least you run a very high risk that they do.
Going forward you have to ask yourself are you behaving morally. Its not good enough to accuse someone of behaving unethically and not being fully ethical yourself. That is a half measure.
If you are going to start sh*t, you have to do so in the full knowledge a sh*t storm will arise. You say you would report a pickpocket, you run the same risk of that person doing something to you as well.
Cover you're ar*se, confront the man, record details of the conversation, give him the chance to explain and confirm your suspicion. Take the full evidence to your superiors and if it were me, I would show my face. We don't live in Basra or Kabul.
If I am going to cause a man a lot of pain for the right reasons then damn straight I am going to be able to look him in the eye before and after. It is his crime, don't commit one (albeit a moral one) of your own which going forward causes you to feel guilt.
At least that is the way I look at it
Please support our advertisers:
DO NOT CONFRONT HIM, YOU LL NEVER KNOW HOW ONE REACTS! PROTECT YOURSELF, Don't listen to Digital Blonde!!!!!
Report it or write an anonymous letter.
Please support our advertisers:
Yes
by all means potentially get the police involved, and begin lying to them to protect yourself.
very sage and I have to say noble advice.
Please support our advertisers:
DO NOT talk with the guy, it is very dangerours for you to alert him. we are talking about big amount here - $1m, not like a few thousands.
Report him anonymously to the authorithy (police) and let them handle it.
Please support our advertisers:
Its a lack of spine Cara. If I found out my staff had done that, really I would end up with a fairly negative impression of them.
I know you are a doll love. but it has deep resonance about what it says about you as a person, that you will not look the person you accuse in the eye.
Frankly its a million dollar fraud. I have no doubt that the company will call the police and an investigation will be launched at which point it will quickly emerge which employees have access to the evidence.
If it goes to court the police and prosecution will be keen to have a witness, and if you want to protect your anonymity you will have to lie to both your employer and the police.
Which are issues in themselves and will cause a range of issues down the line if it becomes obvious that indeed you have done so to protect yourself.
Frankly I expect to be able to hold my head up after any kind of altercation. If feel they need to look away when looking at someone, that is not really being able to hold your head up is it?
As far as your point two is concerned on the one hand you are saying you are loathe to confront him in case he is innocent, because it would make your workplace untenable, but have no problems sending an anonymous tip that he is engaging in illegal behaviour, which would basically have the effect of screwing up an innocent person's life.
This is someone's life you are dealing with here, his job and whether he goes to jail depend on the decision one makes in this case.
If you say one has a moral obligation to report it, why does morality end there. It must extend right across your life and the way you behave, otherwise the real motive is not morality it is more sinister and far less positive.
It is a Pandora's box you open, the much maligned can of worms. If you are not prepared for the repercussions of opening the box, then perhaps you should leave it closed.
Please support our advertisers:
Please support our advertisers:
Interesting thread.
JennyTeo please check Cap 221 Criminal Procedures Ordinance Section 90 and 91 which lays down obligations to report crimes and penalties for failing to report or covering them up. There you will see your legal position which could be quite sticky if you do not report.
You do have an obligation to your fellow workers as you do not know the full extent of this person's theft and how it will impact on the company's financial position in the long term; he may have stolen more than you think, and you and your colleagues may all lose your jobs.
Don't confront him as you cannot be sure how he will react and you may be hurt if he turns violent; at best you will have tipped him off and he may do a runner (refer back to Cap 221 Sect 90).
Your options for reporting are directly to the police/ICAC or your emloyers/management; all three organisations will/should do their best to ensure your safety and anonymity to a certain extent
Please support our advertisers:
I'm not going to continue re-iterating the same points over and over again, so I will make it i for the last time.
Before you escalate something, you must be completely certain that there is not a perfectly logical and reasonable explanation for certain behaviour, regardless of how certain you think something may be peering in from the outside.
If it is a colleague, you must give them the opportunity to explain before really what amounts to wrecking their lives. If he is really innocent, he will have no problems going through the motions of clearing the doubt.
If anything it prevents you from looking like the fool should they ultimately have a decent explanation. If not, it is an added layer of protocol which you followed.
I apologise if I thought you were suggesting doing it anonymously, from the number of people advocating that. That is what I assumed.
Notwithstanding the morality of being unwilling to level an accusation against someone to their face.
Confronting someone before reporting is nothing like covering up, not even close. it does not fulfil any definition of cover up and as far as I can tell once you report it, the act of reporting is completely contradictory to the definition of cover up.
If it becomes a police case, you can forget the notion of anonymity.
You can try and do this anonymously. All I can say is I have very little doubt that eventually it will emerge who the accuser was, and that colleagues will be wary of dealing with someone who tips off anonymously and as far as bosses go, then all it tells them is the person who made the tip does not really have courage of conviction, and if it were me, that really I would question the employees motives, and certainly their spine.
Please support our advertisers:
I appreciate that one may be pushed to theft because they are in poverty or a family member is in need of help. But this guy has an address in a posh district, a ferrari, a maseratti & a porsche. I think he is just driven by pure greed.
Does anyone have any experience with the ICAC?
I hear that everything is held in confidence.
Also you are able to tip them off & still remain anonymous.
I may seem spineless but I fear for my life. I don't want to have acid thrown on my face. Do you blame me?
Please support our advertisers:
Yeah I do blame you.
And I question your underlying motive. I personally don't think you are driven by doing the right thing. certainly if you are not prepared to face the person you are accusing.
You can huff and puff but you will not blow that house down.
Its not the ICAC you need to worry about, whilst the case is being investigated, I am sure your identity will be protected. Its when it gets to court you need to worry about.
Good luck concealing your identity then, and more power to you when your colleagues basically find out you are prepared to snitch behind someone's back, without first talking to them to see if there is a decent explanation for any rules they me bending however minor and innocuous they may be.
Please support our advertisers:
Why would you question me?
I am not the one who is breaking the law.
DB, I know he broke the law. I saw the papers. I fear for my life if he knew that I even know about it whether I report it or not.
You're a bit harsh considering I haven't done anything except to ask for advice.
You insist that I confront him, & if I, an employee so low down in the hierarchy does not have the guts to do it, to just keep quiet & let him continue plundering?
Is that what you recommend I should do?
You would want acid to be thrown at my face?
Besides, I really don't see what you mean that 'You can huff and puff but you will not blow that house down' I haven't done anything!
Besides, Digital Blonde, I'm surprised at how angry you sound.
Please support our advertisers:
Not angry in the slightest, just surprised at the number of hypocrites there are out there, and you don't live in Baghdad. If you are really worried about an acid attack or even just violence, why don't you compute the probability of it, you seem to be calculating enough.
The number of police cases reported by victims and concerned parties annually and divide it by the number of acid or violent attacks committed by the accused, factor in probably a good education and wealth and it probably falls even lower from there.
People report crime and illegal behaviour all the time, every day, citing fear as an excuse doesn't really hold a lot of water with me.
When I say confront, that doesn't mean go have an argument with the guy, you can politely talk to him and gauge the response.
The fact that you cite you fear for your life as the underlying excuse for not facing the man you accuse, and not even bothering to ask him about an alleged indiscretion and still worse a potential criminal act, sows a seed of doubt about what your real motives for wanting to act are, even if your fear is real. Jealousy vengeance, any number of things.
You don't have to worry about whether I question you, my opinion is meaningless. What you do have to worry about is everyone you know around you, some of whom will question your true motives. Some people may believe you, but when it comes to ruining a man's life, I couldn't even tolerate even a single one person who didn't believe or doubted whether I acted in good faith.
And as I said, you can huff and puff, but you won't blow that particular house down I'm afraid. Its just one of those things.
Please support our advertisers:
Think you are being a little hard on JennyTeo.
As quoted in one of her earlier posts she is certain that he has committed the offence, there is no reason to give him an opportunity to explain. If he is innocent he will have no problems proving that to the investigating authority! The police would not recommend that she makes an accusation to the guy's face. She seems to have some concerns about her safety and without knowing the full details it is unfair to scoff at these worries for her. A criminal's reaction on being found out can be totally unpredictable and violent. She can face the man she accuses in court.
Don't confront him just make the report, whilst also expressing your concerns for your safety. I do not advocate making anonymous complaints as this may conceal important info from the investigating officers.
Please support our advertisers:
I don't think so. I am not scoffing at her concept of personal safety, her fear may be completely real, and it is completely rational.
I scoff at the notion that one is prepared to escalate and level an accusation at someone that has the potential to ruin their life, without first asking the individual about their behaviour.
I don't think that is wholly unreasonable and in fact I think making the complaint without first querying your own logic and assumptions with the individual first is far more unreasonable.
To do so anonymously would be anathema to me, and I would have very valid doubts about anyone's motives were they to effectively ruin someone's life that way.
If we were told that the individual in question had some history of violence, displayed bad tempered tendencies or was just in general a bad sort, I might even very very grudgingly accept it, but still have grave concerns.
We are told the opposite, that he is personable friendly and even nice. If your impression of a person is that favourable, why on earth would anyone go and escalate something to the point of no return without first talking to them.
The US went to war in Iraq based on a perceived threat of weapons of mass destruction. Close to 1 million non combatants have lost their lives because someone said they saw something that was never there.
When you do these things, they are irrevocable. There is no going back, no changing it, no matter how much you may want to or how large or small the mistake. You may think I am being hard, but I really don't think so.
Please support our advertisers:
jennyteo,
i would like to come back on my earlier post (without having read the blonde rant yet)
i will answer below what i would do if i am 100% sure, but first i would like to challenge again whether you are 100% sure that what this person does is illegal. given what you said about the guys wealth (ferraris, etc), i assume he is a rather senior manager (or possibly a high flying banker).
you also mentioned that it's about allowances that he does not deserve. the key questions is what you base this against? company rules? i have seen hundreds of allowance rules in my working time and i have seen 1000 exceptions from these rules - all duly known to someone senior but to nobody else so as nobody else feels jealous and wants the same.
so you must be sure that what this person does is not only against the company rules, but really not approved by anyone - and how can you know for sure? you are not his boss, are you? if you are in doubt on this one, tread carefully.
now assuming that there is a really exceptional situation where you really can be 100% sure that something is amiss, do not go to ICAC or Police. They won't investigate allowances frankly as they would first need the company to confirm whether it's a fraud or not.
much better is to approach two parties within your company: a) your immediate boss. tell him what you think and share the 'news'. once done, it's off your chest and he becomes responsible (because he is the superior); b) approach compliance (that's why they exist in some companies like banks); or c) approach HR (they make the policy and approve exceptions, so they would know whether this is legit or not). all three of them commonly keep such things confidential.
i don't think you need to approach the suspect. unfortunately hk needed an ICAC exactly because some people resort to extreme measures to shut up people who say the wrong things.
Please support our advertisers:
one more point (after reading one of blondes points): in a court case, the witness would be the company not you. hence no worries to talk to the company
Please support our advertisers:
Thank you for all your advice.
Firstly, I am dead sure he is in the wrong. He is not a senior guy in the company but in a different department. When it comes to this set of benefit, it is standardise throughout the whole company. I do not want to go into the details as it may then be very obvious what company this is. On this part, I'm 100 percent sure. I have the evidence & in this area its very black & white whatever the position you hold in the company.
Sometime ago, another colleague violated this rule & was terminated. This is how serious it is in the company.
I asked your advice because he has always been nice to me but at the same time, he has violated the rules.
About being anonymous or not, I ask about it it because I want to know what options there are. Just gathering advice.
In view of the situation, I do not feel comfortable confronting the person myself.I do not have that kind or 'extrovert' personality. I don't think I can handle getting into a heated argument with the guy. We are all different right?
DB, its not a matter of esclating the matter to no return - he has made a violation. I am not jealous because he is wealthy - I was just replying to what I thought you meant that he may well have a reason to indulge in this sort of behaviour.
I have no reason to be jealous and I don't want to flaunt, but just to make a point to you, although I may not have a high flying job, my family is not exactly in the average income category. So no reason to be jealous at all.
My concern is also that I do not want to be in the news as it will affect my family.
Thanks Green Valley, you have cleared my mind. I appreciate your advice & will act accordingly.
I think even if he is personable, he has comitted a crime.
Please support our advertisers:
JennyTeo
Please disregard DigitalBlonde's advice. I have rarely read such bad advice which is based on solely on idealistic principles and so lacking in common sense.
Your best bet is to contact the ICAC who will discretely investigate and keep your identity anonymous.
We all have to protect ourselves if possible. Probably, you have family responsibilities and can't recklessly confront this person without fear of losing your job or maybe personal safety.
Listen only to those giving pragmatic advice, based on more than ideals.
Please support our advertisers:
personally I think Cookie, greenvalley & iwilltry's advise fair and reasonable.
A crime is a crime, regardless of whatever reason behind why ppl do it. Leave it to the judge to decide that part.
Please support our advertisers:
xpatwiliwier
That's pretty much what GWB said to his intelligence agencies when they were debating whether to go into Iraq, and he was being told there wasn't enough solid intelligence that WMD even existed.
I am guessing back then that he to said they needed to be pragmatic.
Idealism conceptually is completely separate to a set of principles. Pragmatism is the word most commonly used when people violate or compromise on a set of principles and moral code that they live by, not ideals.
Its a word that people use to justify their own hypocrisy to themselves, largely because, well one needs to.
I am guessing you probably use the word a lot.
Please support our advertisers:
agreed with iwilltry, can't imagine one man can scam 1M out by himself. expenses/allowances need to be approved by superiors, and maybe HR (as in my company).
I am not so sure but think in the court, OP may need to testify, but this can be done behind close door without revealing her/his true identity.
Please support our advertisers:
How on earth did this go from an employee seeking advice on a dishonest colleague to the war in Iraq? It's a bit of stretch to liken JennyTeo's fears of confronting the guy and the Bush/Blair search for WMD and the invasion of Iraq!
JennyTeo may not have to testify in court if there is sufficient documentary evidence of the fraud committed. The initial complaint simply gives Police/ICAC a starting point on where to begin the investigation; in fact the allegation itself may be of no evidential value whatsoever as the judge/jury does not need to know how the investigation commenced but if an offence was actually committed. However please do not take this an assurance that JennyTeo will not be called, it alls depends on the needs of the investigation.
JennyTeo do the right thing as you see it but don't confront the guy.
Please support our advertisers:
Its an example of building castles in the sky.
Please support our advertisers:
UBS whistleblower is the only one in jail.
Please support our advertisers:
JennyTeo I would not advise confronting your colleague. Write an anonymous whistleblower letter to your company and they will take it from there and start an investigation. Many times writers of whistleblower letters are never identified and they are certainly not the focus of the investigation.
Please support our advertisers:
Unless of course the "anonymous" writer of the letter used their real name on an asiaxpat forum.
And whistleblowers are typically the sole focus on investigations, hence whistleblowers protection acts around the world, which rarely work from what I have read.
You are playing with fire JennyTeo, suggest you get legal advice immediately, assuming you are real.
Please support our advertisers:
I am not entirely sure what particular relevance one's profession has to whether one has a set of principles when dealing with people around you, that you behave properly and with dignity.
If you behave like a rat, that is how people will treat you.
In fact if anything, your profession in that regard would probably work against you, if we were to believe all the clichés.
Personally I'd like to avoid doing anyone over however inadvertently and well intentioned, or certainly minimise the risk of it to the absolute minimum. I need to know that I did right by my relationships however formal them may be and however pain my actions may cause, and behaved with honour rather than merely pay lip service to it for undefined motives.
confrontation is not necessary, a conversation is.
Here speaketh a man.
Please support our advertisers:
It's an absurdity to suggest that someone who suspects a crime has been committed ought to confront the suspect.
Report your suspicions to your senior supervisors. Let them do the investigation, not you. They will involve the police if they find cause to do so. If his allowances are genuine, then they will be proved to be so. End of case. A trial will only proceed if there is sufficient evidence. That will be established at various points in the investigation.
You don't need to wrack your own conscience as to the rights and wrongs of this. You suspect a crime. Report those suspicions as mere suspicions, and let the process take care of it. There is no moral duty on you to establish the case yourself from him or anyone else. You are not a criminal justice worker.
Please support our advertisers:
I would definitely not confront this man. It is not between you and this man, it is between him and the company. I would go to whomever you think you should report this to and explain that you have a suspicion that a fraud is taking place and let THEM, the company, investigate it.
Please support our advertisers:
Digital Blonde,
I do think you rant a bit too much. My advice to the OP is pragmatic (not amoral nor immoral) and would allow the OP to protect herself, whilst bringing a criminal to justice (providing that the ICAC substantiates during their investigations that a criminal act took place). Your analogy of the Iraqi invasion is preposterous, as that would be the equivalent of sending the Colleague to jail without any evidence supporting the jail sentence.
PS I don't only use the word "pragmatic" alot, I also exercise pragmatism alot. Exercising morally correct decisions and making pragmatic decisions are not mutually exclusive processes.
DB wrote:
"xpatwiliwier
That's pretty much what GWB said to his intelligence agencies when they were debating whether to go into Iraq, and he was being told there wasn't enough solid intelligence that WMD even existed.
I am guessing back then that he to said they needed to be pragmatic.
Idealism conceptually is completely separate to a set of principles. Pragmatism is the word most commonly used when people violate or compromise on a set of principles and moral code that they live by, not ideals.
Its a word that people use to justify their own hypocrisy to themselves, largely because, well one needs to.
I am guessing you probably use the word a lot. "
Please support our advertisers:
Jenny, your duty is to inform the company however you please. Your duty stops there, no need to get involved with the wrongdoer. Thats good enough, and nothing more should be expected of you. You owe no duty to the wrongdoer to give him a chance to explain himself any more than you would if you saw him stealing a car. Thats not your job, its the company's. If you wish you could send an E Mail to HR and the CFO (or whoever, you know better than us) using an anoymous account (set one up in Google not using your name) and offer to meet them if they reply to you offering you confidentality and security.
Please support our advertisers:
< Back to main category
You must be logged in to be able to reply.
Login now
Copy Link
Facebook
Gmail
Mail