| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 101569 | 2009-07-19 21:22:00 | Westpac to Sack Staff Member over the Missing Money | pctek (84) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 793103 | 2009-07-20 06:34:00 | My brother is a lawyer. He had a client he defended who was charged with criminal intent or some such thing. This guy went into the local branch of his bank, filled out a withdrawal form, and took the cash. The problem... he was given $5000 instead of the $50 he requested, which of course he didn't have in his account. The prosecution claimed he knew exactly what he was receiving, and therefore it was essentially theft. My brother's client said he had no idea of the amount he received, as he immediately went out and bought cannabis with, what he thought was 50 bucks. Prosecution used as evidence the bank's video surveilance footage to show that the guy was looking closely as the female teller counted and handed over the cash. My brother countered that, because the teller was rather well endowed in the chest area, that he was looking at the woman's breasts, not the cash. The guy got off the charge! The teller was subsequently fired. |
Greg (193) | ||
| 793104 | 2009-07-20 07:04:00 | Beats me how people think they can just give away a companies money, and then blame the company. The 10 million dollar chick should have resigned in shame. |
Metla (12) | ||
| 793105 | 2009-07-20 07:06:00 | So how did they stuff up the dismissal? " However, applicant knew driving company car with excess breath alcohol level constituted serious misconduct under employment agreement and no warning was necessary - Authority found fair and reasonable employer would conclude summary dismissal appropriate sanction - Given any procedural defects were minor respondent acted as fair and reasonable employer - Application dismissed - Customer Care Officer Result: Application dismissed " www.ers.dol.govt.nz The guy wasnt over excess piss level he wasnt even drunk but he had some drinks and drove company vehicle. Boss of company is 7th day adventist and is just anti piss. Contract said no drinking and driving but its not a first time sackable offence may not even be sackable after second. I suppose driving after a few drinks is not a crime and thats how he got off. |
prefect (6291) | ||
| 793106 | 2009-07-20 07:14:00 | My brother is a lawyer. He had a client he defended who was charged with criminal intent or some such thing. This guy went into the local branch of his bank, filled out a withdrawal form, and took the cash. The problem... he was given $5000 instead of the $50 he requested, which of course he didn't have in his account. The prosecution claimed he knew exactly what he was receiving, and therefore it was essentially theft. My brother's client said he had no idea of the amount he received, as he immediately went out and bought cannabis with, what he thought was 50 bucks. Prosecution used as evidence the bank's video surveilance footage to show that the guy was looking closely as the female teller counted and handed over the cash. My brother countered that, because the teller was rather well endowed in the chest area, that he was looking at the woman's breasts, not the cash. The guy got off the charge! The teller was subsequently fired. Quite believable, when ever I am perving at nice big breasts my pathetic mind turns to jelly. Could have been me judge got it right. |
prefect (6291) | ||
| 793107 | 2009-07-20 10:32:00 | I agree with paulw - any system that allows a $9.9M mistake means the responsibility lies heavily on the bank. After all, the bank won't be saying to it's shareholders, "hey we fired the employee responsible - it's all their fault!" To some extent or other the bank has a responsibility to it's employees too - and the woman's supervisor apparently looked it over, thought "hmm" and then did nothing. :groan: |
roddy_boy (4115) | ||
| 793108 | 2009-07-20 11:55:00 | :groan: I'm sorry roddy_boy. That shouldn't have crept in there. I was tired and emotional after discussing the Nigerian situation all afternoon. |
Deane F (8204) | ||
| 793109 | 2009-07-20 21:31:00 | Beats me how people think they can just give away a companies money, and then blame the company. The 10 million dollar chick should have resigned in shame. Yeah and you never make a mistake?? |
paulw (1826) | ||
| 793110 | 2009-07-20 21:46:00 | Yeah and you never make a mistake?? I have done,and no doubt will again. And I have lost my employment for it once or twice. And rightly so. |
Metla (12) | ||
| 793111 | 2009-07-20 21:51:00 | I don't think the bank will sack her for 2 reasons. 1. Negative publicity for bank 2. Its almost impossible to fire someone without warning the employment tribunal would reinstate her . Business not far from here had in contract that drinking then driving company vehicles (they are drainage company) was a sackable offence. When they fired him the tribunal sent him back to work. Not sure if assault or stealing is grounds nowdays the only way to get rid of them is to give written warnings and follow labour dept guidelines to the letter. With luck national will rectify this rediculous situation |
Cicero (40) | ||
| 793112 | 2009-07-20 22:57:00 | With luck national will rectify this rediculous situation What ridiculous situation? Prefect's facts are completely wrong. You can fire people without warning. Reasons for summary dismissal are written into every contract - usually for things classed as serious misconduct - and if there is a serious safety issue involved that endangers the worker or others then summary dismissal is justified too. |
Deane F (8204) | ||
| 1 2 3 | |||||