dealing with compliance issue with minimum career damage

Scotty · Post by **Scotty** » Tue Oct 09, 2012 5:52 pm

Unfortunately and sadly very predictable.

Compliance probably wouldn't have helped much. They tend to try to reduce the likelihood of the company getting caught rather than whether the company should have been doing the action in question in the first place.

I would support having a chat with an employment lawyer.

Consider this as an opportunity to find somewhere better to work. It sounds like your boss and boss's boss are ethically challenged and it is unlikely to improve anytime in the next few years.

ESMaestro · Post by **ESMaestro** » Tue Oct 09, 2012 7:35 pm

...I can tell you that it is impossible to devise something that is fair in all circumstances from all points of view. The best you can hope for is mostly fair in aggregate. Even then, fair is highly subjective. Is it fair to the flagship fund investors to have smaller funds or managed accounts piggybacking on flagship fund's execution power? The flagship investors would say no and argue for protections from anything that could potentially increase their trading costs.

At first I had similar thoughts, but with braintree's latest post, the awfully quick action of his superior strikes me that there may be devious behavior at hand. Unless there is active downsizing company wide where top echelon looks for any & every excuse, their seemingly rash action makes little sense over a disagreement in execution.

Braintree: I am sorry to hear this news. I can imagine it is stressful, and wish you and your family the best. Put your conscience ahead of all, it will eat you alive otherwise. It reminds me of stresses endured as a mech engineer in prosthesis industry in a previous career. At a top-5 industry company, FDA protocols were blatantly circumvented to push product to market prior to where development team felt comfortable signing off. Even though I had been planning to move to finance prior to the dark cloud, I resigned 3-4 months ahead of plan in fear of tarnishing my name and being tied to any future legal repercussion. Filed all necessary paper-trail with lawyer to cover my name, and wrote down as many relevant details as possible in anticipation I would have to recall details years down the line. There was a partial product recall 4.5 years later, vindicating our team's fear.

Are you able to share clearer suspicions of what motive there is for these particular superiors? Have you had any performance issues in the recent past?

Scotty · Post by **Scotty** » Wed Oct 10, 2012 2:06 am

Good story ESMaestro - not just in financial services.

I'm going to make an outrageous guess that the motivation is poor incentive structure. Remuneration driven by revenues driven by AUM driven by the flagship fund's performance. So it is logical albeit not ethical to transfer wealth from smaller funds to the flagship fund.

braintree · Post by **braintree** » Wed Oct 10, 2012 11:24 am

Scotty - can't share too many details but yes, poorly designed incentive structure certainly appears part of it.

Can anyone recommend a good London-based employment lawyer?

AndyM · Post by **AndyM** » Wed Oct 10, 2012 1:59 pm

Your employers sound like they're bonkers; it sounds to me like they are actively setting themselves up for a cracker of a constructive dismissal suit.

Just after you flag up a compliance violation, they propose to transfer you overseas...mmmhhhh, I can see that going down well with the tribunal.

polysena · Post by **polysena** » Wed Oct 10, 2012 4:19 pm

Jumping on what FDAX just wrote, you may use the following -

you can write an anonymous letter to the FSA service concerned, they actually take such things quite seriously- I have heard. An acquointance of mine, who works for a bank, was withness of such an action, and he told me that FSA really investigated. If you are in a small structure however, and given the discussions you had with our +1 and +2 this would probably be equal to your being shown the "door" out immediately. In any case, my take is that when it starts like that- either you disciplin or you got to be ready to go (and even if you disciplin to their orders.. you got to get ready to go.. because you have already expressed doubts...) I've been so many times in your shoes (I always had to leave), I am so sorry for you, I hope it is only a bad wave, that they might revise their decision and that it won't escalate... Poly

[sorry in other words, sharing 100% FDAX's view]

silverside · Post by **silverside** » Wed Oct 10, 2012 6:37 pm

It is often interesting to take the "what would Jesus do" approach.

If you look at how the people involved in recent high profile situations have fared (including the "whale" trading desk, the fake ETF trader and his friends, the la,dy who blew the whistle on dodgy mortgage documentation, and so on, it may help guide your conscience. The path of least resistance might well involve finding a new job sooner rather than later.

Perhaps things have changed recently and the FSA have an ethical hotline.

AndyM · Post by **AndyM** » Wed Oct 10, 2012 7:06 pm

Jesus wouldn't have taken the job in the first place Tongue out

gc · Post by gc » Thu Oct 11, 2012 11:56 am

I am sorry for your situation and wish you all the luck.

Many years ago I wanted to check a contract and I used:

Olswang

My case was trivial and with hindsight I didn't need to check with them and I should have saved the money, but I know they are pretty good with this kind of situations.

The only problem is they are quite expensive.

Also, if you call them, ask them if your employer is one of their existing clients; just to avoid any possibility of conflict of interests.

KangaXX · Post by **KangaXX** » Thu Oct 11, 2012 1:41 pm

In London, Mischon de reya. They won in the employees vs Commerzbank case and were recommended to me. Also heard of Stewartslaw.

I have not used either firm, they will be expensive.