Can she be sacked?

Another_not_new_user

Irn-Bru-Kid wrote: »

A friend of mine has recently (last week) been found guilty of fraud. I don't want to go into details, she was stupid and is devastated. It was reported in the local paper.

Her employer has suspended her on full pay whilst they decide what to do. It's a trust issue obviously. The offence has nothing to do with her place of work.

She has worked for them for four years, does not handle cash.

Can she be sacked for this? I have advised her to contact ACAS as I have no idea where she stands legally.

Any/all advice I can pass on would be appreciated.

It is pretty hard to give advice without knowing the circumstances, although I agree with the issue of bringing the employer into disrepute. But I must assume she didn't tell the employer in advance either? Which brings another element of trust into play. It isn't simply that she doesn't handle money - how far can someone be trusted with information, client details etc., having done this and kept it secret? That is what they will be thinking. It would take a powerful argument to defend against dismissal, and to be honest, you aren't going to get one based on no information.

James_B.

Irn-Bru-Kid wrote: »

A friend of mine has recently (last week) been found guilty of fraud. I don't want to go into details, she was stupid and is devastated. It was reported in the local paper.

You don't get a fraud conviction for being stupid, fraud requires intent, and action, it's a serious criminal offence.

It also comes in a variety of types and severities. If it was buying a child's ticket, once, on the underground then I'd assume that most employers where the person has no financial responsibilities might be willing to let them stay. Something that required planning, and that involved hundreds of pounds, then I'd assume that being let go is more likely.

I'd not employ anyone who'd a fraud conviction, and expect many other employers feel the same.

Gavin83

It's really hard to comment fully without knowing the circumstances but it's clearly pretty serious as it appeared in the paper. Therefore I'd be stunned if she kept her job through this. It's really easy for them to sack her, they could approach this from several routes. I certainly wouldn't employ someone with a fraud convinction and I'm assuming most others wouldn't either. It's arguably the worst conviction you can have when it comes to finding a job.

I agree with the other poster too, you don't get a fraud conviction by being stupid. It's a serious crime and I'd normally expect someone to be looking at a prison sentence.

stevemLS

As with any other offence, fraud has a wide range of degrees of seriousness. This is illustrated by the Sentencing Council's guideline which suggests sentences ranging from a conditional discharge to 7 years imprisonment.

However, whatever the sentence, it is an offence an essential element of which is premeditated dishonesty and it is that which makes it always serious from an employers point of view.

The fact that they have no access to cash is immaterial in my view. An employment relationship is based on mutual trust, it is difficult to see how that can be maintained with a conviction of that nature lurking in the background.

TBagpuss

Being convicted (or accused) of a criminal offence doesn't give the employer the right to sack her automatically.

BUT:
It is not uncommon for employment contracts or terms to specifically define getting a criminal conviction as gross misconduct.

he employer would have to decide whether the conviction means she can no longer effectively carry out her duties
ACAS guuidance says "If an employee is charged with, or convicted of a criminal offence this is not normally in itself reason for disciplinary action. Consideration needs to be given to what effect the charge or conviction has on the employee’s suitability to do the job and their relationship with their employer, work colleagues and customers.
In practice, however, the employee may take the view that conviction does prevent her from doing her job, if the result is a break down of trust in her, or if continuing to employ her is likely to bring the firm into disrepute.

A lot will depend on the nature of her job - I think any office based job, or any job such as cleaning where she has access to people's homes or offices, there is a very strong liklihood that there would be a lack on trust which would prevent her doing the job.

Takeaway_Addict

TBagpuss wrote: »

Being convicted (or accused) of a criminal offence doesn't give the employer the right to sack her automatically.

BUT:
It is not uncommon for employment contracts or terms to specifically define getting a criminal conviction as gross misconduct.

he employer would have to decide whether the conviction means she can no longer effectively carry out her duties
ACAS guuidance says "If an employee is charged with, or convicted of a criminal offence this is not normally in itself reason for disciplinary action. Consideration needs to be given to what effect the charge or conviction has on the employee’s suitability to do the job and their relationship with their employer, work colleagues and customers.
In practice, however, the employee may take the view that conviction does prevent her from doing her job, if the result is a break down of trust in her, or if continuing to employ her is likely to bring the firm into disrepute.

A lot will depend on the nature of her job - I think any office based job, or any job such as cleaning where she has access to people's homes or offices, there is a very strong liklihood that there would be a lack on trust which would prevent her doing the job.

If the employer wants to dismiss then they will and would be highly unlikely to have any kick back, it will only create more bad publicity for the fraudster/thief etc

Pennywise

Irn-Bru-Kid wrote: »

does not handle cash.

That's fairly irrelevant really.

This case is fraud which isn't about nicking a few quid out of petty cash, it's deliberate and intentional dishonesty and probably involves falsifying documents, lying on claim forms, or similar.

All kinds of workers in all kinds of departments within organisations could pose a risk if they have a trait of dishonesty and fraud.

Relatively few employee theft/fraud situations are as simple as nicking a bit of cash. Most, and certainly the most serious, involve creating false paperwork to either hide their theft/fraud or to actually facilitate the fraud/theft, which is often by bank transfer or cheque rather than cash. They may include deliberately holding sales invoices out of the records, fraudulently creating purchase invoices, creating false staff records - all kinds of things really that have nothing to do with handling cash!

So, the employer would have to satisfy themselves that your friend wasn't in any position at all to get close to any activity within the organisation where they could use her dishonesty to benefit herself. That basically counts out any department involving accounts, payroll, procurement, even sales, i.e. basically most administrative and management roles.

So it really would depend on what job they do within the organisation.