• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

  • You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
  • You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
  • If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.

Previously on "You can't have your c̶a̶k̶e̶ sandwich and eat it"

Collapse

  • JustKeepSwimming
    replied
    Originally posted by northernladuk View Post
    Can't help thinking there is often more to the case than two meals when they come after someone like this. Seems very harsh so must be some agenda going on. And then it says..



    And often this is just the tip of the iceberg so he's made himself a target and they've caught him bang to rights.
    Back in the day I was asked by a manager to do an analysis of someone's timesheets. Wasn't my place to ask but the rumour was he pissed someone senior off and they wanted rid.

    There been a few times where I've seen someone be 'managed' out of a company. Sometimes justified (poor performance) sometimes not (too much time off ill).

    If my manager said 'I'm not approving these expenses' and I know their refusal was right because I was skirting the rules I would just suck it up. The fact their manager escalated it to the point he was sacked does imply they wanted him gone.

    Leave a comment:


  • northernladuk
    replied
    Can't help thinking there is often more to the case than two meals when they come after someone like this. Seems very harsh so must be some agenda going on. And then it says..

    He also said that he was having personal difficulties following the death of his grandmother, had taken six weeks of medical leave and was on strong medication when he replied to emails.
    And often this is just the tip of the iceberg so he's made himself a target and they've caught him bang to rights.

    Leave a comment:


  • Lance
    replied
    He should have simply said that he had the munchies as he was baked out of his gourd. That would have been fine.

    Leave a comment:


  • ladymuck
    replied
    Originally posted by SueEllen View Post
    The pasta dish was the one that got him caught out.

    He should have been aware of that considering what his role was.

    Ha. That's the wrong type of crime

    Leave a comment:


  • SueEllen
    replied
    The pasta dish was the one that got him caught out.

    He should have been aware of that considering what his role was.

    Mr Fekete, who worked at Citi for seven years as an analyst specialising in financial crime, had travelled to Amsterdam for work between 3 and 5 July last year.

    Leave a comment:


  • d000hg
    started a topic You can't have your c̶a̶k̶e̶ sandwich and eat it

    You can't have your c̶a̶k̶e̶ sandwich and eat it

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-67121456

    Citibank has won an employment tribunal after sacking a worker for claiming expenses for sandwiches and coffee for his partner, and then lying about it.

    Szabolcs Fekete had accused the bank of unfair dismissal after he was fired last year for gross misconduct.

    Mr Fekete had initially claimed that he alone had consumed two sandwiches, two coffees and two pasta dishes during a business trip to Amsterdam.

    But he later admitted that his partner had shared some meals.

Working...
X