Co-worker may have criminal record - what to do (if anything)?

[toguy]

I recently found out that a co-worker (was hired > 2 years ago) may have a criminal record (white collar crime). I am not 100% sure it is the same person but I would say about 90%. The charges were apparently laid several months before he was hired (I suppose a background check was never done, it's a very small company). This individual does not deal with company funds and there is almost no chance that he would wind up in a position involving that responsibility, just because of the size of the company, nature of his work, etc. If he were an accountant, controller, etc. I would have serious reservations about it given his past (and would be more likely to speak up) but that is not the case. Should I say anything?

EDIT: I should add that this is alleged to have been a multi-million dollar fraud, not just fixing the books for $5000.

[wilsonlam97]

I recently found out that a co-worker (was hired > 2 years ago) may have a criminal record (white collar crime). I am not 100% sure it is the same person but I would say about 90%. The charges were apparently laid several months before he was hired (I suppose a background check was never done, it's a very small company). This individual does not deal with company funds and there is almost no chance that he would wind up in a position involving that responsibility, just because of the size of the company, nature of his work, etc. If he were an accountant, controller, etc. I would have serious reservations about it given his past (and would be more likely to speak up) but that is not the case. Should I say anything?

Let management know?

[deltone]

My suggestion is that you mind your own business. First of all you don't even know if it's the same guy, and second of all you said there is little chance he will find himself in a position where he could do harm. Would you rather he is not allowed to work and he goes on welfare or returns to a life of crime (if it is in fact the same guy) because nobody will hire him and he has to eat?

[kingofwale]

call 911 ASAP. we don't need ex-criminal in our society, near our school and around our kids.

I think when you are at work tomorrow, perform citizen arrest until the police comes. You never know, once a criminal, he might be a rapist also, you will be the hero to all ladies in the office.

[ovechkin1]

I wouldn't say anything unless you want to to have your ***** on the line for worker discrimination. I think you're just a p***** who's scared of him.

[lordnikon]

Mind your own business. You don't want to make unnecessary enemies!

[cOmAtOaSt]

This is the perfect opportunity for you to start stealing, they'll think it's your coworker.

[aplayaz2000]

mind ur own business, unless you want to get bb'ed

[Jimboski]

You and the person should team up OP!

[Ojam]

Unless your job is some sort of corp security (in which case you would know what to do) stop sticking your big nose where it doesn't belong.

[Syne]

If he has a criminal record, that means he was held accountable for his crime and served his sentence. While I have much enmity and zero sympathy for white collar criminals, (people who already have money who are pig greedy for more) I am 100% against stigmatizing those who have already paid their debt to society, especially if the result is to have these people unemployed and roaming the streets.

You should do nothing, not because you don't want to make enemies, but because it's the right thing to do. In fact, if management found out, they should also do nothing, instead focusing only on his performance at work, as to discriminate based on past indiscretions for which a person been held to account, is no more fair than doing so on someone's race, religion or sexuality.

[poedua]

Should I say anything?

No.....mind your own business.

[toguy]

My suggestion is that you mind your own business. First of all you don't even know if it's the same guy, and second of all you said there is little chance he will find himself in a position where he could do harm. Would you rather he is not allowed to work and he goes on welfare or returns to a life of crime (if it is in fact the same guy) because nobody will hire him and he has to eat?

That's my tendency - even if it's something pertaining to work (i.e. that a manager should know about) I keep my head down and out of office gossip. I think it's just the shock of knowing someone who is alleged to have committed a fraud of this magnitude that I'm grappling with.


I wouldn't say anything unless you want to to have your ***** on the line for worker discrimination. I think you're just a ***** who's scared of him.

Yeah, because white collar criminals are the scariest ones :facepalm:


If he has a criminal record, that means he was held accountable for his crime and served his sentence. While I have much enmity and zero sympathy for white collar criminals, (people who already have money who are pig greedy for more) I am 100% against stigmatizing those who have already paid their debt to society, especially if the result is to have these people unemployed and roaming the streets.

You should do nothing, not because you don't want to make enemies, but because it's the right thing to do. In fact, if management found out, they should also do nothing, instead focusing only on his performance at work, as to discriminate based on past indiscretions for which a person been held to account, is no more fair than doing so on someone's race, religion or sexuality.

Well, it shouldn't have any bearing on me saying anything, but I'm just pointing out that we don't know that for sure. The trial could still be forthcoming.

[Syne]

If the trial is forthcoming then he is innocent until proven guilty, by law.

[opento]

http://i658.photobucket.com/albums/uu305/Jonstradamus/BB%20forum/SnitchDANGERsnitchatownrisk.jpg

[vero95]

he's been working for over 2 years and the charges were laid several months before he was hired
so how do you know he has a criminal record? when did that happen? whan was the trial? :facepalm:

[vero95]

call 911 ASAP. we don't need ex-criminal in our society, near our school and around our kids.

I think when you are at work tomorrow, perform citizen arrest until the police comes. You never know, once a criminal, he might be a rapist also, you will be the hero to all ladies in the office.

how old are you, dude? :facepalm:

[Syne]

^ He was obviously poking fun at the OP

[steve-0101]

Seriously, just mind your own business.

[vero95]

^ He was obviously poking fun at the OP

I need coffee ;)

[Ottomaddox]

) may
I am not 100%
were apparently

That's alot of weasel words. Do you often make allegations without any proof?

[toguy]

That's alot of weasel words. Do you often make allegations without any proof?

It's a shame an expert on the English language such as yourself still has trouble reading, because the answer to your question is in an earlier post.

[kingofwale]

I need coffee ;)

lol, definitely not your best moment... although I do think the entire thread was a giant "lolz"

[Forhad]

Be 100% sure first then inform the management.

[gman]

Are you suggesting a person who has criminal record should not be allowed to work?

Did he lie to get the job? If he did not, what is the problem?
Does the company have a policy that anyone who has criminal record will not be hired?
If the company does not, what is the problem?

[kennyhohoho]

He's the hero Gotham deserves, but not the one it needs right now. So we'll hunt him. Because he can take it. Because he's not our hero. He's a silent guardian, a watchful protector. A dark knight.

[Simaahoy]

Buy him coffee...that's it

[manmanny]

Let management know?
Its a good idea. Or ask HR about company polices on hiring someone with criminal record.


call 911 ASAP. we don't need ex-criminal in our society, near our school and around our kids.

I think when you are at work tomorrow, perform citizen arrest until the police comes. You never know, once a criminal, he might be a rapist also, you will be the hero to all ladies in the office.
really?

[Ottomaddox]

It's a shame an expert on the English language such as yourself still has trouble reading, because the answer to your question is in an earlier post.

What answer? You said yourself you don't know if it's the same guy.

[Stock R]

If he's not doing anything, what's the problem?

I once found out that a guy I was playing beer league hockey with had been previously convicted for possession of child pornography. At first I was in a "OH EM GEE, WTF!!!" panic... and then it came on me that he was convicted, and served his sentence already. He was playing with a group of men, not doing anything illegal, etc. Why should I penalize him for a past transgression?

[SoBored]

If he's not doing anything, what's the problem?

I once found out that a guy I was playing beer league hockey with had been previously convicted for possession of child pornography. At first I was in a "OH EM GEE, WTF!!!" panic... and then it came on me that he was convicted, and served his sentence already. He was playing with a group of men, not doing anything illegal, etc. Why should I penalize him for a past transgression?

lol that's a bit different than the OP's case..

if he was into C.P before, he most likely still is. it's a genetic/biological thing and not something that can be mentally/consciously changed.... whether he deserves to have that held against him or not is a different question, but still.

[DontAskDontTell]

This is the perfect opportunity for you to start stealing, they'll think it's your coworker.

+1

[radioheadrules]

Once a criminal, always a criminal. Given the appropriate situation, a past criminal will always re-offend. No amount of jail time will ever rehabilitate someone 100%.

[deltone]

Once a criminal, always a criminal. Given the appropriate situation, a past criminal will always re-offend. No amount of jail time will ever rehabilitate someone 100%.

Criminals don't tend to immediately return the fruits of their crime, with an apology and a bonus. HUMANS make mistakes. There is not a human alive who doesn't make a mistake. If the facts are exactly as stated, then this guy is not necessarily a criminal. He is a human who made a mistake and took steps to rectify the mistake.

[toguy]

What answer? You said yourself you don't know if it's the same guy.

You asked:


That's alot of weasel words. Do you often make allegations without any proof?

I stated in my earlier post:


That's my tendency - even if it's something pertaining to work (i.e. that a manager should know about) I keep my head down and out of office gossip. I think it's just the shock of knowing someone who is alleged to have committed a fraud of this magnitude that I'm grappling with.


I will reiterate that I am 90-95% sure that it is the same person. This is not a case of I just saw a name in a newspaper that happens to match that of my colleague. Actually, that's how it started out (and I ignored it, heck, there could be x number of people with the same name), however the case was profiled on TV and certain details came out in that story which is how I realized that it is likely the same individual. In any case, I was already heavily leaning towards keeping my mouth shut and that's what I'm planning to do. I suppose I just needed some reassurance on that, being the first time I've ever encountered anything like this. Another reason to keep quiet is that I have no idea what the status of the trial is, whether it is still to come or if it is already over, and if it is, what the outcome was.

Now, judging from some of the responses, I'm getting the impression that some people think that an employer has no business knowing whether an individual has a criminal record. I would like to point out, for those who are unaware, that a question directly relating to this topic is part of a standard employment application/questionnaire:


Have you ever been convicted of a criminal offence for which a pardon has not been granted?

IF you have been pardoned, then no issue, but if you have been convicted, served your sentence/paid fines, etc. you may still be waiting out the appropriate waiting period, in which case if you are in the process of applying for employment, you would have to disclose the conviction.

[deltone]

You asked:



I stated in my earlier post:



I will reiterate that I am 90-95% sure that it is the same person. This is not a case of I just saw a name in a newspaper that happens to match that of my colleague. Actually, that's how it started out (and I ignored it, heck, there could be x number of people with the same name), however the case was profiled on TV and certain details came out in that story which is how I realized that it is likely the same individual. In any case, I was already heavily leaning towards keeping my mouth shut and that's what I'm planning to do. I suppose I just needed some reassurance on that, being the first time I've ever encountered anything like this. Another reason to keep quiet is that I have no idea what the status of the trial is, whether it is still to come or if it is already over, and if it is, what the outcome was.

Now, judging from some of the responses, I'm getting the impression that some people think that an employer has no business knowing whether an individual has a criminal record. I would like to point out, for those who are unaware, that a question directly relating to this topic is part of a standard employment application/questionnaire:



IF you have been pardoned, then no issue, but if you have been convicted, served your sentence/paid fines, etc. you may still be waiting out the appropriate waiting period, in which case if you are in the process of applying for employment, you would have to disclose the conviction.

If he's not gone to trial as yet (assuming it's the same guy) then if he answered the question "no" that he's not been convincted of a crime, then he's not lying, is he?

As far as thinking an employer does or doesn't have a right to know about an employee's history, well that's up to the employer to find out. Now, if there was a chance that the nature of the crime could be an issue, that would be one thing. For example, if you knew a person was a convicted pedophile, or something along that line, and the person was working with children, then it would be crucial to come forward and let the cat out of the bag, for the sake of the innocent and vulnerable children.

What you are citing in the OP doesn't come close to showing that it's your responsbility or duty to tell the employer anything. You said that the guy doesn't deal with the finances or anything like that, and besides, you don't know if the employer already knows about the (assumed) criminal history of this person. Maybe the employer knows but chooses to overlook it and really doesn't want people gossiping about it. It is possible.

[Anonymouse]

Snitches get stitches. MYOFB.

[zz000ter]

Was he just charged or was he convicted?
If you want to be a busybody go to the courts and do your research rather than just speculate.

[Syne]

Once a criminal, always a criminal. Given the appropriate situation, a past criminal will always re-offend. No amount of jail time will ever rehabilitate someone 100%.

It's these sorts of comments that make me worried about the future of the human race.

[lazymonkeygod]

ask him to let you in on his plan...


I recently found out that a co-worker (was hired > 2 years ago) may have a criminal record (white collar crime). I am not 100% sure it is the same person but I would say about 90%. The charges were apparently laid several months before he was hired (I suppose a background check was never done, it's a very small company). This individual does not deal with company funds and there is almost no chance that he would wind up in a position involving that responsibility, just because of the size of the company, nature of his work, etc. If he were an accountant, controller, etc. I would have serious reservations about it given his past (and would be more likely to speak up) but that is not the case. Should I say anything?

EDIT: I should add that this is alleged to have been a multi-million dollar fraud, not just fixing the books for $5000.

[gman]

IF you have been pardoned, then no issue, but if you have been convicted, served your sentence/paid fines, etc. you may still be waiting out the appropriate waiting period, in which case if you are in the process of applying for employment, you would have to disclose the conviction.

You somehow know that he did not disclose the conviction to the company?

[Syne]

Now, judging from some of the responses, I'm getting the impression that some people think that an employer has no business knowing whether an individual has a criminal record. I would like to point out, for those who are unaware, that a question directly relating to this topic is part of a standard employment application/questionnaire:

First of all, it depends where you live and the laws in that state or province. Second, just because employers in some places are allowed to do it and exercise that right, doesn't make it the morally appropriate choice. The reason that legislation on this varies, is because it is a controversial issue. I definitely fall on the side of protecting employees from discrimination, but others might disagree. Personally, I think my side has a stronger case.


IF you have been pardoned, then no issue, but if you have been convicted, served your sentence/paid fines, etc. you may still be waiting out the appropriate waiting period, in which case if you are in the process of applying for employment, you would have to disclose the conviction.

No, you do not have to disclose a conviction. That is false. If asked, you can legally lie about a conviction. However, in Ontario an employer can compel you to submit to a CBC conditional to employment, under very specific conditions.

From a privacy perspective, an organization under PIPEDA must abide by the 10 Privacy Principles of PIPEDA, the fourth being Limiting Collection which states that the collection of personal information should be limited to what is necessary for the purposes identified.

In other words, an organization has no reason to ask about the existence of a criminal record or medical illness unless it has a justifiable reason for doing so.

From a human rights perspective, as a general rule, employers in Canada are forbidden to discriminate on certain grounds. These include:

Race
Religion
National/ethnic origin
Colour
Age
Sex/sexual orientation
Marital/Family Status
Physical/mental disabilities
Pardoned criminal offences

However, an employer can discriminate on these grounds if there is a “bona fide occupational requirement” — that means the organization can prove that discrimination is necessary to fulfill the requirements of the position.

The employer has an obligation to prove that the position would be impossible to accommodate without undue hardship.
link (http://www.privacysense.net/can-employer-ask-criminal-record-or-medical-illness/)

It's worth mentioning that in this past, this has been tested and deliberated upon, and unfortunately the judge did not uphold a grievance for discrimination in this specific case

Once an employer becomes
aware of a prospective or existing
employee’s criminal record,
it must determine, reasonably
and in good faith, whether the
individual is a suitable candidate.
This would include a consideration
of whether the employee
is bondable or insurable,
where that is a factor. Employers
need information regarding
the criminal record in order to
do so.
In this case, the evidence
was that the employer had, in
the past, considered prospective
employees’ criminal
records reasonably and in context.
For example, drinking and
driving convictions were not a
bar to employment. Arbitrator
Beattie agreed the employer
had a legitimate interest in
knowing whether prospective
employees had a criminal
record. The prospective employee
was entitled to protect
his privacy rights by refusing to
disclose his record. However, he
could not then claim unjust dismissal.
The grievance was therefore
dismissed.
link (http://www.millerthomson.com/assets/files/article_attachments/BackgroudCheck_HR_Reporter_SRudner.pdf)

Another example is landlords who think that they can ask for a background check conditional to renting to potential tenants. They cannot.

A landlord renting to a tenant is engaging in a commercial activity. Therefore, the landlord’s request for information is governed by the federal Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA). PIPEDA stipulates that an organization shall not, as a condition of supplying a service, require an
INFORMATION
AND PRIVACY
COMMISSIONER/
ONTARIO
What is involved if you are asked to provide a Police Background Check?
individual to consent to the landlord collecting personal information beyond what is necessary to protect the landlord’s legitimate interests. The amount and type of information collected must be limited to what is necessary to fulfill these purposes.
If you believe that a landlord is asking the police to provide more information than is necessary to determine whether you are a suitable tenant, you may contact the Privacy Commissioner of Canada at 1-800-282-1376 or online at www.privcom.gc.ca. for more information about your rights under PIPEDA.
link (http://www.ipc.on.ca/images/resources/up-1policebkg.pdf)

[flyinggonzo]

"Accidently" throw a bar of soap on the ground in front of where he's standing. Ask him if he'll pick up the bar of soap for you and see if he flinches first.

[feidailo]

I recently found out that a co-worker (was hired > 2 years ago) may have a criminal record (white collar crime). I am not 100% sure it is the same person but I would say about 90%. The charges were apparently laid several months before he was hired (I suppose a background check was never done, it's a very small company). This individual does not deal with company funds and there is almost no chance that he would wind up in a position involving that responsibility, just because of the size of the company, nature of his work, etc. If he were an accountant, controller, etc. I would have serious reservations about it given his past (and would be more likely to speak up) but that is not the case. Should I say anything?

EDIT: I should add that this is alleged to have been a multi-million dollar fraud, not just fixing the books for $5000.

jeez, who doesnt have a criminal record? grow up ya boy scout.

[Simaahoy]

jeez, who doesnt have a criminal record? grow up ya boy scout.

I don't

[vero95]

some companies do a background check and some jobs require no criminal convictions
however, OP did not answer my question when was this guy convited if the charges were laid several months before he was hired and he was hired over 2 years ago
was he convicted while he was working at this company? I guess not because he would be in jail for defrauding for millions
that ends the thread

[stevenvv]

I recently found out that a co-worker (was hired > 2 years ago) may have a criminal record (white collar crime). I am not 100% sure it is the same person but I would say about 90%. The charges were apparently laid several months before he was hired (I suppose a background check was never done, it's a very small company). This individual does not deal with company funds and there is almost no chance that he would wind up in a position involving that responsibility, just because of the size of the company, nature of his work, etc. If he were an accountant, controller, etc. I would have serious reservations about it given his past (and would be more likely to speak up) but that is not the case. Should I say anything?

EDIT: I should add that this is alleged to have been a multi-million dollar fraud, not just fixing the books for $5000.

Like you said, the case was about a multi-million dollar fraud and since he doesn't deal with any company funds you should just leave him alone, mot like you're 100% sure its him anyway. And even if the was the individual that you assumed was convicted what does that have to do with you? I am sure it doesn't effect you in anyway so it shouldn't matter.

[dragon_drift]

Unless you are 100% sure, just mind your own business.

[Royalsoldier]

My suggestion is that you mind your own business. First of all you don't even know if it's the same guy, and second of all you said there is little chance he will find himself in a position where he could do harm. Would you rather he is not allowed to work and he goes on welfare or returns to a life of crime (if it is in fact the same guy) because nobody will hire him and he has to eat?

This.

Mind your own business and do not become a drama queen in the work place. I hate people who spread rumours and cause drama - it destroys the work environment.

I've worked with people like you and I've seen careers get destroyed. I worked at a temp. agency and someone I worked with knew someone I went to high school with 5-6 years ago. That person from high school told my co-worker I was a "pot head" in high school. The female drama queen co-worker began sending e-mails to other co-workers how I was a "pot head" and whispers began going around - I eventually lost my job due to the drama queen - which is exactly what you would be doing. (this happened about 4 years ago)

Even if he did commit a crime in the past - it's just that - the past. People can and have changed. You would be condemning a possibly "changed man" to unemployment/welfare/EI.

You're toying with peoples' lives - drop it.

People who obsess themselves with other people's lives need to re-evaluate their own stale lives. Find new hobbies, more friends, a significant others - anything.

Sorry if I came off too blunt/harsh - just voicing my view. I just don't want a potentially innocent guy/gal losing their job like I described in the above story due to drama queens.


Once a criminal, always a criminal. Given the appropriate situation, a past criminal will always re-offend. No amount of jail time will ever rehabilitate someone 100%.
Congratulations on having one of the most ignorant posts I have ever seen on these boards.

[uber_shnitz]

If he had been proven guilty of defrauding millions, he'd have gone to jail during the last 2 years he was working for your company.

Even assuming he was convicted but was on his way to pardon, how do you know the company isn't aware of this?

This is of course assuming it IS him (which there is a 5-10% chance according to you that it might not be).

[Hugh Jass]

If he has been convicted already, why wasn't there a background check performed by your company? If they didn't do one, then it's their fault.

And as said before, if he hasnt been convicted yet, he's innocent until proven otherwise.

You should just stay out of it, but keep a very distant eye on him. If he does step out of line and starts stealing, then you can blow the whistle.

BTW, when you say "fraud of this magnitude", what are we talking about? MIllions?

[dealseeker2011]

Maybe he's just concern about the company that he's working. But remember, you might have a problem at the end with what you have known. If you are aware of the consequences then it's up to you. you can do whatever you think is right.

[billdozer]

Time to join in on this RFD circlejerk:

OP you disgust me.

[501]

if he did the time he deserves a second chance!

[yao416]

How do you know its the same person? Mind your own business

[Abel4Life]

How do you know its the same person? Mind your own business

+1.

[Mattones]

Unless your job is some sort of corp security (in which case you would know what to do) stop sticking your big nose where it doesn't belong.
X2!!

Maybe it was a thing of the past or if what you heard was false.

It seems that you are trying to get into the 'good books' with the boss by 'snitching'. What is this public school? As the poster above stated 'stop sticking your big nose where it doesn't belong'

[Toukolou]

if he did the time he deserves a second chance!

Even if he didn't do any time, OP needs to mind his own business. Find something to occupy your time instead of worrying about what someone else has done.

[starboy869]

I wonder if the op gotten their teeth kicked in from sticking their nose where it doesn't belong?

[radioheadrules]

This.
Congratulations on having one of the most ignorant posts I have ever seen on these boards.

You're probably one of those who is in support of criminals being paroled. That is, until they harm one of your own family members.. then your opinion totally changes.

[gman]

You're probably one of those who is in support of criminals being paroled. That is, until they harm one of your own family members.. then your opinion totally changes.

Was this "coworker" a violent criminal? A lot of ex-con becomes criminal again because people do not give them a chance again.
What you said has nothing to do with parole because in theory, they can still harm you after their full sentence is served. You want to jail all the criminal for life.

[sylpherware]

My suggestion is that you mind your own business.

Wait, what? If your kids' daycare center have hired a possible convicted sex offender, would you have "mind your own business" even if you're not 100% sure??

OP's workplace hired a possible fraudster, and if this person is actually working on some scheme against his company, that's OP's livelihood on the line. This damn well falls into OP's "business". Unless OP has hates his workplace and want to see it fail, I'd say talk to management.

[sonic]

i wouldnt say anything...everyone deserves a second chance.

[gman]

Wait, what? If your kids' daycare center have hired a possible convicted sex offender, would you have "mind your own business" even if you're not 100% sure??

OP's workplace hired a possible fraudster, and if this person is actually working on some scheme against his company, that's OP's livelihood on the line. This damn well falls into OP's "business". Unless OP has hates his workplace and want to see it fail, I'd say talk to management.

Did you read OP's post?

He said:


This individual does not deal with company funds and there is almost no chance that he would wind up in a position involving that responsibility, just because of the size of the company, nature of his work, etc. If he were an accountant, controller, etc. I would have serious reservations about it given his past (and would be more likely to speak up) but that is not the case. Should I say anything?


+ OP does not even know if this is the same guy
+ OP does not know if this guy disclosed that information to the company already.
+ OP does not see this guy did anything wrong in the past 2 years.


You basically suggest this guy should not work anywhere in the society.

[Buggy166]

charges being laid doesnt mean hes got a record, it means someone thinks he did something bad and wish to prove it.

[radioheadrules]

You want to jail all the criminal for life.

I never said that. I sure hope you don't work in any kind of medical field, because you totally just took my statement and made an assumption out of it. What I said was, jail time does not 100% rehabilitate anyone. I don't care what any corrections dept says - after a criminal serves his/her sentence, it's my opinion that given the right situation, they will re-offend.

[sylpherware]

You basically suggest this guy should not work anywhere in the society.

Uh, no. I suggested him to notify management. It's up to management to assess the risk.

[akz]

the OP seriously needs to focus on his work and stop being so nosy.. IF he was convicted (NOT CHARGED, they are 2 different things) of a "MULTI MILLION" dollar fraud the police will definitely harass him and call to notify his current place of work. No need to be a hero champ, let the real ones do their job. Sit back and relax.

[gman]

I never said that. I sure hope you don't work in any kind of medical field, because you totally just took my statement and made an assumption out of it. What I said was, jail time does not 100% rehabilitate anyone. I don't care what any corrections dept says - after a criminal serves his/her sentence, it's my opinion that given the right situation, they will re-offend.

Since you don't give them the 2nd chance to prove themselves, they will be criminal again. They will be caught and will be send to jail again. So, we may as well jail them for life to help them and us for the trouble and less victims on the path.

[radioheadrules]

Since you don't give them the 2nd chance to prove themselves, they will be criminal again. They will be caught and will be send to jail again. So, we may as well jail them for life to help them and us for the trouble and less victims on the path.

Which is why jail isn't the ideal solution. There is no ideal solution. Why do you think places like Singapore sentences offenders of various crimes to receive lashes?

[gman]

Which is why jail isn't the ideal solution. There is no ideal solution.

More ideal solution is to give them 2nd chance, give them hope. I am not talking about serious criminal like murderers, rapist, etc. Why does some ex-con re-offend again? Because people do not give them 2nd chance. What other choice do they have?


Why do you think places like Singapore sentences offenders of various crimes to receive lashes?

Because they are cruel?

[deltone]

Wait, what? If your kids' daycare center have hired a possible convicted sex offender, would you have "mind your own business" even if you're not 100% sure??

OP's workplace hired a possible fraudster, and if this person is actually working on some scheme against his company, that's OP's livelihood on the line. This damn well falls into OP's "business". Unless OP has hates his workplace and want to see it fail, I'd say talk to management.

Did you bother to read the whole thread? I ask that because if you did you would see that my post was actually one of the more polite ones telling the OP to mind his own business. In addition, if you bothered to read the whole thread you would have seen my post 36 where I said (I will copy and paste it and bold it for you):

If he's not gone to trial as yet (assuming it's the same guy) then if he answered the question "no" that he's not been convincted of a crime, then he's not lying, is he?

As far as thinking an employer does or doesn't have a right to know about an employee's history, well that's up to the employer to find out. Now, if there was a chance that the nature of the crime could be an issue, that would be one thing. For example, if you knew a person was a convicted pedophile, or something along that line, and the person was working with children, then it would be crucial to come forward and let the cat out of the bag, for the sake of the innocent and vulnerable children.

What you are citing in the OP doesn't come close to showing that it's your responsbility or duty to tell the employer anything. You said that the guy doesn't deal with the finances or anything like that, and besides, you don't know if the employer already knows about the (assumed) criminal history of this person. Maybe the employer knows but chooses to overlook it and really doesn't want people gossiping about it. It is possible.


So, there you have it. Reading the whole thread before picking out one post is usually a good idea.

[kennyhohoho]

Which is why jail isn't the ideal solution. There is no ideal solution. Why do you think places like Singapore sentences offenders of various crimes to receive lashes?

You just said that given the right circumstances all criminals will reoffend. So what difference does it make if the punishment for commiting crimes is jail time or lashes if "all criminals will reoffend"?

[sylpherware]

Did you bother to read the whole thread? I ask that because if you did you would see that my post was actually one of the more polite ones telling the OP to mind his own business. In addition, if you bothered to read the whole thread you would have seen my post 36 where I said (I will copy and paste it and bold it for you):

Thanks. My post wasn't meant to be a direct response to your post, rather to all the "mind your own business" posts. Yours just happened to be the first :razz:

Even if this person who was charged is actually innocent, having such a person on staff can do quite some damage to a small business. For a crime this serious, there'll still be court appearances, innocent or not. There's also the possibility of unwanted publicity. Can a small company afford someone who might be away for uncertain amount of periods or having its name published alongside a criminal case? It's up to OP's company management to decide whether or not they are okay with all these things.

[kennyhohoho]

Thanks. My post wasn't meant to be a direct response to your post, rather to all the "mind your own business" posts. Yours just happened to be the first :razz:

Even if this person who was charged is actually innocent, having such a person on staff can do quite some damage to a small business. For a crime this serious, there'll still be court appearances, innocent or not. There's also the possibility of unwanted publicity. Can a small company afford someone who might be away for uncertain amount of periods or having its name published alongside a criminal case? It's up to OP's company management to decide whether or not they are okay with all these things.

Exactly. It's up to the COMPANY to decide. Not the OP. If the company wanted to safe guard themselves, they would do all of the appropriate background checks. If not, then why is it the OP's responsibility to bring it up to the company?

OP needs to mind his/her own business and get laid already.

[gman]

Thanks. My post wasn't meant to be a direct response to your post, rather to all the "mind your own business" posts. Yours just happened to be the first :razz:

Even if this person who was charged is actually innocent, having such a person on staff can do quite some damage to a small business. For a crime this serious, there'll still be court appearances, innocent or not. There's also the possibility of unwanted publicity. Can a small company afford someone who might be away for uncertain amount of periods or having its name published alongside a criminal case? It's up to OP's company management to decide whether or not they are okay with all these things.

It has been 2 years. The company would know without OP's involvement. So, it is either the company does not care or it has no effect to the company. If the company actually does something before the guy is convicted (assuming the guy did not lie or was not asked), it is a wrongful dismissal. That for sure will affect the company.

[deltone]

Thanks. My post wasn't meant to be a direct response to your post, rather to all the "mind your own business" posts. Yours just happened to be the first :razz:

Even if this person who was charged is actually innocent, having such a person on staff can do quite some damage to a small business. For a crime this serious, there'll still be court appearances, innocent or not. There's also the possibility of unwanted publicity. Can a small company afford someone who might be away for uncertain amount of periods or having its name published alongside a criminal case? It's up to OP's company management to decide whether or not they are okay with all these things.

Fair enough!

The problem with the OP telling the employer is that he's not 100% sure that the guy is even the guy who was charged with the crime. I would be the first one to say tell the employer if he knew the guy was the right one and if the crime was something that could create a problem for the employer. Seeing that he doesn't know for sure, and he said himself that the guy doesn't have the ability to create a financial problem so at this point, it's just idle gossip and that can be so damaging to someone. Also, what if the employer already knows? He/she may not appreciate the OP interfering or let's say he tells, and it turns out that it wasn't the right guy, the OP would come off looking like some gossip/drama queen.

I think the risk would be worth it in the case of some pedophile possibly working around kids as the old "better safe than sorry" adage comes into play but in this case I think it just comes off as sticking his nose in where it doesn't belong. It seems to be the general concensus (within this thread).

[sylpherware]

Maybe it's my line of work that influenced my thought process.

Whenever we work with a design, we make sure to check every component and their failure rate. We don't make the design 100% fail-safe, but we make damn sure that anybody responsible for the design knows the conditions the design will fail at. We don't assume 0.000001% = 0%.

Maybe this coworker has not done any damage in 2 years, maybe he never will, and maybe he will be promoted to a manager position next year and still nothing will happen. However, it only takes ONE multi-million fraud to take down a company. Do you really want to be the one who tells your other co-workers: "Sorry, guys, I kinda had an idea that this was gonna happen, but I didn't want to be a tattle-tale"?

[kennyhohoho]

Maybe it's my line of work that influenced my thought process.

Whenever we work with a design, we make sure to check every component and their failure rate. We don't make the design 100% fail-safe, but we make damn sure that anybody responsible for the design knows the conditions the design will fail at. We don't assume 0.000001% = 0%.

Maybe this coworker has not done any damage in 2 years, maybe he never will, and maybe he will be promoted to a manager position next year and still nothing will happen. However, it only takes ONE multi-million fraud to take down a company. Do you really want to be the one who tells your other co-workers: "Sorry, guys, I kinda had an idea that this was gonna happen, but I didn't want to be a tattle-tale"?

That still doesn't justify potentially ruining the guy's career over something that may or may not be true. AT THE VERY LEAST, the OP needs to confirm whether or not the allegations are true BEFORE saying a word to anybody. Otherwise, he/she is just acting like a giant douche hole.

[Abel4Life]

That still doesn't justify potentially ruining the guy's career over something that may or may not be true. AT THE VERY LEAST, the OP needs to confirm whether or not the allegations are true BEFORE saying a word to anybody. Otherwise, he/she is just acting like a giant douche hole.

Whether its true or not who cares.

Its like if I found out my co-worker was arrested as a college teenager for 'something' as a result of a protest for tuition hikes. What business is that of mine other then just knowledge.

[radioheadrules]

You just said that given the right circumstances all criminals will reoffend. So what difference does it make if the punishment for commiting crimes is jail time or lashes if "all criminals will reoffend"?

Feel free to analyze crime rate statistics, perform regression testing, and get back to us with your findings!

[kennyhohoho]

Feel free to analyze crime rate statistics, perform regression testing, and get back to us with your findings!

Wtf are you talking about? I'm just pointing out the holes in your own argument.

On the one hand, you say that all criminals will reoffend. Then on the other hand you talk about how in Singapore they subject to criminals to lashes.

If (according to you) all criminals will reoffend. What difference would lashing make? Since all criminals will reoffend anyways.

[danfromwaterloo]

I recently found out that a co-worker (was hired > 2 years ago) may have a criminal record (white collar crime). I am not 100% sure it is the same person but I would say about 90%. The charges were apparently laid several months before he was hired (I suppose a background check was never done, it's a very small company). This individual does not deal with company funds and there is almost no chance that he would wind up in a position involving that responsibility, just because of the size of the company, nature of his work, etc. If he were an accountant, controller, etc. I would have serious reservations about it given his past (and would be more likely to speak up) but that is not the case. Should I say anything?

EDIT: I should add that this is alleged to have been a multi-million dollar fraud, not just fixing the books for $5000.

I would ask yourself two questions:

1. Is it your responsibility to report this by finding out? For example, I'm in management, and if I found out about something like this, I would feel compelled to report it, as I think it would be part of my duties.
2. Is it reasonable (or provable) to assume that others would know you know this information? If they can show you should have known about this, not reporting it may get you fired. Ask yourself if not snitching might get you fired.

If you say yes to either of those questions, the answer is simply that you must snitch. It's in your own self-preservation to do so. Additionally, if the first one is true, you might also look very good for doing so.

If you say no to both, then you only have a moral question to answer. We live in a time where seemingly everybody turns a blind eye to crimes, especially white collar crime. If this guy pulled off a multi-million dollar fraud, he's probably going to try the same again. What if his actions bankrupts your company, and you end up losing your job because of your not reporting it? Aside from it being the right thing to do to express your concerns (confidentially) to HR or your boss, it may very well save your job and the jobs of countless others.

Remember how Spiderman could have stopped the thief but rabble rabble, Uncle Ben dies? Checkmate, bro.

[gman]

Remember how Spiderman could have stopped the thief but rabble rabble, Uncle Ben dies? Checkmate, bro.

Bad comparison. Spiderman saw the crime and did nothing. He was not looking for may be ex-con.

[radioheadrules]

I was speaking in terms of jail rehabilitation.

[danfromwaterloo]

Bad comparison. Spiderman saw the crime and did nothing. He was not looking for may be ex-con.

So, your dispute is between being a direct witness and simple suspicion? The comparison stands because the issue is not with the certainty of the crime but with the lack of action by the person who could do something but does not.

And remember, with great responsibility rabble rabble.

[gman]

So, your dispute is between being a direct witness and simple suspicion? The comparison stands because the issue is not with the certainty of the crime but with the lack of action by the person who could do something but does not.

And remember, with great responsibility rabble rabble.

Is there any evidence this person did/do anything? No.
Is there a real evidence to show this person is an ex-con? No.
Will this person be able to exercise his "supposed to be" crime in the company? According to OP, no.
Did he do anything in the company that caused suspicion? No.

If he did nothing wrong in the last 2 years, why would you want to ruin his life especially when you don't even know if the management knew that or not?

Yes, with great responsibility rabble rabble. It is a great responsibility not to spread out unfounded rumor too.

[Catherine111]

You should inform it to the top level management.

[VintagePhick]

This is not your business, this is not your battle. Stay out of it.