Articles tagged by unfair dismissal
Citi is on the wrong end of a third unfair
dismissal trail according to sources familiar with the matter who say that Rob
Hoodless has won his claim against the bank.
In an email statement, Hoodless says, “The East London ...
JP Morgan has become the latest bank on the
wrong end of an unfair dismissal claim from its currency teams with Patrice
Ktorza, a former FX salesperson at the bank, reportedly winning his claim.
News, citing a copy of ...
This really is a tricky time for the
foreign exchange industry. The chat room scandal has truly opened a can of
worms and it seems there is rarely a month that goes past without yet another
case of unfair dismissal ...
A third FX trader fired by Barclays is suing the bank for unfair dismissal, adding to the growing number of similar cases being brought against banks.
Mark Clark, who worked on the bank’s FX trading desk since joining in 2010 from Citi is having his claim heard at the East London Employment Tribunal on September 27 according to court records.
The same tribunal has already heard claims from former Barclays’ traders Jack Murray and Chris Ashton, although a decision has yet to be announced in either.
Mark Clark has become the second former Barclays FX trader to lose a claim for unfair dismissal in a UK employment tribunal.
According to a report by Bloomberg News Clark’s claim was dismissed by Judge George Foxwell at the East London Employment Tribunal.
During the trial, Clark claimed he was “thrown to the wolves” and fired, whilst senior managers were allowed to retire with reputation intact. This represents the second successful trial defence by Barclays who also defeated a claim last year.
Baris Ozkaptan has become the fourth former Citi FX trader to win a claim of unfair dismissal against the bank.
Although a London employment tribunal judge Alison Russell found in Ozkaptan’s favour overall, informed sources say she did note in the judgement that Ozkaptan contributed to the dismissal, meaning the final compensation paid could be reduced.
Currently the maximum amount that can be awarded is GBP 78,800, a remedial hearing will be held at a later date to finalise any compensation paid to Ozkaptan.
Former Barclays FX trader Jack Murray has lost his unfair dismissal case against the bank according to Bloomberg News.
Murray is the third Barclays trader to lose his case after Mark Clark and Chris Ashton both also failed to convince the East London Employment Tribunal they were unfairly dismissed.
Murray was suspended by Barclays in late 2013 when an investigation cleared him of benchmark collusion but found instances of inappropriate communications including the disclosure of stop loss levels and customer flow.
Former Citi FX trader David Madaras has lost his claim for unfair dismissal against the bank after a UK tribunal judge decided he intentionally broke rules surrounding the sharing of client information.
Madaras is the first of five former Citi FX traders who sued the bank to lose their claim after Perry Stimpson, Carly McWilliams, Robert Hoodless and most recently Baris Ozkaptan all were ruled to have been unfairly dismissed, even though the judge found they also contributed to their dismissal.
A UK appeals court judge has decided that former JP Morgan FX salesperson Patrice Ktorza’s case must be reheard by an employment tribunal.
In a judgement, Judge David Richardson accepted the bank’s claim that the original judge who head the case had adopted “a legally incorrect” approach to the law and “disregarded or misunderstood” important aspects of JP Morgan’s case.
Ktorza won his claim for unfair dismissal in August 2016, however Profit & Loss noted at the time that the case was “tricky” because it involved the subject of partial fills of client orders.
Profit & Loss understands that David Fotheringhame, former head of automated flow trading at Barclays, has won his claim for unfair dismissal against the bank.
Sources familiar with the matter say that a judgement to be made public later this week, will find for Fotheringhame, although the judge at East London Employment Tribunal has decided that he was 20% to blame for his own dismissal and ordered the settlement and compensation be appropriately adjusted. Fotheringhame claimed that the bank dismissed him to appease US regulators who had demanded his dismissal in a public notice.
Reading the summary of Employment Judge Jill Brown, who found that Barclays had unfairly dismissed its former head of automated FX trading David Fotheringhame earlier this week (and yes, you did read it here first!), I found myself shaking my head at yet another example of a bank throwing a member of its staff under the bus. The more I read, however, I found myself thinking that everyone involved was being shoved in front of the number 45 - thanks to a regulator's hastiness.
This won’t take long as it’s a long weekend for most in the markets, including me! Just to reminder subscribers that we will have the latest in our monthly Insight calls next Wednesday – I thought we’d give you an extra day to get things back in order – and there is plenty to talk about.
I’ve already had a couple of messages about the events of the past month, possible bids for NEX, unfair dismissal claims being won and the Cartel traders making their first appearance in court, so we can discuss all of that if we have time, plus there is something I want to get into regarding the FX market structure.
So, it will be great to have you join us – this is only open to subscribers – and I look forward to a nice long weekend preparing some ammunition for Wednesday!
There is probably more value in me writing about my holiday than the industry given how I did not, for one second, bother to look at what was going on! Luckily for you, dear readers, you will not have to suffer my eulogy to the Amalfi Coast, rather I want to discuss something that happened just before I went on my break, yet another unfair dismissal case - this one with the added spice of a plaintiff claiming whistle blower status.
Profit & Loss understands that John Bannerjee, who claimed unfair dismissal against former employer Royal Bank of Canada, has won his case.
Sources say that the tribunal judge at the London Central Tribunal found that the principal reason for his dismissal was the making of a protected disclosure. The judge also found, the sources say, that Bannerjee contributed 25% to his dismissal, however the compensation awarded will be boosted by 25% because the bank failed to comply with the UK’s Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service (ACAS) Code of Practice.
In this week’s In the FICC of It podcast, Galen Stops breaks ranks to say he found one of Colin Lambert’s columns interesting, while the latter makes an appeal for expert knowledge on risk-free rates – if only so he doesn't have to blag another podcast feature.
They also discuss the latest unfair dismissal outcome in the UK in which yet another FX dealer was found to have been wrongly sacked, as well as the potential implications for the fintech industry from a legal case in the US. In a busy podcast they also dispel some myths about AI – while at the same time making a big statement (is there any other kind?) on what will make AI trading successful; and they pick out their early selections for must-not-miss sessions from Forex Network Chicago in September.
The judge’s summary in the unfair dismissal case in which John Banerjee won his claim against Royal Bank of Canada has been published by a London employment tribunal and could see the bank facing a large compensation bill.
Rarely in such cases, Banerjee’s claim for whistleblower status was not dismissed, with Employment Judge James Tayler finding that he was unfairly dismissed principally for “the making of a protected disclosure”.
In the ruling, Judge Tayler refers to an address, in which staff were encouraged to report wrongdoing, and were told “don’t ask don’t tell will not be tolerated”.
People are fond of “looking at the bigger picture” but when it comes to the legal profession and FICC markets, frankly the bigger picture confuses me. How else can we explain how a number of traders are facing jail time and yet so many other traders are winning their unfair dismissal cases? To me, the issue clearly highlights the level of collateral damage in the industry and requires the banks (and regulators to a degree) to have a serious reappraisal of their approach.
Following up on a column from last month that elicited an interesting idea from a correspondent - should trading businesses be penalised for not adhering to the correct procedures when it comes to HR? There are few traders who care about the HR function, but the number of unfair dismissal cases being lost by banks would suggest that something needs to be done to ensure that the next generation of traders doesn't face the trauma faced by some of the current crop.
What is it that infected so many of the banks’ FX businesses at the end of 2013 that led to so many bad decisions being made? Was it a lack of focus, courage, or even sheer panic that underpinned the decision to roll over on legal actions brought by customers, but at the same time stand firm and fight unfair dismissal cases brought about by their own staff?
The question emerges because the stakes have been raised when it comes to unfair dismissals thanks to the awarding of £1.2 million to former RBC FX trader John Banerjee to compensate him for loss of earnings.