Thursday 8 December 2016

The bank’s responsibility or not?

The Financial Times last weekend reported on the MAS banning a banker from operating in the Singapore market for 10 years due to wrongdoings found in the 1MD investigation in this article . “Mr Leissner was found by the MAS to have issued an unauthorized reference letter, using Goldman Sachs letterhead, to a financial institution based in Luxembourg in June 2015.”

Two things are remarkable about this:
1.       Maybe 10 years is a long time but it’s ‘just’ a prohibition to work in Singapore. If you know how difficult it is to get a work permit in Singapore this can hardly be seen as a punishment. There are millions of people who want to work in Singapore and cannot. It doesn’t appear to be a harsh or severe treatment. Certainly not if you take into account that Goldman received 300 million in fees for the transaction of which mr Leissner without doubt got a handsome share.
2.       Secondly it’s puzzling that a person can be banned for doing something while his employer goes completely free. If a person is doing something that is not allowed he or she should be held accountable but if the person is doing that as an employee also the employer should be held accountable I’d say