Posted in Conflict of Interest

Theft From Employer

This article caught my eye and reminded me of another example of fair treatment.  Very painful, but fair.  The boss I referred to previously, fired a well loved employee who was great with the clients and staff – everyone was absolutely gutted – including the boss.

There was a 1-800 phone line available to contact other offices in different provinces for Legal Aid business only.  This employee had been using the 1-800 line to call family and friends in other provinces.  The Financial Director watched every penny and was on top of everything going on.  He noticed certain numbers popping up and investigated.  The employee was asked and admitted to the calling, then fired.  Legal Aid at the time was funded by Federal and Provincial money – taxpayer dollars – and the Financial Director did a good job keeping track.

Luckily, the employee was not charged.  Everyone felt awful but it had to be done.  Theft from an employer is a very serious offence.  Legal Aid didn’t cover theft under unless it was theft from an employer – this type of theft was always covered because of the possibility of jail time.  It is a breach of trust, very serious.

Like this boss,  elected individuals must do what is best for the community – no matter how painful, or if friends/neighbors get upset.   If they can’t make the tough decisions and answer questions directly – get rid of them.

The TAG Trustees loyalty is to TAG first, then friendships, then the community.  TAG no longer exists as it was presented.  To have a Trustee insist on supporting TAG and the actions by TAG is simply wilful ignorance.  TAG is using this title to operate the positions of Trustee outside the guidelines set for Trustees in the Improvement District Manual.  TAG has manipulated and mislead the community and continues to do so.  There can be no claims of ignorance.  I have voiced my concerns since I first learned of these ridiculous ‘caucus’ meetings TAG Trustees were having after the resignation of Alan de Jersey in July 2011.  I have not received a satisfactory answer.

Union Bay should be turned over to the Regional District.  This community doesn’t have one, let alone five,  who are truly capable of making those hard decisions and the backbone to do what is right.  They always cave to pressure from ‘friends’.

Should be a very interesting election.  Let’s have a debate.  Two positions up for grabs.  Will they go door to door campaigning again?  Will they say how they want to bring the community together but refuse to go to James Smith’s house and then when he writes asking why, they’ll just ignore him?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s