We may have too much faith that it cannot happen, or won’t happen or we’re simply naïve.  Perhaps we don’t seek, therefore we don’t find.  Maybe it’s assumptions, perhaps laziness, or even poor work ethic.  It can breed and morph in a culture where accuracy is considered unimportant.   It is commonly known as – pencil whipping, or faking information on documents.

Last week the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission announced a proposal to ban pre-employment background checks by employers. The proposal was in response to the heads and spokespersons of several social agencies that prepare convicts to re-enter the workforce. The EEOC chair, Amy Solomon stated in a press release, “Today, we had the opportunity to add to our knowledge of this issue and learn about the practical ways employers have been able to balance business concerns with the need to ensure that employment practices are fair and non-discriminatory.”

He was a great find. An experienced fast food manager walked in and applied for an open shift manager position. He interviewed well and obviously had a great deal of experience. All of the favorable first impressions were verified with a phone call to a former district manager of the applicant, who gave a raving endorsement of his abilities, aptitudes and experience. “We hate to lose him” was the most memorable comment by the former supervisor.

The New York Times and Scambusters report that employees of a company found a number of USB drives, commonly known as “flash” or “thumb” drives bearing their company logo scattered around its parking lot.  Curiosity dictated that they plugged them into their computers in their office to find out what was on them.  They found what appeared to by a document that installed malware that stole confidential information from the company’s computer network.

Business ethics, or lack of them, apparently has made its way into the world of pizza in a Philadelphia suburb.   A pizzeria owner had a problem with mice that, for whatever reason, he blamed on two competitors in the neighborhood.   He visited one of his rivals and asked to use the restroom.   After he left, they found footprints on the toilet seat and noticed that the ceiling tiles had been disturbed.  A white bag was found tucked above the tiles.

The 2010 Marquet Report on Embezzlement was released recently. It’s an annual study on major embezzlement cases in the United States over $100,000. In what has been described as a banner year, 485 such cases were studied. An assumption can be easily made that in this bad economy the thefts were triggered by deep financial problems. The study found however, that the most major embezzlers were driven by greed or a need to live a more lavish lifestyle that could not afford otherwise.

“They treated me like a common criminal”, said the employee after being escorted from the building after being let go from his employer of 12 years.” “It’s hard to recover from watching terminated co-workers escorted to the door”, stated another employee of a company involved in laying off employees in the midst of downsizing.  So why does it happen this way?  Why do companies resort to such protective actions?  It is not so much of a fear of a violent response, but more as, it is protection of proprietary information and the brand.  Policies are created to prevent a just terminated employee from walking out with client lists, memos, or other proprietary information; some of which may or could be used against the company.  To guard against the theft of information, sabotage, or disgruntled or even violent behavior, their departure is closely supervised. 

Two employees working late at night for a franchisee of a national fast food (QSR) chain decided to post a video of themselves on You Tube.  What they thought was a good idea at the time was videoing themselves tampering with food products.  Disgusting, unsanitary, vile… you get the idea.  It received over 60,000 hits on You Tube and was viewed by millions more on several major network and cable newscasts. The employees were promptly fired and the information flowing out from the location ensured the public that the food was not served.  It was also determined that one of the employees was a convicted sex offender.  The highly embarrassed franchisee admitted that there was no pre-employment screening process in place – not uncommon in the industry.