Introducing the accountant who cannot count

RBS has identified 21 people involved with LIBOR rigging – and yet it seems more than half are still there. How come?

Half of 21 is 10.5.

Of those 21 here\’s the disposition of the cases:

Here’s the breakdown:

• Six staff have been dismissed for LIBOR related misconduct, including two managers.

• Six have been severely disciplined or are going through a disciplinary process.

• Eight left the organisation before disciplinary action could be taken.

• One was dismissed for misconduct not related to these findings.

Wouldn\’t it be nice if one of the country\’s leading international and corporate tax experts could count?

Do note that the second set of information comes from the same blog post that is headlined as at the top. It\’s not that he didn\’t know this, it\’s that he cannot count.

21 comments on “Introducing the accountant who cannot count

  1. 6 is close enough to 10.5 in Ritchie’s world .

    Correction is passed due to immateriality and over concerns that forcing Ritchie to count correctly would involve him have to expose his toes on a regular basis.

  2. I’m pretty sure Ritchie means that of a Libor desk of about 40-50 only 21 have left. The implication being that they are all guilty and should all have been dismissed.

    You don’t link to where this comes from but I’ve seen tweets from other Ritchie types making this point more clearly.

    So poor English rather than poor arithmetic.

  3. Don’t you know that basic arithmetic is a tool used by tax avoiders? Ritchie doesn’t want to risk doing the same as them. Someone should tell him that all tax avoiders breathe…

  4. It seems that Surreptitious Evil’s description of Murphy as the ‘Lord High Tax denouncer’ isn’t far off the mark. He’s aware that bodies have, by law, assigned disciplinary processes which ,thanks to the Unions who pay his wages can tie up management for months? I’d be interested to see, what, if any resources, RBS has had to set aside for possible employment tribunal settlements in the wake of these cases…

  5. “So poor English rather than poor arithmetic.”

    More like “He writes as well as he counts”.

    Ritchie’s had difficulties with basic math in the past… most notably with his calculation of the ‘tax gap’.

  6. Fair enough Ritchie is clearly confused.

    I did however see tweets the morning suggesting that only half of RBS”s Libor desk was being disciplined/sacked.

  7. Fact is eight of them left before censure and are probably working somewhere else. So over half are still “out there”.

    If someone commited fraud in any other walk of life (except perhaps MPs) then they would never get a job in FinServs.

  8. Arnald – but if they left before censure then they probably won’t have a problem getting a new job.

    If someone did something wrong but left before censure in other walks of life they can still get jobs. Probably never again with the same employer is all.

  9. Yes Martin, I know. But they are named and so should be chased wherever they are. So they are still “there” despite being known about.

  10. Ah, right. Arnald reckons that anybody you ever worked for has the right to subject you to an employment disciplinary whenever they feel like it, no matter that you have left.

    I can’t see there being any problems with that.

  11. Yet again, Arnald does have a point. Full marks to the man on the fryer.
    Except, in the ordinary case , leaving an employer under a cloud would make it bloody hard to get a job in a similar field ( although one gathers fast food emporia are fairly open-minded). There’s all sorts of ways of writing perfectly satisfactory references the prospective company wouldn’t touch you with a barge pole. Point with the LIBOR thing is everyone was doing it. Nobody even considered it was wrong. Even the Bank Of England. Nobody even got hurt, did they? They were massaging down, not up? Mortgages would be cheaper. The discretion on whether to lend to banks & at what rates was with the lender, not the banks.

  12. On the LIBOR thing. My disinterest in the matter is profound but from what I gather it canvassed the banks on lending rates.
    Back when dinosaurs walked the earth there was a thing on the Stock Exchange called getting a “market opinion”. Basically one was supposed to toddle round the jobbers, the market makers in stocks, to ask them what they thought of a company. Totally pointless exercise. Dealer, bull of a whole line of shares is hardly likely to tell you the company’s shit, are they? They talk their book, as we used to say. Or don’t people think like this, now?

  13. Arnald

    So you believe in rehabilitation.? What you are suggesting is actually illegal but then I guess the law has never been your (or Murphy’s) strong suit.

    Surreptitious Evil (#15)

    I think that’s one of the principles of ‘The Courageous State’ – rather like the State (s) it resembles in actuality, you’ll have to defect or escape in order to leave it. The problem is, his designs are global so the end goal is there’ll be nowhere for you to escape to….

  14. Arnald: “But they are named and so should be chased wherever they are.”

    Sounds like Arnald’s auditioning for a second career as an Inquisitor. Evidently working in fast food isn’t as glamorous as it’s made out to be…

  15. RBS, by the way, were (no idea about the current position) notorious in the industry for actually stating on otherwise utterly bland job references if somebody had quit while they were suspended, disciplinary action was pending or even if they were under investigation.

  16. I see the offending article has now been removed from RM’s website.
    Before it was I did see him say in response to a comment that he had ‘misread the article’ and ‘he was only human’
    Lost for words….

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>