The PM and the Banker
January 30th, 2007 at 10:15 am by David FarrarInsolent Prick has a story about the PM complaining to Westpac about an e-mail sent by a staffer which had one of those parody billboards on it. Retribution was promised until, it seems, they discovered not one, but 182 Westpac staff had forwarded the e-mail on 
January 30th, 2007 at 1:02 pm
No offence but a “story” is all this appears to be.
Hearsay of hearsay methinks.
Vote:January 30th, 2007 at 2:29 pm
Thats how all MSM articles start Sonic? A story of a story, until it snowballs out of control and it gets repeated enough that it becomes fact.
Or is that not the case when it is about the PM and her band of misfits?
Vote:January 30th, 2007 at 2:39 pm
But she will not get rid of Phillip Field. This is not the first time she has got someone fired for doing something that annoyed her.
Vote:January 30th, 2007 at 3:11 pm
It is rather hypocritical of Clark to make the unfounded allegation that National is somehow behind the rumours about her husband’s sexual preference.
Vote:January 30th, 2007 at 3:27 pm
It is rather hypocritical of Clark to make the unfounded allegation that National is somehow behind the rumours about her husband’s sexual preference.
Vote:January 30th, 2007 at 4:31 pm
This story is totally in character with the meglomaniac that inhabits the office of the PM
Vote:January 30th, 2007 at 5:26 pm
Wait SONIC someone mentioned SEX sex SEX and helen, THATS KINKY HELEN AND PETER SWINGING ON A ROPE,BONKING climbing a hill, or down hill on a ski run in norway DOGGY FASHION, she bent over going for it and peter accidently running into her rear end, make a great TV! program, WART and all, SONIC think about it
Vote:January 30th, 2007 at 5:56 pm
What a stupid story.
Let me see. Bank has customers. Somebody working for bank sends email to a customer featuring offensive jokes about a senior person at said customer. Customer is offended and complains. Bank has internal review and discovers that its policies relating to IT use are being flouted so extensively that they cannot be enforced.
… yet this is, according to IP and the weirdos who read his blog, somehow evidence that there’s something wrong with THE CUSTOMER and the BANK and its inability to enforce its own IT use policies is the organisational hero of the tale?
Try re-reading that post but imagine that it appeared on Kiwiblog, and it was DPF telling a tale about how he recieved an offensive email from inside a government department, who subsequently couldn’t enforce their IT use policies because of widespread disobediance inside the service. How would you react then? Oh yeah, that’d be, like, a totally different situation…
Frankly, I’m glad I’m with BNZ having read that story. They have an appropriate emphasis on professional standards, judging by the experience of people I know who work there…
Vote:January 30th, 2007 at 6:07 pm
Get a grip err no one except you thinks the BNZ does not pass on fun emails. Of course you do, and have and will.
Vote:January 30th, 2007 at 6:08 pm
Did anyone notice that the term ‘disciplinary action’ is assumed to mean termination of employment? I hope the story is published far and wide and I hope some journalist somewhere asks the PM whether she did in fact phone the CEO and demand that ‘disciplinary action’ be taken. Sounds like a good parliamentary question. Can’t see anyone at Radio Left Wing, State TV, Campbell TV or The Herald doing so. Fed Hilmer was right.
Roll on Fox News NZ
Vote:January 30th, 2007 at 6:20 pm
Yes, it is interesting that termination of employment is assumed when, of course, under employment law the employee being disciplined would have to have already undergone a number of disciplinary procedures before being fired.
I think the story has grown in the telling.
Vote:January 30th, 2007 at 6:40 pm
This is a true story, verified by bank staff…
Vote:January 30th, 2007 at 7:55 pm
I believe the basic premise of the story is true. The PM was personally offended and made a complaint asking that disciplinary action be taken. If the joke applied to me and my partner I would be offended too and would likely make a complaint. It’s where the disciplinary action translates to termination of employment that I suspect the story has grown.
Vote:January 30th, 2007 at 9:13 pm
Thrash Cardiom is right, no major employer like Westpac would be dumb enough to attempt firing an employee with an otherwise unblemished record for forwarding a joke – against policy or nay, that’s going to be a hard one to justify at the inevitable employment tribunal hearings..
The issue here is surely that although one person forwarding a dirty joke is an individual mistake, hundreds doing it is an organisational failure to get employees to follow IT usage policies that are almost certain to have been part of their contracts. Do you want to bank somewhere where the employees can play fast and loose with the terms of their contracts and get away without anybody noticing? I’m not sure I’d fancy it, but hey, whatever floats your boat. If you’re dumb enough to see that as an advertisement for Westpac then knock yourselves out, idiots…
Vote:January 30th, 2007 at 9:18 pm
“Roll on Fox News NZ”
Yes quite, it must be hellish having to deal with all those leftist “facts” every day.
Roll on ideological based truthiness!
Vote:January 30th, 2007 at 10:51 pm
Perhaps like the Police and their email debacle, they’ll be ‘cautioned and re-educated’ (or, is that re-programed???)
Vote:January 31st, 2007 at 9:47 am
Errr…
If you think the PM is an ordinary bank customer, you’re living on another planet.
Vote:January 31st, 2007 at 11:27 am
I quite agree. Similarly, Bill Gates isn’t an ordinary bank customer either. So would his banking provider be particularly bright if they started sending jokes about his wife to his office at Microsoft? I don’t really get why the customer being less “ordinary” makes a difference, other than making the bank’s mistake bigger and dumber than it would otherwise have been. It’s still their fuckup, and having 180+ people making the same fuckup is still an indictment of their ability to enforce IT policy, and therefore the degree to which they can be trusted as a financial services provider.
Again, this reflects poorly on Helen how? She’s offended by offensive jokes directed at her personally? Good god. Call the royal family, the PM is getting out of line…
Vote:January 31st, 2007 at 6:47 pm
Err:
You don’t vote for Bill Gates. Every bank employee at Westpac has the right to vote in an election, and indeed, the right to express a political opinion.
Bill Gates owns a big chunk of Microsoft. He is the symbol of his company. Helen Clark doesn’t own any more of New Zealand than you or I do.
Just stop your rhetoric for a moment, and ask yourself this. If John Key were Prime Minister, and an email poking the borax at him were floating around Westpac, would you think it is appropriate that he call the CEO, complain, and expect disciplinary action against the employee?
Of course you wouldn’t.
Vote:February 1st, 2007 at 1:16 am
IP, are you being obtuse or are are you really that much of a total munter?
Nobody has said that Westpac staff can’t vote, or express a political opinion, or masturbate into their sweaty undies while staring at photoshopped pictures of Ayn Rand performing an act of love upon John Key – whatever floats your right-wing boat, they’re allowed to do it as long as their employment agreements allow it. What they can’t do, as banking sector employees, is disregard company policy. Why? Because in a banking environment trust and security are absolutely paramount. That’s basically all banks are – a particularly trustworthy administration and lending organisation. The reason you give your money to Westpac or BNZ rather than Joe-Loan-Shark across the street is because of trust and security. That trust is based on internal systems, policies and competencies that you believe to be in existence, watertight and strictly enforced across the business.
So basically if you, as a banking sector employee, send out an offensive joke about an important figure at a major customer in direct violation of agreements you have signed as part of your job… then you fucked up. Sending jokes about customers TO THOSE CUSTOMERS is unprofessional and stupid in any business, but it’s terminally stupid at a bank. If the figure at the customer complains to your boss then you’re in trouble, because you just damaged the trust that people outside your company have in your internal systems, policies and competency to be looking after billions of dollars without doing something equally retarded that actually might result in some money getting lost.
And again, if it turns out that 180+ people are making the same stupid mistake then it just means that you have a systematic failure, which is far worse for Westpac than a one-off. None of this is Helen Clark’s fault, but she’s right to complain because she, as leader of the government, is ultimately the currently appointed leader of an organisation – government – which trusts Westpac with very, very substantial sums of money belonging to the nation. If Westpac’s staff are so slack on maintaining required standards of professionalism and basic common sense that they think sending jokes about the Prime Minister’s sexuality to HER OFFICE is a smart thing to do then maybe our money should be deposited somewhere where the employees have the proper number of fingers and toes and can manage to add two and two together without getting 666, tofu and lesbianism?
Since you heard this story and just went “Ha Ha, Helen Clark is a lesbo” or something I must assume that you *are* in fact just a munter and not actually being obtuse. The only message that comes from the story as told by yourself and DPF is that Westpac are, organisationally, shit at preventing their staff from making stupid mistakes that are potentially harmful to their business. Sounds like the bank for me! I’ve always wanted to put my money in an account with a bunch of people I couldn’t trust to tie their own shoelaces… Oh, no, wait. That’s a lie.
Vote:February 2nd, 2007 at 11:45 am
“You don’t vote for Bill Gates. Every bank employee at Westpac has the right to vote in an election, and indeed, the right to express a political opinion.”
Fuck mate, if you think some childish gag about Helen Clark’s husband being gay is ‘expressing a political opinion’ then you’re a sadder sack than I thought.
By the way, I read the original article on your homepage. The way you brag about your relationship with your bank manager implying your financial success is almost as sad as your supposed conquests of women. You realise how truly, truly lame it looks, don’t you.
Vote:March 15th, 2007 at 12:09 pm
John Gibson:
It’s a sad world that you live in to be so envious of me just because I’m witty, charming, good looking and rich.
I’m not defending the joke itself. I didn’t even think it was particularly funny. I don’t personally care about the PM’s sexuality, or her relationship with her husband. Frankly, the thought of two middle-agers going at it is pretty repulsive at the best of times. If Helecn Clark is a lesbian and if her husband is gay, that is entirely their business.
But getting the CEO of the Government’s bank to conduct an investigation and disciplinary proceedings against the employee concerned is simply overkill, and is well beyond what is appropriate behaviour for a Prime Minister.
Vote: