Two groups were characterized by the corporate climate in which the CEO wants to report another whistleblower and the employees of Barclays found by the bank’s Board. In addition, the whistleblowing processes breached by Chief Executive Officer Staley Jes have been voiced. The bank board only heard about Staley’s misuse of proceedings to shield the whistleblowers’ privacy at the beginning of 2017. This incident was followed by other scenarios which threatened Barclay Bank’s long-term brand (Ben 2017). The above event comprised of two letters that came from the United States and they were being addressed to senior executives and board members of Barclay bank in the month of June 2016. It was noted that this letter had information about Main Tim who is a former worker mate of Jes and a friend from his past life at JP Morgan where Staley had spent thirty-four years. The incident concentrated mainly on the process how Main who is the former worker of JP Morgan and a banker was recruited at Barclay bank by his friend Jes who is sixty years old. Moreover, these letters are said to have contained private life about Main, his career at the firm of Wall Street and how he became a chairman of Barclay bank group investment institutions.
The ethical issues that are correlated with the above scenario are that there was a breach of rules which are meant to protect the whistle blower’s identity by Staley. This above incident was discovered by one of the employees of Barclay bank who was questioning the procedures that concerned whistleblowing in the bank. Moreover, the above exposure is said to have led to so many other fraud cases that were eating up the bank and affecting the working ethics of the banking institution (Preliminary Results 2016).In relation to the above findings, one the analysts of shore capital argued that Staley had performed well in rebuilding capital base and running of non-core assets of the bank through daily operations. It is from the above argument that he asserted it would be better if Jes was retained as CEO of the bank because of the operational progress he had achieved (The Gurney family and banking in Norwich, 2016).
The rules broken by the above incident were the rules that guide the whistleblowers’ governance that state that a company must respect a requested tendered in by the informer for concealment of his identity. However, in this case, it was not the same as Staley authorized his information security team to disclose one the letters and he even went ahead to receive one which was a violation of the rules that govern whistleblowing according to the bank’s chairman McFarlane john. Moreover, the above reached a point of necessitating the services of the law firm Simmons and Simmons after there was a second whistleblower who contested the actions of the bank CEO Staley (British Linen Bank, 2016)
The above incident culminated into slashing of Jes’ salary and reprimanding was considered to be enough a fair punishment for the CEO. Furthermore, Staley could be eliminated completely from the financial services if the prudential regulation authority and the financial conduct authority find him guilty after they have done their investigations. This is also backed up by the New York financial services department that is also probing what transpired (Timmons 2003).
Ben Martin (2017). Banking correspondent .10 April
Preliminary Results 2016″ (PDF). Retrieved 19 April 2017
“The Gurney family and banking in Norwich”. (2016). Heritage City. Retrieved 19 April 2017
“Bank and Agent’s House, British Linen Bank (2016)”. Stirling Archives. Retrieved 19 April 2017
Timmons, Heather (9 May 2011). “Barclays agrees to buy Spanish bank in cash deal”. The New York Times. SPAIN. Retrieved 19 April 2017