SIG being sued

[presspics]

SIG is trying to get this settled behind closed doors.. Didn't they get caught illegally selling guns a few years ago?

http://www.fosters.com/news/20171029...l-gun-shipment

"A Dover woman has filed a federal whistleblower suit against Sig Sauer claiming she was fired from her job, as compliance director for the local gunmaker, after reporting an unlawful shipment of firearms to an end user described as the “Indonesian way of spelling Ministry of Defense.”"

[TunnelRat]

You're thinking of SIG GmbH, not SIG SAUER Inc, in terms of the illegal sales before.

I saw the story today as well, and while I think it's interesting I don't think this is the sub forum for it.

[sigarms228]

Big yawn. I am always very skeptical of people who have been terminated doing this kind of stuff. If it really happened as she says she should have the proof. Smart people make copies/documentation to make their case for CYA reasons if something goes sideways.

[James K]

Interesting. But I don't think the "binding arbitration" clause will hold; the allegation is not that the company fired the woman without cause, but that it violated the law, and that is another matter. Still, this sounds more like a disgruntled employee trying to "get back" at a company than a concerned citizen reporting a violation of the law.

Jim

[TunnelRat]

If it really happened as she says she should have the proof. Smart people make copies/documentation to make their case for CYA reasons if something goes sideways.

Smart companies don't let people walk out the door with such documents. From the article she was fired without notice and escorted out of the building that day. In my experience from the corporate world when you're terminated usually that guard stays with you while you pack. Somehow I don't think he/she would let this woman print out loads of documents in the process.

I have no idea if this is true or not. That's why we have a legal system. Until a decision is reached what we're left with is conjecture.

[sigarms228]

Oh I understand what you are saying. What I meant is that smart people do CYA before things go sideways as in being terminated. I know I did in a couple cases in case I got blamed for someone else's mistakes but never had the need to use such.

[JohnKSa]

Moving to General Discussion.

[ATN082268]

Originally Posted by TunnelRat

Smart companies don't let people walk out the door with such documents. From the article she was fired without notice and escorted out of the building that day. In my experience from the corporate world when you're terminated usually that guard stays with you while you pack. Somehow I don't think he/she would let this woman print out loads of documents in the process.

I have no idea if this is true or not. That's why we have a legal system. Until a decision is reached what we're left with is conjecture.

It would be incredibly easy to copy something or print something well in advance before being showed the door. If a employer is doing something shifty and it falls under your responsibility, you better document stuff so you don't become the patsy if things go south...

[ATN082268]

Originally Posted by James K

Interesting. But I don't think the "binding arbitration" clause will hold; the allegation is not that the company fired the woman without cause, but that it violated the law, and that is another matter. Still, this sounds more like a disgruntled employee trying to "get back" at a company than a concerned citizen reporting a violation of the law.

Jim

The motivation is likely a disgruntled employee but that has no affect on whether company did "x" action or not. Really though, if the company clearly performed a criminal act and the disgruntled employee had a hand in it, they should also be liable.

[Armorer-at-Law]

Interesting. But I don't think the "binding arbitration" clause will hold; the allegation is not that the company fired the woman without cause, but that it violated the law, and that is another matter. Still, this sounds more like a disgruntled employee trying to "get back" at a company than a concerned citizen reporting a violation of the law.

No, the allegation is that she was fired for reporting the violation. It's a civil claim by the former employee.

[Bartholomew Roberts]

She is also alleging FMLA retaliation as part of the claim?

I guess I'll believe SIG when they issue a press release saying that there have been zero reported employment complaints related to commercial export sales

[ammo.crafter]

This is all public record and can be found on the judicial website of the venue the matter has been filed in.

[Aguila Blanca]

Originally Posted by ATN082268

The motivation is likely a disgruntled employee but that has no affect on whether company did "x" action or not. Really though, if the company clearly performed a criminal act and the disgruntled employee had a hand in it, they should also be liable.

I think if my job was monitoring export compliance and I was fired for reporting an internal violation, I'd be pretty disgruntled, too. If her side of the story is at all accurate, she didn't "have a hand in it." She discovered it, reported it up her chain of command, and (apparently) was fired as a reward for doing her job.

[ATN082268]

Originally Posted by Aguila Blanca

I think if my job was monitoring export compliance and I was fired for reporting an internal violation, I'd be pretty disgruntled, too. If her side of the story is at all accurate, she didn't "have a hand in it." She discovered it, reported it up her chain of command, and (apparently) was fired as a reward for doing her job.

That's probably what happened. That being said, you are only getting one side of the story. If what she says is true, she better hope the internal documents of SIG and the company that sent/received the weapons supports her allegations.

[DMK]

It would be incredibly easy to copy something or print something well in advance before being showed the door. If a employer is doing something shifty and it falls under your responsibility, you better document stuff so you don't become the patsy if things go south...

That sounds like a prudent and reasonable thing to do for CYA, but printing off and taking home documents containing corporate data and customer data could be a crime in itself.

Working in IT, I can tell you that some companies log what you print and what you transfer to a USB flash drive. They know all about CYA too.

[ATN082268]

Originally Posted by DMK

Working in IT, I can tell you that some companies log what you print and what you transfer to a USB flash drive. They know all about CYA too.

I'm surprised almost all companies don't do it

[KyJim]

You have to assume any competent IT department knows everything you are doing on your computer unless you have the ability to disconnect from the network (unplug the ethernet) and boot up with Linux from a USB or DVD, though you probably won't be able to access the network or Internet then. Just sayin'.

[ATN082268]

Originally Posted by KyJim

You have to assume any competent IT department knows everything you are doing on your computer unless you have the ability to disconnect from the network (unplug the ethernet) and boot up with Linux from a USB or DVD, though you probably won't be able to access the network or Internet then. Just sayin'.

Agreed. I haven't given the idea much thought since I'm not into corporate spying and the like but a person could take a picture of document(s) and send it (in case their phone gets confiscated) via their phone. I have no idea of what SIG is like as a company but it doesn't sound wise to treat someone like dirt who has access to a lot of your sensitive info