Forced Resignation Based On Investigation

I was the signing authority at our company, which was acquired this year by a French-based company. The Indian entity decided to integrate with our company, and while doing so, they moved me into a new role and laid off two of my staff. They then forced me to resign two weeks ago on the grounds that some purchases we had made were overpriced, and some transactions I had approved had discrepancies, such as the order quantity being higher than necessary, etc.

During the investigations, they did not call me or interrogate me or give me any chance to clarify. They said that if they had given me a chance to clarify and I was not able to, then there would be other complications that could jeopardize my career.

While asking me to leave, they said they knew that I was not involved in any fraud, but since I had signed, I was accountable. They also promised a three-month notice period, gratuity, and profit-sharing.

Last week, when I called HR, she said they are conducting a fraud investigation as they have found more issues. They want me to come and help them respond to these. There was a transaction with the landlord of the facility, which may cause them a loss of money deposited with the landlord. Since we had a good relationship with the landlord and I have signed the transactions, they want me to help. They say they will settle my full and final only once they obtain the deposit.

What am I supposed to do now?

Dear friend,

When mergers and acquisitions take place, issues of this kind are common. The acquiring company always has the upper hand. Possibly, they wanted to remove you, and for this reason, they are raising these kinds of issues. Many times, MNCs are penny-wise and pound-foolish. That is why they could be focusing on these smaller issues. My paragraph-wise comments are as follows:

Paragraph No 1: Were you the Purchase Head or Purchase Manager? When ordering quantities, did you consider the past consumption of materials? Did you include a note explaining why this quantity was ordered? The accumulation of inventory of certain items is a perennial problem worldwide. Additionally, you mentioned that "some" purchases were overpriced. Were these purchases made after comparing prices? Sometimes, quality comes at a price, so "cheap" may not always be the best option. When selecting a supplier with a higher quoted price, did you calculate the Total Acquisition Cost (TAC) or Life Cycle Cost (LCC) and attach an internal note when issuing the PO?

Since they did not contact you for an inquiry, these arguments, while important, do not hold water. Nevertheless, you could have written an email justifying your position.

There may be someone from the audits department in the new company trying to assert their presence. Could you have been made a scapegoat in their eagerness to shine in the limelight? Are you a victim of logical overreach?

Caesar's wife must be above suspicion goes the famous idiom. If you are in procurement, the opposite holds true – Caesar's wife must be suspected. Procurement professionals are more prone to suspicion than any other professionals.

Paragraph No 2: They have promised to pay your dues according to the terms of your employment. Is this assurance in writing, or is it verbal?

Paragraph No 3: When renting a property, your company must have signed an agreement with the landlord, specifying the deposit amount. You signed the agreement on behalf of the company, and the company authorized or delegated powers for signing the agreement. After your resignation, the person in charge is responsible for settling this matter. Why did they want to contact you? The company only needs to inform the landlord in writing about the change in the person dealing with them. It is unclear why the company wanted to link your Full and Final Settlement (FFS) with the retrieval of the deposit amount from the landlord. Personal relationships hold no significance in official matters. When you signed the agreement, you utilized your positional power. Now, the person in charge must resolve the issue.

Last comments: If you were a signatory for the landlord's agreement or were signing the POs, you must have held the position of VP or Director. It is puzzling why a person of your stature would be confused. Before submitting your resignation, did you request an interview with senior management? Why didn't you firmly state that you were open to any kind of inquiry? In extreme situations, you could have even sent a lawyer's notice to counter the character defamation or image tarnishing caused by raising issues through unofficial channels instead of conducting an official inquiry. A timely legal notice could have prevented unnecessary stress and strain.

Regardless, your previous employment is a closed chapter. Aim to secure your Full and Final Settlement and let go of everything except the lessons learned. To obtain your FFS, provide them with any assistance they require.

All the best!

Dinesh V Divekar

Thank you for your response, Dinesh.

Yes, I was General Manager for administration, which included purchasing. I was the signing authority for POs and for the Landlord's agreement. This was a start-up, and I worked here for 10 years, after which it was acquired. I conducted the purchases as per our processes at that time, but I do not have any documents with me as they had cut off my email and everything the day I was released.

Since the cost to the company is due to my negligence, the company is connecting my Full and Final settlement to the deposit. I have never committed fraud, but if my subordinates have, will I be held accountable for it? Can I be sued if I don't return to answer their questions now, or will they simply waive my Full and Final settlement?

Please advise on whether such possibilities exist.

Dear friend,

I have replied to your post. Hereafter, whenever there is a query from your ex-company, let there be written communication. You need to have proof of all your communication.

If your juniors are involved in fraud, then possibly you could be sued. While your personal integrity may be impeccable, if you had failed to detect the nefarious activities of your juniors, then you are answerable. It appears to me that some vendor or landlord must have spilled the beans on how the kickbacks were given. This must have alerted the authorities of the new company, and thereafter, they started taking a microscopic view of every decision. There cannot be smoke without fire.

There is a difference between error in judgment while making a decision and fraud. In fact, those who commit fraud are very good at keeping all the paperwork perfect. Error in judgment is also different from negligence. Negligence results from mistrust or not obtaining sufficient information before making a decision.

Let us not consider the persons at the other end as morons. They must have some concrete evidence at hand. Without this evidence, they would not have terminated your services.

Your ex-company has erred on one major count, and that is not conducting the inquiry. If they had done that, it would have strengthened both their case and yours.

As far as FFS is concerned, try to resolve the issue amicably. However, if the other side remains intractable, then whether to adopt the course of litigation is your call. You know the truth very well, and no one else. Whether FFS or not, what is most important is getting an "Experience-cum-Service Certificate." If you have not received it, first try to obtain this certificate so that you can start looking for a fresh job.

Learning from the post for other members: It appears that the poster did not upgrade his secondary skills for his job. I doubt whether he has taken training on purchase management or decision-making skills. This is where many professionals fail. This post is a good example of how experience breeds complacence. The gentleman had a smooth sail for ten long years, and all of a sudden, his career's boat met a rock. To steer away from such rocks, skillful navigation is required. For skillful navigation, one has to identify the primary, secondary, and associated competencies of the job and train oneself. These competencies improve the quality of decisions. The post proves the inadequacy of the so-called "experience."

Thanks,

Dinesh Divekar