Cooperation In Workplace Investigations

638 Words2 Pages

Cooperation An employee’s duty to cooperate stems from the existence of an employer/employee relationship. However, the scope of the employee’s duty is better defined by either the state’s statutes or by the relationship between the employer and the employee. The duty to cooperate also exists during workplace investigations, so employees are required to cooperate as long as the requests made by the investigators are reasonable. Determining the reasonableness of a request, however, depends on the particular facts of the case as well as the employee’s duties upon hiring. For example, Accounts Receivable (A/R) is being overstated, so the investigator requests the A/R manager to review source documents and payments to ensure the account’s …show more content…

Fraud Manual 2017). As long as the questions focus on an employee’s position or actions, the employee has a duty to cooperate with investigators. For example, an investigator interviews an A/R clerk regarding some invoices being posted in the ledger twice. Since the question relates to the A/R clerk’s scope of duties, he or she has a duty to cooperate with investigators. However, if the investigator follows up with a question regarding cash deposits; the question is unreasonable and there is no duty to cooperate. In cases of an impending litigation, the organization and its employees have a duty to preserve all necessary records to be turned over to the investigators. If the organization or employee fails to preserve necessary records, they are guilty of spoliation claims and other severe consequences (2017 U.S. Fraud Manual …show more content…

After management testified against Richard Scrushy, he invoked his Fifth Amendment rights to avoid self-incrimination during his civil hearing. Therefore, he has a duty to cooperate at his criminal hearing. If Scrushy had given a voluntary testimony instead, he would not be protected from self-incrimination. The voluntary testimony creates a duty to cooperate as he can be cross-examined by the prosecution. The Sixth Amendment enables employee access to legal representation. For example, an A/R clerk is being interviewed for her involvement in a fraud case. She invokes her Sixth Amendment rights to have her lawyer present during questioning. If the investigator complies, she has a duty to cooperate unless she is told to invoke her Fifth Amendment rights. If the investigator refuses, there is no duty to cooperate due to the violation of the clerk’s Sixth Amendment Rights (Hill, Jr. & Wright 1991) (Gordon 2003) (2017 U.S. Fraud Manual

More about Cooperation In Workplace Investigations

Open Document