Employee stole thousands, sued for more — and won
November 26, 2008 by Shane BorerPosted in: "Would you want this person in Finance?", Contract disputes, Special report, Worker's comp
What’s the next step after someone steals from your company? If you said “paying the crook,” you and this employee are both winners.
Former facilities manager Gary Lean was placed on paid administrative leave from Montana’s Butte Civic Center when the state started investigating theft allegations against him. Nearly two years later and after receiving $118,835 in administrative pay, Lean was formally charged and pleaded guilty to eight counts of felony theft and tampering with public records.
During his three active years of employment with the Center, Lean stole more than $40,000 from taxpayers and non-profit funds associated with the facility.
After he was found guilty, the county sought to have Lean’s administrative pay returned. His response? He counter-sued the county, claiming it owed him an additional $92,000 in compensatory time, sick leave, annual leave and longevity pay.
Peter Meloy, Lean’s lawyer, claims the county doesn’t have “clean hands” and can’t deny the accrued pay — even though Lean openly admitted to stealing.
Popularity: 1% [?]
Tags: Administrative leave, Butte Civic Center, Facility manager, Felony theft, Non-profit
November 28th, 2008 at 3:20 pm
Too bad he didn’t live in China………. (see leaky toilet posting.
December 1st, 2008 at 10:19 am
“Former facilities manager Gary Lean was placed on paid administrative leave” —
right here is the mistake. Had he been fired as soon as their suspicions came tue there would have been no argument.
December 1st, 2008 at 12:16 pm
You can’t fire him for allegations of theft no matter how much you would want to. If he was fired on the spot it would be as if the allegations did not need to be found true or false. Though I wouldn’t want to work with someone that is suspected of stealing, he could have been innocent and if that was the case they would have lost a lot more then $92,000 plus the amount the paid him.
December 1st, 2008 at 12:45 pm
Touche’ Chris! You are absolutely correct. If the policy allowed it they could have put him on an administrative leave without pay plus basic benefits (health, dental, etc.) pending the results of the investigation. If found not guilty he would then receive full back pay and any other benefits he was entitled to receive. Schools use this when a teacher is suspected of an inappropriate relationship with a student. However, there would have had to be a policy in place BEFORE the alledged theft took place.
December 3rd, 2008 at 2:29 pm
Everything depends largely on how a company restructures its administrative and personnel policies, otherwise even an employee and confessed thief could have the upper hand.
December 3rd, 2008 at 3:22 pm
Following those lines of changing company policy wouldn’t it make more sense to continue to have him work while he is under investigation? He would be earning the pay he is receiving instead of getting paid to sit at home. The investigation should be able to continue without fully alerting the party in question due to digital back-ups and paper redundancies in the corporate world today, especially in a civic center which can sometimes get parts of its funding from the city it resides in. Then when a full investigation has been completed you fire him hand him his severance package (which includes accumulated holiday, sick time and other benefits if he is entitled to them) and file suit in order to recoup the lost money through his nefarious dealings. I do not like seeing the bad guy get away but someone dropped the ball with this investigation and subsequent court filling and an intelligent thief played the system because of it.