.. her colleagues lost their jobs.
While a woman was gambling away close to half-a-million dollars’ worth of company funds, her colleagues were being laid off.
A Hastings woman, granted name suppression to protect her former employer, has appeared in the Hastings District Court where she pleaded guilty to one charge of theft.
The woman was employed by the Hastings company in April 2005. [Hawkes Bay Today 13 Jan]
Name suppression to protect the business reputation of an employer…is this a legitimate use of the rules?
As a side benefit the convicted thief also gets some protection. She’s got a gambling addiction – a mental health issue.
The rule in this case would seem to be “undue hardship” for the employer but is it fair?
Anyone connected to the woman, the Hastings company and the Hastings District Court knows who she is and the name of the employer and the company.
In short, anyone who might be materially affected by this woman’s action and the aftermath already knows.
What’s the point of name suppression?
To the credit of HBT journo Hinerangi Vaimoso the story covers a number of similar cases related to problem gambling in the region. It’s a well done story that doesn’t seek to sensationalise the cases mentioned and actually looks at the issues.