• Ledivin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    81
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    22 hours ago

    Dave said he entered the company card himself to buy Robux for his son, and it then sat saved on the Google account that also carries his work email, calendar, and files. Dave did not say why he used the company card for that purchase.

    Man steals from his employer, is surprised to get in trouble for it 🙄

      • Jessica@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        69
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        21 hours ago

        Keeping company card saved to an account that is not expressly used for work is a bad idea. Not sure how that makes one a bootlicker.

        • BoxOfFeet@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          18
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          21 hours ago

          Didn’t he say he used the card for robux or a smal $20l ad campaign? That’s how it got saved in there. So, he (the dad) started it. Why did he use the company card at all for personal spending?

          • Jessica@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            26
            ·
            21 hours ago

            That’s what I’m saying. Work should be completely separate from personal life, doubly so for expenses. This is wholly on the father, of course. I like the idea of giving youngsters agency and such, but it must come with guard rails and some amount of supervision. The father clearly had no idea what he was getting himself into.

            • Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              edit-2
              12 hours ago

              Even if one has one’s very own personal single-owner company, you keep company stuff separate from personal stuff.

              There are accounting reasons for this, there are management reasons for this, there are even legal reasons for this (for example if you own limited company is sued, keeping its shit totally separate from your shit means none of your stuff is part of the discovery process and if it loses the lawsuit, none of your personal stuff gets taken).

              This is even more so when the company is not yours and you’re just an employee - you don’t want company troubles to end up hitting you and the company doesn’t want you troubles to end up hitting it, so it’s a win-win for both sides.

              Always suspect when companies want to start mixing company stuff with personal stuff - in my experience they’re either small amateurish operations, they’re doing it to get you to do unpaid work for them outside work hours (i.e. the “company phone” that gets calls from management at odd hours) or its some weird tax evasion scheme and/or ties you more to the company (the “company car” that you don’t really use for company stuff).

              This guy fucked things up massivelly, even if a $118k “lesson” is maybe a bit too much.

              • Bluescluestoothpaste@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                6 hours ago

                It’s not a bit too much, people have to understand what things are worth snd what risks they’re subjecting those things to. It could have been an idiot in a $118k car changing lanes without looking and wrecking $118k that way, or someone using a company card for “de minimis” personal purchases. They’re both things that have no negative consequences 999 times out of 1000, and the 1000th time something goes wrong and you’re SOL.

                We’re all smart enough to understand the concept of tail risks, most of us just choose to gamble with our lives and money anyway.

                • Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  5 hours ago

                  It’s a bit much when that’s a transaction done with a retail customer (even if the card used was a business one, it looks like that was used on a personal account with Google, not a company account) which should legally have some form of limit to protect consumers of unlimited charges or if you want to be insanely neoliberal, at least some kind of insurance (just like how Insurance is mandatory in most of the World for driving a car).

                  I mean, even in Financial Investment there are at least mandated by law very prominent warnings to retail customers if they want to trade the more dangerous products with unlimited liability, such as Futures, because such customers are not considered domain experts and people even without those warnings already generally know and treat Financial Investments as something where a lot of money at risk and thus are more careful with it even when they’re non-experts.

                  This wouldn’t be a “bit too much” if we were talking of somebody doing it on a professional setting were it’s their fucking work to know what the fuck they’re doing, but for a retail customer who is not tracking what’s going on in their account day in and day out and who is not expected to know all the ins and outs of it, unlimited liability with no notifications at all is insanelly anti-consumer and only possible in a zero-regulations jurisdiction.

                  That kind of shit were there are ZERO mechanisms to avoid that a single dumb but understandable mistake by a non-expert retail customer explodes into a life-changing bill, is very much a facet of the typical American way of treating common people as nothing more than money-bags for big corporations to squeeze.

          • Jessica@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            22
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            21 hours ago

            Defending Google? He used a company card on an account to pay for Roblox money. Shouldn’t do that. If he had not done that, then he would not be on the hook for so much money. Also, please don’t tell people to injure themselves. Personal responsibility is a thing.

            Google automatically saving credit cards is scummy, and should not be a thing.

            • boonhet@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              17
              ·
              21 hours ago

              Also what the fuck kind of company expense is Robux anyway? I’d get some questions from the tax authority if I did that. If you’re going to use a company card for personal expenses, at least do it for expenses that are believable as company expenses.

              • nyan@lemmy.cafe
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                10 hours ago

                We don’t know what kind of company it is or what kind of job this guy does. It’s unlikely-but-possible that researching a gaming platform aimed at kids is a reasonable business activity for him.

          • Greg Clarke@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            15
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            21 hours ago

            Fun fact, two things can be true at the same time. Like corporations can be bad AND people can be stupid.

          • Em Adespoton@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            13
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            21 hours ago

            That’s an odd take here.

            Man uses company card for personal purchases, then leaves account management with 9 year old son.

            Let’s say this was:

            Bob has Bill’s key to his house, so he can take care of it while Bill is away. One day, Bob’s son says he needs some peanut butter. Bob says “let’s use some of Bill’s — he’s away, and we can replace it before he gets back.”

            So Bob and his son go over to Bill’s place and take his peanut butter. Bob leaves the key with his son.

            Later that day, his son is hungry but Bob isn’t around. So the son goes over to Bill’s house and eats everything in Bill’s fridge.

            Bill gets home the next day and finds his fridge empty an a note from Bob saying he borrowed his peanut butter.

            It doesn’t matter that Bill was off at a puppy shooting convention. Bob and his son are both in the wrong here.