News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
I presume the rationale is that when these claims became public the stock price was adversely impacted meaning public investors during that period lost money. Not all shareholders are wealthy people playing the dips and highs for maximum gains or have any connection to the bank itself. For example some everyday people may have had their modest retirement funds or life savings impacted as some of these investments commonly include bank stocks as they are seen as “safe” and are usually not direct investment decisions that these people make if part of a managed portfolio.
This is the risk that comes with holding stock directly or indirectly, but for some this not really a “benefit” but an attempt to get back their hard earned money that they tucked away and then lost through no fault of their own. Governments have historically bailed out banks when they are in trouble regardless if caused by the banks actions or not, so I see no reason why a bank should not have to cover people’s losses caused by their corrupt actions through a class action lawsuit.
The article wasn't specific about how the settlement amount was decided upon, but it's a class action lawsuit, so the more class members there are, the less each one receives. The people who were actually doing these bogus interviews are, therefore, getting less than they would have as a result of the shareholders getting 'bailed out'.
Maybe that was factored into the amount and they're getting the same amount they would have, but if not, it's bullshit and IMO should all be going to the people who went to the interviews.
I couldn’t also see the definition of “qualified” candidate in the article. Someone may have attended one of these fake recruitment processes but secured employment elsewhere in the same timeframe without any real financial penalty other than having their time wasted. Also just holding stock during that time does not mean an actual loss was realised by a shareholder. A bit of a mess for either type of candidate to work out compensation.