Theft at work: criminal proceedings and employment consequences

One event can trigger two different assessments

An employer can invoke a breach of trust or urgent reason while the police and Public Prosecution Service are investigating a criminal offense. The legal conditions and evidence assessment are not completely the same. Therefore, a criminal acquittal is not automatically the same as a judgment that the dismissal is invalid. Conversely, an employment law decision does not automatically prove all the elements of theft. Both routes require their own documents and timely legal assistance.

Our analysis starts with two columns: criminal law and labor. Write the sender, decision, requested response and deadline in each column. A letter about wages or dismissal should not disappear at the bottom of the folder because the police interrogation is later. An internal accusation should also not be treated as a proven fact because the employer has already taken a measure. By separating the routes, advice can be coordinated and an action for one route can be prevented from unintentionally harming the other position.

What exactly is considered theft?

The term theft at work can refer to a variety of actions. This may involve removing goods, keeping entrusted items, using cash or changing administration. The Criminal Code has various descriptions of the offense for this purpose. An employee who was allowed to take a company asset home for work faces different questions than someone who sold stock without permission. Therefore, start with the act, property, date and alleged unlawfulness. (Criminal Code)

Also have the actual work agreements examined. Was private use permitted, was there a regulation for written off items and who was allowed to give permission? An informal practice may be relevant, but should not be presented as general company policy without evidence. Moreover, a manager cannot always approve every disposition of goods. The lawyer can connect authority, consent and his own knowledge to the specific accusation. The aim is that an employment relationship is not automatically used as proof of guilt or as a license.

Permission and tolerance require sources from the correct period

Change internal rules. A current employee handbook does not have to correspond with the instructions at the time of the incident. Written rules and actual implementation may also differ. That difference deserves investigation, but does not make every violation permissible. Ask what instructions applied at the time, how they were communicated and what specific permission you received. A general statement that everyone did it is usually insufficiently precise to assess one's own action.

Search for existing messages, issuance forms, training and previous approvals. Make a note of who can confirm an appointment without asking that person to copy a desired story. If you only thought something was allowed, describe what that thought was based on. A personal assumption and an explicit consent are different facts. The defense can respond to both, but must keep the difference. In this way, the question of intent or unlawfulness remains connected to the actual knowledge at the relevant time.

Cash register difference or login registration is not always proof of identity

For shared cash registers, keys or accounts, a registration can provide an investigation direction without automatically determining who performed each action. At the same time, shared access does not make identification impossible; images, grids and other data can together demonstrate a role. Therefore, ask what the personal attribution is based on. A file must provide more explanation than just that you worked in that department or that your account was visible.

Create an access and timeline of the relevant service. Who could use the cash register or inventory, what transfers took place and how were corrections recorded? Also include unfavorable data. A conclusive grid argument that is based only on one's own memory can be refuted by other sources. Where necessary, make specific requests for the retention of camera images or system data. Do not copy the entire company administration without authorization. A specific request for evidence through legal assistance is a different action than taking confidential files with you to safeguard your position.

An internal investigation has a different legal position

Exactly the same rules do not automatically apply to a conversation with the employer, security or an investigation agency as to a suspect interrogation by the police. Ask who is conducting the conversation, for what purpose and whether a report is being made. Your possible employment law obligations and criminal interests must be assessed together. Universal advice to remain silent everywhere or to explain everything immediately is not justified without documents.

Ask for legal assistance and sufficient explanation before signing a substantive or financial acknowledgment. Read the report and have any inaccuracies corrected. A signature of receipt differs from agreement to the contents. Language problems and pressure to sign immediately deserve concrete documentation. If the police interrogate you as a suspect, criminal proceedings and the role of the lawyer during interrogation apply. A previously internal statement may become relevant to the criminal case; therefore keep track of exactly what was said and recorded. (criminal proceedings · lawyer during interrogation)

The labor law clock can run much faster

In case of summary dismissal, short expiry periods may apply. The central government specifies a period of two months for a request to reverse the dismissal. Have the applicable term and desired procedure immediately assessed by an employment law advisor. Waiting for dismissal or acquittal may mean that an independent option against dismissal is lost. An objection letter to the employer is not automatically the required request to the judge. (The central government specifies a period of two months for a request to reverse the dismissal)

Save the dismissal notice with the time of receipt and exact reason. Wages, benefits and any compensation may also raise their own questions under the Civil Code, Book 7. Do not sign a termination agreement without assessment because it is presented as less harmful. The content and consequences must be clear. It is not about always litigating, but about a conscious choice while the possibility still exists. Coordinate employment law and criminal law advice so that statements and agreements do not overlap. (Civil Code Book 7)

A damage amount does not automatically constitute a correct final settlement

An employer can claim goods, research costs or other damages. Ask for a specification and basis. The estimated stock loss of an entire period is not automatically your personal fault. Settlement against wages also has its own legal framework. Any proposed arrangement may be helpful, but should make clear what is recognized and what issues are addressed. The promise that payment will prevent or end every declaration deserves legal assessment.

Distinguish between return of company property, payment of damages and statement of fact. A lawful transfer may be necessary without all allegations being admitted. Record which items have been returned and in what condition. Do not delete files or messages to influence an investigation. If there is confidential or personal data on a device, an authorized, secure solution should be chosen. A conflict over money makes it unwise to keep the device as a means of pressure or to copy data from others yourself.

References, VOG and new job

An accusation may have consequences beyond the direct procedure, but these are not the same in every case. A VOG is assessed according to its own function-oriented framework and an ongoing suspicion is not the same as a final conviction. What an employer may communicate about a departure also requires its own assessment. Avoid blanket promises that there will be no consequences or that working in the industry will be impossible forever.

Discuss what information is actually requested and which statement is factually correct. A new employer does not need to be informed via a widely distributed file. At the same time, you should not provide incorrect information to avoid an obligation. The lawyer can help distinguish between necessary information, confidentiality and a still disputed accusation. Save judgments and settlement letters so that it is clear later how the case ended. A verbal statement that nothing came of it is less useful than the official document.

Fictional example: take with you written-off tools

A fictitious employee takes tools from a bin of written-off materials. He says that this was allowed before, while the employer states that permission was always required. The criminal law question requires investigation into removal, consent and the required intention. The employment law question may also concern rules, trust and the measure taken. One witness saying that items were taken more often does not automatically decide both issues.

A targeted preparation contains the then applicable instructions, previous specific permission, photos of the situation where lawfully available and the dismissal letter. The advisors assess the two processes with their own deadlines. The example shows why an existing habit can provide relevant context without automatically justifying every inclusion. It also becomes clear why waiting for the police outcome is not sufficient if the employment contract has been terminated in the meantime and an independent expiration period is running.

A work card for facts, rights and deadlines

Set up the timeline as quickly as possible and seek appropriate advice immediately in the event of immediate termination of employment. The map helps both advisors work with the same facts. Highlight your own memories and missing pieces. Only retain data to which you have lawful access and make specific requests for material held by the employer. A defense interest is not an unlimited access authorization.

• Accusation: property, amount, act, date and criminal classification as far as known.
• Agreement: policy from the relevant period, permission and authorized persons.
• Access: rosters, keys, cash registers, accounts and relevant registrations.
• Discussion: participants, report, signing, corrections and possible printing.
• Employment: suspension, dismissal, salary decision and procedural deadline.
• Money and property: itemized claim, return and contents of a proposed settlement.
• Continuation: coordinated criminal and employment law legal assistance and evidence preservation.