[2018-01-14]Whistleblower Details Big Bank’s Plans to Prohibit Employees Owning

[Diced90]

This week News.Bitcoin.com carried the breaking story alleging employees of giant Northern European bank Nordea were being forbidden by company policy from owning or trading cryptocurrency. Since publication, a bank employee, who wishes to remain anonymous, forwarded evidence the large institution is indeed going ahead with such plans.
Nordea Bank Whistleblower
Word spread 12 January 2018 on Twitter Nordea Bank “forbids all their employees (at least in Sweden) to stop owning and trading $btc and other crypto currency. This applies to secretaries, IT personal [sic], cleaners and any bank staff employed by the company. Is it legal even?,” asked Twitter user @samisin.

Nordea Bank AB has more than half a trillion dollars in assets, and is one of the largest banks in Northern Europe. Its alleged move against employees’ cryptocurrencies were not all that surprising when placed in the backdrop of the bank’s executive team’s disparaging public comments. Executives have long worried about cryptocurrency and its lack of regulation, and more recently complained about the fact bitcoin was allowed to exist without jumping through all the hoops of the traditional banking system, referring to the phenomenon as “a joke.”

Read more https://news.bitcoin.com/whistleblower-details-big-banks-plans-to-prohibit-employees-owning-bitcoin

[uslfd]

Have to fight back. Anyone with account in these banks might consider switching to somewhere else. Let those who support btc thrive!

[hatshepsut93]

I guess their employees will have to use Bitcoin ATM's or buy Bitcoin directly from other people, or use some proxies (like their friends of relatives), because for banks it shouldn't be hard to check if someone is depositing fiat to exchanges. And this is how Bitcoin ban or restriction might work - governments will cut fiat systems from cryptocurrencies, so the market will have to go underground, and we'll have obstacles like lower volumes, risks of p2p trading.

[richardsNY]

Have to fight back. Anyone with account in these banks might consider switching to somewhere else. Let those who support btc thrive!

It won't do much for the regular people since it just affects employees. Main point of importance is that banks want to make their clients invest and buy traditional assets, which they benefit from as well, and not crypto currencies. By taking these measures, banks hope that their employees will keep advising clients to go for traditional assets, and thus not buy whatever crypto coin at external exchanges. Traditional assets will never be able to beat crypto currencies when it comes to returns. It is exactly what I already expected to be happening, and this pretty much confirms that -- banks have their interests to protect.

[DooMAD]

My first impression was simply that the bank didn't want employees installing wallets on work computers, which would be a perfectly reasonable request.  Any sensible company working in the finance sector should have strict policies against installing software on work devices.  I could even understand them not wanting employees using company internet to indulge in unregulated markets.  Again, a perfectly fair and reasonable rule given the regulatory requirements such companies are subject to.  I honestly thought this would be one of those click-bait things where it was all a big overreaction about nothing.  But having read the article... I'm almost lost for words.  This is unbelievable.

New rules also include how unless “otherwise stated, the rules set forth in this section apply to all transactions. Therefore, it is irrelevant whether they are carried out on [a personal] account, on behalf of a Closely Related Person, a customer, the Group, or on behalf of another party within or outside the scope of work,”

I'm not imagining it, am I?  It really does say that?  Where do they get off telling people what they can or can't do outside of work?  Maybe if Bitcoin were illegal in Sweden they might, and I mean might, have an excuse.  But beyond that, what does anyone's employer have any business whatsoever in dictating what assets they can or can't hold?  I would be totally ignoring my employer if they ever dared to pull a stunt like that.  And if I didn't already know what Bitcoin was, I'd sure as hell be looking it up, learning all about it and buying some just to spite them.  Then, if they ever found out and sacked me, I'd be taking them to court over unfair dismissal.  I hope this blows up in their face and half their employees make a killing on crypto and then leave the company in favour of a less draconian one.

As a small consolation, at least this is yet another sign we've got the banks running scared.

[casparthefriendly]

What a jerky thing to do!!

[entrepmind23]

New rules also include how unless “otherwise stated, the rules set forth in this section apply to all transactions. Therefore, it is irrelevant whether they are carried out on [a personal] account, on behalf of a Closely Related Person, a customer, the Group, or on behalf of another party within or outside the scope of work,”

I'm not imagining it, am I?  It really does say that?  Where do they get off telling people what they can or can't do outside of work?  Maybe if Bitcoin were illegal in Sweden they might, and I mean might, have an excuse.  But beyond that, what does anyone's employer have any business whatsoever in dictating what assets they can or can't hold?  I would be totally ignoring my employer if they ever dared to pull a stunt like that.  And if I didn't already know what Bitcoin was, I'd sure as hell be looking it up, learning all about it and buying some just to spite them.  Then, if they ever found out and sacked me, I'd be taking them to court over unfair dismissal.  I hope this blows up in their face and half their employees make a killing on crypto and then leave the company in favour of a less draconian one.

As a small consolation, at least this is yet another sign we've got the banks running scared.

It would understandable if they prohibit their employees to use their computer in dealing with cryptocurrencies in their work but as what you said, they also prohibit it outside of their work so there is really something wrong about that. You just cannot tell someone to stop doing this or that if it is not part of the job so it is just a sign that banks just want to decrease the number people investing in cryptocurrencies because they know that if more people got involved with it, their business might strive and may even be considering increasing their rates to encourage people to deposit their money to them.

[Stegobit]

Nordea treats his employees as slaves?! It is not your f*cking business what your employees do outside work!
I think workers must will fight back!

[Enjorlas]

Lol this is stupid, how can they know they are trading, they will just change of bank

[numizmat]

Their chairman Björn Wahlroos is a staunch hater of Bitcoin, for its supposed lack of inflation and its anonymous properties. What’s more, President and CEO Casper von Koskull has often had his own harsh words to say - he calls Bitcoin a joke because of its decentralized nature. According to him, letting Bitcoin thrive is self-defeating considering that it is beyond governments’ and banks’ control. He sees no need to spend billions of dollars regulating the finance industry, when it isn’t possible to do so with Bitcoin.

However, it is a surprise that all employees are banned – it is one thing to ban those engaged directly in the bank’s transactions, but it is another thing to ban cleaners too: Nordea Bank Forbids Employees From Owning Cryptocurrencies

[DooMAD]

One week on and it now sounds as though they've got no teeth and are merely "recommending" their employees steer clear.

Employees who hold the currency as of the ban won’t be asked to sell them. The bank is, however, recommending they do exactly that, sell.
(...)
“We’re skeptical toward cryptocurrencies and are advising our employees not to trade them, but we don’t impose an actual ban. We’re currently analyzing the situation and time will tell whether there’ll be a formal ban.”

I'm assuming they realised they have no legal authority whatsoever to impose a ban and are now trying to save face.  I'm sure they would have if they could, but they'll just have to learn to respect peoples' freedom.  Obviously learning from their mistakes has never been a strong suit for them, though.  I expect they'll continue to plow on without thinking it through to conclusion.  Silly banksters.  

[PR-Person]

Absolutely ridiculous to even be in a position to consider a ban. I'm really surprised a nordic bank has taken this stance, especially when Nordic countries were among the first to migrate to digital money and already lead the world's charge towards paperless currency. Blockchain based currencies is only a further step forward here. Perhaps there is a back story no one is aware of, perhaps even something that involves the "whistleblower".

It sounds like someone just had some backroom drama and it escalated thanks to intervention from clueless management.

[veleten]

there is no way a bank finds out their employes are buying bitcoins
unless them employees allow it to,like trading at coinbase or anywhere with their identity confirmed
the only way for this bank to be able to trace the employees would be
if they were stupid enough to use their work computers to buy/sell or god forbid,store bitcoins

[tuvok007]

That just cannot be true. How can any bank or any company prohibit their employees to use or trade crypto on their free time? Even a "recommendation"   would be immoral,dishonest,wrong and let alone "prohibition" !

[Appuned]

I guess their employees will have to use Bitcoin ATM's or buy Bitcoin directly from other people, or use some proxies (like their friends of relatives), because for banks it shouldn't be hard to check if someone is depositing fiat to exchanges. And this is how Bitcoin ban or restriction might work - governments will cut fiat systems from cryptocurrencies, so the market will have to go underground, and we'll have obstacles like lower volumes, risks of p2p trading.

If that is found out, they will still lose their jobs.

[Johann Strauss]

I think we should first ask ourselves how legal is that? I'm curious how the bank can ever demand that, it is just not their business by any metric. It is like your employer telling you that you should not spend your money on things that he doesn't quite like. You may love apples and he may love oranges. Did anyone sue the bank yet? Or is this real?

[gentlemand]

I think we should first ask ourselves how legal is that? I'm curious how the bank can ever demand that, it is just not their business by any metric. It is like your employer telling you that you should not spend your money on things that he doesn't quite like. You may love apples and he may love oranges. Did anyone sue the bank yet? Or is this real?

When it comes to banking lots of employees will sign contracts agreeing that they can't have personal trading accounts on regular markets. There's no reason why they'd allow them on irregular ones either.

There may be a division between retail banking and investment banking employees but restrictions are there.

[Johann Strauss]

I think we should first ask ourselves how legal is that? I'm curious how the bank can ever demand that, it is just not their business by any metric. It is like your employer telling you that you should not spend your money on things that he doesn't quite like. You may love apples and he may love oranges. Did anyone sue the bank yet? Or is this real?

When it comes to banking lots of employees will sign contracts agreeing that they can't have personal trading accounts on regular markets. There's no reason why they'd allow them on irregular ones either.

There may be a division between retail banking and investment banking employees but restrictions are there.

Okay, now I see what you are trying to say, but what does simple ownership have to do with trading? Are investment banking employees restricted from buying stocks or bonds, or even precious metals and foreign currencies? As I understand it, there is a difference between passive investment like buying and holding crypto, and actively trading them.

[Aikidoka]

That is really unethical to forbid such a thing. However, it is known that banks are against bitcoin because it is their biggest threat. Still it is not a good thing to prevent someone from using something personal, even though I do believe that Northern Europe accepts the use or owning bitcoin, right?

Either ways, these kind of banks have to stop ridiculing its employees for they are not slaves. People do not only rely on their job's income, they also have alternative source of income.

[tuvok007]

What a joke, those managers at Nordea Bank are probably retarded.They could suffer legal consequences. Here you go https://cointelegraph.com/news/nordea-bank-forbids-workers-from-owning-bitcoin-denmark-unions-threaten-legal-action