Employment in Financial Services

Contributing Editor

In a rapidly evolving regulatory landscape, employers in the financial services sector must ensure they are fully compliant with local employment rules and procedures. Helping to mitigate risk, IEL’s guide provides clear answers to the key issues facing employers in the sector

Choose countries

 

Choose questions

Choose the questions you would like answering, or choose all for the full picture.

09. Is there a particular code of conduct and/or are there other regulations regarding standards of behaviour that financial services employees are expected to adhere to?
 

09. Is there a particular code of conduct and/or are there other regulations regarding standards of behaviour that financial services employees are expected to adhere to?
 

Flag / Icon

India

  • at AZB & Partners

Financial services regulators like the RBI, SEBI and Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority of India (IRDAI) regulate employees through prescribed frameworks and their organisation-specific rules.

The obligations for the conduct of employees in financial services are determined depending upon the type of organisation: public sector banks (majorly owned by the state) or private banks; sectors (banking, non-banking, insurance, capital market); regions (different local laws); and level of seniority (liability of officers or manager is different from regular employees or clerical staff).  Though there are no statutory standards, judicial pronouncements have set a higher threshold of duty of care for employees in the financial services sectors. The Andhra Pradesh High Court in Harinarayan Seet v Andhra Bank[1] held dismissal of service as a proportionate punishment for dereliction of duty by banking employees, which would have otherwise attracted a lesser penalty for employees in less-critical sectors.

In terms of general labour legislation also applicable to financial services employees, financial services organisations fall under the definition of “commercial establishments”, whose definition has been laid down by the Shops & Commercial Establishments Act (state level). They provide certain conduct-specific obligations, for example, a prohibition against discrimination, suspension or dismissal for misconduct.

The other major piece of labour legislation that lays down standards of conduct is the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946 (IESOA). However, its applicability to commercial establishments or to a specific industry is dependent upon state-wide laws. For example, the states of Haryana and Karnataka have notified the application of the IESOA to commercial establishments with a minimum of 50 employees. This implies that financial services institutions in these states, meeting the above criteria, are bound to comply with the IESOA. Upon the application of the IESOA, the establishments are required to submit to the certifying officer draft standing orders proposed for their establishment, which should cover acceptable standards for employees.

In the banking sector, employees of public-sector banks, private-sector banks and foreign banks are bound by the obligations laid down by the RBI and their organisation rules. The provisions of these rules, which are different from other industries, are stricter: observance of secrecy; prohibition against using influence to secure employment for family members; bypassing regular compliance checks for availing of banking facilities; prohibition against media contributions, participating in politics or standing for election; demonstrations prejudicial to the public interest; and acceptance of gifts in an official capacity.

In terms of financial propriety, employees must not indulge in speculation in stocks and shares, but must avoid personal insolvency and even disclose their moveable and immoveable assets. During employment, they are also forbidden from engaging in any outside employment (stipendiary or honorary) without the prior approval of the organisation. Higher managerial employees are subject to additional scrutiny. Those belonging to public sector enterprises are brought within the jurisdiction of the Central Vigilance Commission, the apex vigilance institution. It is due to the gravity of corruption cases that the senior management of private sector banks is also included within the ambit of “public servant”, which usually includes employees of only public sector organisations. This was upheld by the Supreme Court of India in the case of Central Bureau of Investigation v Ramesh Gelli[2].  The organisations in the insurance and capital markets sectors also have similar institution-wide conduct and disciplinary rules.

Directors of organisations in the financial services sector may also be subject to duties stated in Schedule IV of the Companies Act 2013 and the SEBI (Listing Obligations and Disclosure Requirements) Regulations 2015.

When it comes to outsourcing activities, financial institutions formulate a board-approved “Code of Conduct” as part of the “Outsourcing Agreement”, which is to be complied with by the outsourced service providers and their employees.[3]

Though financial services employees are held to a higher set of moral standards, their right to participate in trade union actions for voicing their concerns has been upheld time and again. Recently, the Madras High Court in the case of D Thomas Franco Rajendra Dev v The Disciplinary Authority and Circle Development Officer and State Bank of India[4] observed bank officers’ right to unionise.  However, the right of bank employees to go on a strike gets limited since banks and other financial institutions are declared as ‘Public Utility Services’ (“PUS”). Accordingly, while they are not barred from going on strike, they must adhere to certain pre-requisites namely service of notice of at least 6 weeks before going on a strike, prohibition of any strike within 14 days from date of service of above notice, prohibition of going on a strike before the expiry of the date of that strike and non-authorization of any strike during the pendency of any conciliation proceedings or 7 days after the conclusion of such a proceeding. Upon being declared a PUS, the concerned industry must adhere to these conditions failing which the strikes would be declared as illegal.


[1] WP No. 23310 of 2011.

[2] (2016) 3 SCC 788.

[3]Directions on Managing Risks and Code of Conduct in Outsourcing of Financial Services by NBFCs, November 9, 2017, available at <https://rbidocs.rbi.org.in/rdocs/Notification/PDFs/NT87_091117658624E4F2D041A699F73068D55BF6C5.PDF>

[4] W.A. No. 432 of 2013 and W.P. No. 16746 of 2013

Last updated on 16/04/2024

Flag / Icon

Mexico

  • at Marván, González Graf y González Larrazolo

Financial entities must establish, implement and apply, among other things:

  • confidentiality policies;
  • policies for internal control to confirm the acts, operations and services of individuals are carried out in an ethical, professional and legal manner;
  • policies regarding the prevention of acts and operations with illegal resources;
  • policies to prevent psychological risk factors;
  • policies that allow the identification, follow-up and control of risks inherent to operations; and
  • conflict of interest resolution policies.

Under the general provisions applicable to operations with securities carried out by members of the board of directors, officers and employees of financial entities and other obligated parties, the principles that must be complied with are the following:

  • transparency in operations;
  • equal opportunity before all other market participants in sureties operations;
  • compliance with fair stock market customs and practices;
  • absence of a conflict of interest; and
  • prevention of improper behaviour that may have as its origin the use of privileged or confidential information.

Policies, manuals and codes must also include guidelines for the resolution of potential conflicts of interest, as well as the mechanisms to avoid the existence of such conflicts.

Financial entities must inform the CNBV annually, within 15 days, a report on the conduct, operations, and services of individuals. If any act or operation with illegal resources is detected, financial entities must inform the authorities immediately, including the CNBV and the SHCP.

The board of directors of operating companies of investment funds, distribution entities, and stock appraisers of investment funds must approve a code of conduct, which must consider:

  • activities in compliance with the applicable laws;
  • internal control rules for the compliance of provisions and policies contained in the code, including investment provisions issued by the CNBV;
  • security mechanisms to ensure confidential information is used solely for authorised purposes and security measures to protect clients’ files from fraud, robbery or misuse;
  • an obligation on the general manager, officers and employees to conduct themselves in a fair, honest and professional manner in the performance of their activities; and
  • a prohibition on officers, employees and proxies executing any type of operation with the public that contravenes market practices.

Members of the board of directors, the general manager, officers, regulatory comptrollers, proxies, and other employees must immediately report the existence of illegal or unethical conduct or activity to the regulatory comptroller.

Last updated on 14/03/2023

Flag / Icon

United Kingdom

  • at Morgan Lewis & Bockius
  • at Morgan Lewis & Bockius LLP
  • at Morgan Lewis & Bockius

Yes. Both the FCA and PRA have established their own high-level required standards of conduct known as the Conduct Rules. The FCA’s conduct rules are set out in the FCA’s Code of Conduct sourcebook. The PRA’s conduct rules are set out in the PRA Rulebook (and different versions apply to different types of PRA-regulated firms).

The FCA’s conduct rules apply to most individuals working at an SM&CR firm. The PRA’s conduct rules apply to more limited individuals working at dual-regulated SM&CR firms: senior managers (approved by the PRA or FCA); individuals within the PRA’s certification regime; key function holders; and non-executive directors.

The Conduct Rules apply to conduct relating to the carrying out of an individual’s role. They do not extend to conduct within an individual’s private life, provided that the conduct is unrelated to the activities they carry out for their firm. Nevertheless, an individual’s behaviour outside of work can still be relevant to the separate consideration of their fitness and propriety.

There are two tiers of Conduct Rules: a first tier of rules applicable to all individuals subject to the Conduct Rules; and a second tier applicable to senior managers only.

The rules of the first tier are:

  • Rule 1 – You must act with integrity.
  • Rule 2 – You must act with due skill, care and diligence.
  • Rule 3 – You must be open and cooperative with the FCA, PRA and other regulators.
  • Rule 4 – You must pay due regard to the interests of the customer and treat them fairly.
  • Rule 5 – You must observe proper standards of market conduct.

The rules of the second tier (applicable to senior managers) are:

  • SC1 – You must take reasonable steps to ensure that the business of the firm for which you are responsible is controlled effectively.
  • SC2 – You must take reasonable steps to ensure that the business of the firm for which you are responsible complies with the relevant requirements and standards of the regulatory system.
  • SC3 – You must take reasonable steps to ensure that any delegation of your responsibilities is to an appropriate person and that you oversee the discharge of the delegated responsibility effectively.
  • SC4 – You must disclose appropriately any information for which the FCA or PRA would reasonably expect notice.
  • SC5 (certain dual-regulated firms only) – When exercising your responsibilities, you must pay due regard to the interests of current and potential future policyholders in ensuring the provision by the firm of an appropriate degree of protection for their insured benefits.

Firms must notify the FCA if they take disciplinary action against an individual for a breach of the Conduct Rules.

Last updated on 22/01/2023