Employment in Financial Services

In general, regulated companies (eg, banks, insurance companies or asset managers) are required to set up and maintain an organisation that ensures compliance with applicable financial market laws. Given the organisational measures and depending on the regulatory status of the employing entity and the position and activities of the financial services employee, there are training requirements.

While Swiss financial market regulations do not have an exhaustive list of exact training requirements, FINMA requires, among others, that the highest bodies of supervised companies (eg, executives of board members of banks, securities firms, insurance and reinsurance companies, fund management companies, managers of collective assets or asset managers) can fulfil the requirements of the so-called fit and proper test. These requirements extend to all character-related and professional elements that enable an officeholder to manage a supervised company in compliance with applicable laws. Part of the professional elements are relevant work experience and education. In addition, persons holding key positions (eg, compliance and risk officers and their deputies) are required to demonstrate sufficient know-how because of their work experience and education.

That said, the Swiss financial services and insurance supervisory regulations provide for more concrete training requirements. In particular, client advisers of Swiss and foreign financial service providers (eg, investment advisers) may need to demonstrate that they have sufficient knowledge of the code of conduct rules of the Swiss financial services regulation and the necessary expertise required to perform their activities. In addition, insurance intermediaries registered with FINMA’s insurance intermediary register have to prove that they have undergone sufficient education and have sufficient qualifications. On its website, FINMA has published a list of different educational Swiss and foreign qualifications that it deems to be sufficient.

The PRA and FCA training and competence regimes set the minimum standards that must be achieved by individuals working in the financial services industry. These regimes aim to ensure that authorised firms have arrangements in place to satisfy themselves that their employees are competent.

All FSMA-authorised firms are required to have adequately trained and competent senior management and employees. The training and competence requirements include:

• Threshold conditions on suitability – All firms must show that persons connected with the firm are fit and proper, taking into account all the circumstances. When assessing the suitability threshold of an employee, the FCA and the PRA will consider:
  • the nature of the regulated activity the firm carries on or is seeking to carry on;
  • the need to ensure that the firm's affairs are conducted soundly and prudently;
  • the need to ensure that the firm's affairs are conducted appropriately, considering especially the interests of consumers and the integrity of the UK financial system; and
  • whether those who manage the firm's affairs have adequate skills and experience and act with probity.

• FCA Principles for Businesses or PRA Fundamental Rules – These rules lay out the parameters of the “fit and proper” standard set for firms in the threshold condition on suitability, and require firms to undertake the following:
  • recruit staff in sufficient numbers;
  • provide employees with appropriate training, with competence assessed continuously;
  • make proper arrangements for employees involved with carrying on regulated activities to achieve, maintain and enhance competence; and
  • train employees to pay due regard to the interests of a firm’s customers and treat them fairly.

• Competent employees rule in chapters 3 and 5 of the Senior Management Arrangement Systems and Controls Sourcebook – This is the main employee competence requirement in the training and competence regime under the FSMA and applies to individuals engaged in a regulated activity in UK-regulated firms. The application of this rule can be complex and dependent upon the firm and the activities it undertakes, but in general, it provides that firms must employ personnel with the skills, knowledge and expertise necessary for the discharge of the responsibilities allocated to them.

• Detailed training and competence requirements in the FCA’s training and competence handbook (TC) – The TC rules are designed to supplement the competent employees rule, especially concerning retail activities carried on by firms. Among others, these rules include the following:
  • rules on assessing and maintaining competence;
  • supervision of employees who have not yet been assessed as competent;
  • appropriate qualifications; and
  • recordkeeping and reporting for firms within its scope, including how a firm assessed its employees as competent, and how it has ensured that its employees remain competent.

There are no specific whistleblowing laws in Switzerland, but employees have a right to report grievances and misconduct to their employer, provided that they do not commit a breach of a fiduciary duty or cause damage (eg, malicious false reports).

However, employees must also report material facts or incidents of misconduct and the misconduct of other employees discovered in the course of their work to their employer under the employee's duty of loyalty.

On the other hand, an employee’s duty of loyalty and, in particular, an employee’s statutory duty of confidentiality flowing from it may also give rise to a duty to not report.

Based on the current legal situation, there may be a conflict between an employee’s need to report grievances (internally or externally) and a possible duty to not report with regard to an external report. An attempt to resolve this conflict through legislation has failed, and a new attempt to introduce whistleblowing legislation in Switzerland is not expected anytime soon.

Concerning whistleblowing by employees to a public authority or even to the public, employees are regularly prevented from doing so by confidentiality obligations under criminal law. Any justification for such a disclosure will usually only be examined in the context of a criminal investigation against the employee.

However, larger companies have taken measures and set up certain processes to uncover and prevent wrongdoing without having to do so under mandatory laws. For instance, companies have implemented internal or external reporting offices.

When it comes to harassment, an employer is explicitly required to protect employees from sexual harassment (prevention) and to protect any victims from further disadvantages (active protection). According to the Gender Equality Act, victims of sexual harassment may be awarded compensation of up to six months' wages by the courts, in addition to damages and restitution, unless the employer can prove that they have "taken all measures that are necessary and appropriate according to experience to prevent sexual harassment and that they can reasonably be expected to take”. Employers are therefore advised to actively address the issue of sexual harassment (as well as general discrimination and bullying) in the workplace and include it in their regulations or directives.

Whistleblowing

In addition to the requirements of the SM&CR outlined above which relate to the prevention of wrongdoing (including the Conduct Rules, fitness and propriety assessments, Senior Managers’ Duty of Responsibility, the certification and approvals processes and associated training requirements), the PRA and the FCA maintain rules on whistleblowing. These are intended to encourage whistleblowers to come forward to report wrongdoing and protect them from retaliation when they do.

For certain types of SM&CR firms, the rules mandate measures that employers must implement, for others they provide guidance on measures to consider.

The key measures are as follows:

• Whistleblowers’ champion – a non-executive director and senior manager with responsibility for whistleblowing compliance within the firm, including oversight of internal policies and procedures and certain reporting requirements.

• Whistleblowing channel – a system which allows whistleblowers to report concerns confidentially and anonymously, and which allows such concerns to be assessed, addressed, and escalated where appropriate.

• Notification regarding external whistleblowing channels – that is, making staff aware of their right to report matters directly to the PRA and FCA and explaining how they can do so.

• Whistleblowing training – this must cover arrangements on whistleblowing within the firm and be provided (and tailored) to employees based in the UK, their managers, and employees responsible for operating the firm’s whistleblowing arrangements.

Prevention of harassment

Harassment and related unacceptable workplace behaviours (such as bullying and discrimination) are not specifically addressed in the SM&CR rules on individual accountability. However, it is clear from regulators’ public statements that the culture of firms (in its broadest sense) is central to their approach. Having a healthy firm culture is seen as critical to consumer protection and well-functioning markets, and firms with healthy cultures are considered to be less prone to misconduct.

Firms that are subject to the SM&CR need to be alive to the possibility that instances of harassment and other non-financial misconduct could amount to breaches of the individual accountability regime or trigger certain requirements under it, such as a requirement to investigate, reassess an individual’s fitness and propriety, or notify certain matters to the regulators. The same could apply to any failure by relevant staff to investigate and deal appropriately with allegations of this kind, such as a senior manager who turns a blind eye to reports of sexual harassment or workplace bullying. While there have been relatively few instances of non-financial misconduct resulting in an enforcement action to date, this is likely to become an emerging trend.

Non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) are generally lawful in Switzerland. However, NDAs are not regulated by statutory law and therefore do not have to follow any particular statutory form or rule. Nevertheless, most NDAs often contain a similar basic structure.

The core clauses of an NDA concern:

• manufacturing and business secrets or the scope of further confidentiality;
• the purpose of use;
• the return and destruction of devices containing confidential information; and
• post-contractual confidentiality obligations.

As a general rule, it is recommended to use the written form.

To ensure possible enforcement of an NDA in the employment context, the requirements of a post-contractual non-compete obligation (see below) must be met.

NDAs (also known as confidentiality agreements) are potentially lawful and enforceable in the UK. It is common to include NDAs in employment contracts (to protect the confidential information of the employer during and after employment) and in settlement agreements (to reiterate existing confidentiality obligations and to keep the circumstances of the settlement confidential).

NDAs do not need to follow a particular form, but they must be reasonable in scope. Following #MeToo, there has been considerable government, parliamentary, and regulatory scrutiny of the use of NDAs and their reasonableness in different circumstances.

The following limitations on NDAs should be noted:

• By law, any NDA purporting to prevent an individual from making a “protected disclosure” as defined in the Employment Rights Act 1996 (ie, blowing the whistle about a matter) is void.

• The regulatory body for solicitors in England and Wales, the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), has issued a detailed warning notice and guidance to practitioners setting out – in its view – inappropriate or improper uses of NDAs. Failure to comply with the SRA’s warning notice may lead to disciplinary action. The SRA lists the following as examples of improper use of NDAs:

• • using an NDA as a means of preventing, or seeking to impede or deter, a person from:
    • cooperating with a criminal investigation or prosecution;
    • reporting an offence to a law enforcement agency;
    • reporting misconduct, or a serious breach of the SRA’s regulatory requirements, to the SRA, or making an equivalent report to any other body responsible for supervising or regulating the matters in question; and
    • making a protected disclosure;
    • using an NDA to influence the substance of such a report, disclosure or cooperation;
    • using an NDA to prevent any disclosure required by law;
    • using an NDA to prevent proper disclosure about the agreement or circumstances surrounding the agreement to professional advisers, such as legal or tax advisors, or medical professionals and counsellors, who are bound by a duty of confidentiality;
    • including or proposing clauses known to be unenforceable; and
    • using warranties, indemnities and clawback clauses in a way that is designed to, or has the effect of, improperly preventing or inhibiting permitted reporting or disclosures being made (for example, asking a person to warrant that they are not aware of any reason why they would make a permitted disclosure, in circumstances where a breach of warranty would activate a clawback clause).
       
• The Law Society of England and Wales, a professional association representing solicitors in England and Wales, has issued similar guidance (including a practice note) on the use of NDAs in the context of the termination of employment relationships.
• Other non-regulatory guidance on the use of NDAs has also been issued, including by the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service and by the UK Equality and Human Rights Commission.

Care should be taken accordingly to ensure that the wording of any NDA complies with prevailing guidance, especially from the SRA.