It is wrong in principle for a bank to be involved with the family affairs of their customers , if an account should be closed because of so called financial abuse then it should require a clear court order. But the banks are acting as quasi courts , jumping the gun on any decision which should only be made in a court hearing.
It is wrong in principle for a bank to be involved with the family affairs of their customers , if an account should be closed because of so called financial abuse then it should require a clear court order. But the banks are acting as quasi courts , jumping the gun on any decision which should only be made in a court hearing.
The banks need to see their boundaries and that means their responsibility stops at the monetary needs of customers.
Feminist influence in banks is strong with a majority of staff now women, and consider the now 50 years of feminists indoctrination within the education systems, it is fair to say that ALL women in banks today have been brainwashed to some degree by feminist's anti man teaching.
This is how these things continue, the women bankers think anything is justified if a woman is treated unfairly , by a man.
The issue of corporations involving themselves in the family affairs of customers or their staff members was raised some years ago in WA , a mining state . Mining companies like Rio Tinto took it upon themselves to work closely with the state govt. when staff members were involved in domestic
violence matters ,
This is improper for a company, whose responsibility to staff ends when they stop work and leave the work premises.
The CEO of Rio Tinto was at the time a woman { no surprise} , but this is the thin end of the wedge and clear boundaries are needed between what a company can or can't do when the personal issues of customers or staff are involved.
It is wrong in principle for a bank to be involved with the family affairs of their customers , if an account should be closed because of so called financial abuse then it should require a clear court order. But the banks are acting as quasi courts , jumping the gun on any decision which should only be made in a court hearing.
The banks need to see their boundaries and that means their responsibility stops at the monetary needs of customers.
Feminist influence in banks is strong with a majority of staff now women, and consider the now 50 years of feminists indoctrination within the education systems, it is fair to say that ALL women in banks today have been brainwashed to some degree by feminist's anti man teaching.
This is how these things continue, the women bankers think anything is justified if a woman is treated unfairly , by a man.
The issue of corporations involving themselves in the family affairs of customers or their staff members was raised some years ago in WA , a mining state . Mining companies like Rio Tinto took it upon themselves to work closely with the state govt. when staff members were involved in domestic
violence matters ,
This is improper for a company, whose responsibility to staff ends when they stop work and leave the work premises.
The CEO of Rio Tinto was at the time a woman { no surprise} , but this is the thin end of the wedge and clear boundaries are needed between what a company can or can't do when the personal issues of customers or staff are involved.