The banks statement is vague CYA nonsense. They did not anticipate their actions would get as much attention as it has.
Not all that long ago the actions of this woman would have earned Praise and, an Employee of the Month/Year Award.
If I were her I would contact several attorneys to get their opinions about possible unlawful termination.
As some here have said, no good deed goes unpunished. While a well known saying, it should not be so.
I agree that she did a good, kind-hearted deed for a bank customer in need. I also agree that the bank’s termination rationale sounds weak and is self-serving.
IMO, she was _too_ kind-hearted. She left work to give a stranger (who was a customer of the bank) $20. It’s not hard to see that such a kind (naive?), open-hearted person could be manipulated by a saavy player.
It’s $20 today (and out of her own purse, presumably). But what if were $50? $200? A thousand? “I’ll pay it right back when they unfreeze my account.”
It’s too close-sounding to the Nigerian Prince scam, albeit writ small. This man sold his case to someone willing to give him money over a couple of phone calls. I can understand why the bank can’t have someone like that as a teller. I wish her well, though.
“If I were her I would contact several attorneys to get their opinions about possible unlawful termination.”
Oregon is “at will”; ain’t gonna happen unless she can prove some sort of related discrimination.