Soden case was betrayal of trust

David Clerkin argues that Bank of Ireland broke its duty of confidentiality.

The bank's €3 million settlement with Michael Soden, who resigned as chief executive last May after it was leaked to the media that he had viewed adult material on his work computer, will undoubtedly be seen in some quarters as too generous for a man whose extraordinary lapse brought about his downfall.

But the payment will go some way towards recognising the bank's failure to keep its own house in order. Mr Soden's uninspired reign in Baggot Street had done much to undermine the impressive track record he built up in major international banks before being chosen by the bank's board in 2001 as the man to guide it into the future.

While his exit was largely welcomed by the investment community, whose eyebrows had been raised by ill-advised kite-flying that included proposals for a merger with AIB and a planned takeover of British bank Abbey, few could have justified the way his reputation was shattered.

Let's recap. Mr Soden resigned honourably for failing to meet the standards he had set out for others.

Unlike senior executives in a number of competing banks, he did not break the law.

But which was worse? A few minutes glancing at a website containing adult material that was tamer than any of the reality TV shows currently attracting millions of viewers? Or a malicious leak from an organisation whose number one responsibility to customers and staff is to maintain absolute confidentiality?

Put simply, banks know more about each customer, through their current account transactions, credit card bills and salary details, than even their closest friends or family members. That requires each customer to trust their bank and its staff. A lot. Banks make lots of noise about the seriousness with which they treat the issue of confidentiality most expect staff to sign a declaration that they will keep their lips sealed unless a court directs them to do otherwise.

But if Bank of Ireland had dealt with Mr Soden's lapse by the book, no-one outside the bank and very few within it should have heard about it.

Brian Goggin, Mr Soden's replacement in the top job in Baggot Street, has been quick to stress the "sacrosanct" nature of confidentiality and warns staff will be dismissed if they break the rules. But there's been no public comment about the investigation if there was one into the Soden leak. Mr Goggin has said it's "an internal matter."

Or is it? You night lose your temper over your bank charges, but you'd soon get much more upset if someone told your wife about the mystery weekend in Paris that she missed but which was evident from your credit card bill, or your employer about the gambling patterns on your Laser card.

People within banks have access to lots of information, and those who wagged the finger at Mr Soden last year should hope they don't make enemies within their bank.

Who would you rather have working for your bank: Mr Soden, who played by the rules and paid the price with his job? or a mystery individual with access to secrets and a trigger-happy wish to share them?

And what would you think of a bank that can't protect its most important employee but expects to be trusted to look after its customers?

So, one year later, Mr Soden rides off into the sunset richer in his pocket but with his private linen aired in public. He would probably hand the money back in a flash if he could turn back the clock.

Was justice done? At €3 million, the bank got the better deal.