When Kevin Dillon started working for JPMorgan in March 2008 as a "client processing specialist," everybody liked him just fine. Better than fine, in fact. He was praised by his superiors, he received glowing reviews and in just a few months time, he was slated to receive a bonus and a promotion. This was all, however, before he filed a report citing "highly questionable accounting and management practices" at Highland Capital Management LP and recommending that JPM cease "facilitating Highland's improper practices." In doing so, Dillon was forcing his bosses to make a decision re: how to deal with the findings. They could 1) follow his suggestion and cut the hedge fund loose or 2) acknowledge the findings and decide to do nothing about them. In this case, Dill's bosses decided to go with the second option, telling him they were "aware of Highland's improper practices [but] that nothing would be done to remedy the issue."
As I'm sure many of you know, however, when you've got a situation like a Kevin Dillon situation, it does not end there. Because if there's one thing I've found in my multiple decades long career on Wall Street is that a guy like Dillon is gonna be trouble. He won't just accept your decision to look the other way, which is admittedly annoying but something you can deal with if you've got the skills or someone coaching you from the sidelines (me).
First off, you can't fire a Dillon-type straight-away, because it'll be too obvious. This is something that requires a more subtle touch. You will want to, of course, make work life unpalatable for the employee in question, so taking away his bonus, promoting incompetents over him and offering negative but purposely vague reviews is a given. That'll go a long way in psyching out said problem employee. But if you really want to break him...if you really want to leave your mark...if you really want to, in the event this thing ends up a lawsuit, make a name for yourself, give the readers something to aspire to and have people say "that guy may be a whack-job and potentially a racist but he knew how to deal with people," you'll try something like this.
In addition to the retaliatory action, Dillon cites two examples of "alarming behavior" by his supervisor. In one instance in 2008, the supervisor told Dillon he needed to clean "the mess" that was created by an African-American employee "who the supervisor admitted was hired primarily to combat adverse fallout from previous racial and sexual discrimination suits brought against the defendant because of the supervisor's acts," according to the lawsuit.*
In another instance, the lawsuit details how his unnamed supervisor allegedly discussed with Dillon the "wide array of guns he possessed and described to (Dillon) the violent acts he would commit if anybody crossed him or his family," according complaint.
This is just a blueprint of course, feel free to put your own spin on it in whatever way feels natural. For those of you unimaginative fucks who need me to do everything for you, one idea, if you're going to test out the gun scenario on a colleague today, is to do it wearing a purple jumpsuit and start off with something along the lines of "Let me tell you something, pendejo. You see this piece? You pull any of your crazy shit with us, I'll take and I'll stick it up your ass and pull the fucking trigger till it goes 'click'." But I encourage you to test out all kinds of things and let us all know how it goes.
*Can the name of this guy who not only tried to (hilariously) intimidate someone by showing them his gun collection but b) also apparently got pawsy with the ladies PLEASE, for the love of god, have his name released? Otherwise we're just going to be forced to come up with the contents of him sexual discrimination cases on our own.