Rachel Reeves lied on her CV was not an “Economist”

[Disappointedagain22]

AIBU - it’s OK to lie to get ahead

AINBU - it’s bad RReeves very Publicly lied about her prior work. We are right to feel annoyed by this lie.

saw this headline and am feeling really disappointed. Think Rachel Reeves needs to tell public exactly her job title.
She changed job title from Economist, to “Retail Banking”
An Economist at a Bank, is a clear and specific job, it’s a economic research position. A good experience for her current position.

”Retail Banking” - is not a job title … she could have been doing anything in a branch from Bank Teller, to Branch manager, or working in back office operations putting bank notes in the plastic bags or in HR.

NatWest wasn’t bought by RBS until 2000 years after Basel I came in. Additionally, the ring fencing of retail banking only took place in 2019.

There was no regulatory requirement to ring-fence core retail banking prior to that date. In fact, the “universal” banks held it out as a benefit that the deep liquidity they had in the retail business was a buffer for the IB and the profitability of the IB was a buffer for the retail. (We can take a view on how well that worked).

The retail bank was just one division of the group not a stand alone entity as they are now.

What does that mean? Nothing nice, I assume?

I have seen some iffy CVs in my career.

We let one senior guy go after we discovered he had made a misrepresentation on his CV after he had joined!

I judge people harshly who do that.

Come now, don’t be like that.

That settles it! We should fire her.

Why should she be fired?

And the point of this blurb is?

There is no point.

Well, what does it mean? I guess you aren't going to say.

You guess correctly!

Think of it as a Rorschach test for you…

What? You don’t think she lied about her CV?

I am still trying to ascertain the facts.

Do you think she misrepresented the truth?

Edited as shouldn't bite.

Not interested in these minutiae of her CV.
She’s no less qualified than many before her and had these headlines appeared before the elections I wouldn’t have voted differently.

It was to tell you that you are in a hole and you should stop digging. You clearly don’t know what you are talking about. I have decades of experience and worked on a lot of the regulatory remediation during the 2008 crisis with Trade Associations, the regulators and HMT.
Feel free to Advance Search me if it makes you feel better.

What was the orignal?

Why did you edit?

“Explained by people who work in this area”. Sounds like the CV of someone misrepresenting their work experience ….

Thanks for trying with the facts. It's good to keep posting truth.

Thus proving you haven't read the explanations. Oh dear.

Yes, @ChazsBrilliantAttitude has certainly shown a brilliant (and patient) attitude on this thread!

Oh, stop it with your faux indignation. The 'unacceptable utterances' as you call them were posted by Intotheoud - but strangely you didn't have a problem with her comments on foreign posters as she is on your side of the argument.

Don’t flatter yourself; I’m not digging up advanced sources to counter your points. I don’t need to.

You may have decades of experience, and so do I. That’s exactly why, as you were previously saying, we should “agree to disagree.”

Quoting history doesn’t strengthen your argument. Plenty of people in this thread have been copy-pasting things they don’t fully understand.

My point, as I’ve repeatedly emphasised, is that retail banks from 2006-2009 didn’t conduct proper capital modeling or liquidity risk assessments.

I have neither the time nor the interest to keep repeating this just because you’re looking for a d* waving competition on an anonymous forum... really?

Adieu. Go on and keep copy-pasting regulations if that impresses your lemmings

This isn’t an airport so departures don’t need to be announced. I’d like to say it’s been a pleasure…

I remember reading several articles scrutinising the work history/experience for Sunak and Kwarteng in detail.

congratulations

Ah - I see the Times has picked up the story now;

https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/pressure-grows-on-rachel-reeves-to-explain-fake-claims-on-cv-c98l8lf7d