This week, Sepp Blatter resigned as president of FIFA, amid an ongoing investigation into improprieties the organization and its executives allegedly committed over a 25-year span. The 164-page indictment charges 14 executives with 47 counts of racketeering, fraud, and money laundering. The executives, many of whom were arrested last week in Switzerland before FIFA’s annual congress, and 25 unnamed co-conspirators, are said to have been involved in accepting more than $150 million in bribes and kickbacks, including a $10 million payoff from South Africa to guarantee its spot as host of the 2010 World Cup.
Blatter was reelected for a fifth term as president just after the arrests were made, and he abruptly resigned this week, a mere four days later. Those close to the investigation surmise that Blatter, who won’t actually step down until the next president is elected some time after December, is attempting to head things off at the pass. But as U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch firmly stated in recent days, “this investigation is ongoing,” so Blatter’s arrest may be inevitable, if not imminent. The New York Daily News reported this week that dozens more at FIFA are expected to face charges in the days ahead. Those at the top of a scandal such as this one are usually the last to go.
This got us thinking. It seems to happen a lot, doesn’t it? People commit crimes, or just do their jobs poorly, then catch a whiff of their impending firing, and decide to step down. The idea, ostensibly, is to leave with your head held high. Save face, go out with integrity, make your own decisions. Leave with the ball, as it were, in your own court rather than allowing your fate be determined by others. It’s generally a power play (albeit one forced out of fear) – but is it a good one?
Human resources professionals stress that it’s a bad idea to leave a job (for any reason) before securing another source of income. For starters, the school of thought is that you might only worry you’re going to get fired (or indicted), and that may not be the reality. Secondly, an abrupt exit will be awkward and will no doubt burn bridges – even if the bridges were going to come down later, anyway. And there’s obviously no severance package available to you if you quit. Sticking it out allows you to “fight the good fight” to the end, if the reason for your eventual firing is unjustified. But fighting may not be what you want or need. Getting fired (we assume) can be traumatic, stigmatic, upending.
A common practice in handling a problem employee situation, particularly in federal government or the military, is to offer that person the opportunity to resign with a clean record before the disciplinary process can even begin. The details of this can be tricky, as some or all of the process may still be documented (so that the “clean record” notion is inherently impossible) and you may also be relinquishing your rights to eventually challenge the disciplinary action. The paperwork, at the very least, will beg questions when seeking future federal employ.
Sometimes a deal is brokered with law enforcement – you agree to step down to avoid criminal charges – the notion being, we guess, that removal from the position means abstinence from the criminal conduct fostered by the position. But, assuming the “bad guys” are bad guys, and assuming not all cases are like FIFA’s, with Blatter (if left unscathed) able to retire with a pretty penny, won’t they continue to be “bad” in their next line of work?
Regardless of Blatter’s level of involvement in the FIFA wrongdoings, one thing’s for certain: he looks like he’s running scared, not rising above, as he appeared to try to do in his resignation speech, the actions of others at the organization. His removal is obviously part of the “profound restructuring” he called for in that speech. At the helm since 1998, he is, at least in part, responsible for the rampant criminal actions of those who worked under him.
