O’Brien regularly attends analyst meetings. During the course of many of these meetings, he is observed consuming several highballs. On afternoons following the meetings he is easily angered and at times belligerent. However, his investment prowess does not seem to diminish. O’Brien’s drinking at analyst meetings and subsequent conduct is: A) in violation of Standard I(D): Misconduct because it reflects adversely on his professional competence. B) in violation of Standard I(B): Independence and Objectivity. C) illegal because, as a money manager, O’Brien is held to a higher standard than the general public. D) in violation of Standard IV(A): Loyalty to Employer, because his drinking deprives the company of quality work. T/G
I’m between A and D. It says his work didn’t seem to diminish so i’ll go A.
A.
A I say.
You guys are good: Your answer: A was correct! O’Brien’s conduct is not illegal, but it does violate the professional-misconduct Standard, which states, “Members shall not … commit any act that reflects adversely on their honesty, trustworthiness, or professional competence.” The fact that O’Brien’s investment work has not suffered is irrelevant, because the lunchtime drinking “reflects adversely” on O’Brien and Paradigm Portfolios. The conduct does not violate Standard I(B) or Standard IV(A), though it could violate the latter if the quality of O’Brien’s work begins to tail off. T/G