I came across the phrase absent fraud in this article.

I searched for its meaning on Google but didn't find anything.

What does absent fraud mean?

I can’t help but empathize with an employee being fired and will ask multiple questions before any termination. Was there one bad act or a series? Did they have feedback and a chance to change? Was it performance or personality? Absent fraud or transgression, is there a different job in the organization the employee could succeed at? How do we tell them and what, if any, severance is offered? What help can we offer in finding another job more suited to their skills? How can we preserve their dignity?

marked as duplicate by James Waldby - jwpat7, user66974, tchrist, anongoodnurse, choster May 12 '14 at 5:07

This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.

  • You should highlight the paragraph in the article, don't just add a link. – user66974 Apr 23 '14 at 8:42
  • 'Absent fraud' is a legal term. The question may be better asked on a relevant Q&A site, or SO. – Kris Apr 23 '14 at 8:46
  • In American legal documents (and now sometimes in general American English), absent is often used as a preposition meaning in the absence of. See this question. – Peter Shor Apr 23 '14 at 9:27
  • @Kris - You've misunderstood the expression in the context of this question. – Erik Kowal Oct 14 '14 at 1:44
  • c.f. a fraudulent card-absent transaction – rleir May 16 '17 at 7:51

Absent is not just a adjective modifying fraud in this case.

If you look at the context, we see this sentence:

Absent fraud or transgression, is there a different job in the organization the employee could succeed at?

Which can loosely be read as:

When there is no fraud or transgression, can we find the employee another job in the organisation?

Absent (a or b) means in the absence of a or b.

What the writer is saying, is that looking for another position is only on option when there is no fraud or transgression.

  • didn't even come closer to think this. I thought it was some fraud that happened because you were absent, and if present could have thwarted. Or some fraud you commit absent-mindedly. What would that be called I wonder. – Anubhav Apr 24 '14 at 11:43
  • 1
    @AnubhavSaini: fraud because you are absent would deal with absence, so that might be absence fraud. And the second one would be absent-minded fraud :) – oerkelens Apr 24 '14 at 11:45

It simply defines 'no intent' to defraud. For example, Secretary of the Commonwealth v. City Clerk of Lowell,[9] holding that, absent fraud, people may select and change their names freely. It is a term often seen in the 'Terms and procedures' of contracts

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.