Dragan,

I think the characters are more like this:

The employee, who screwed something up, or it was perceived as such by the accuser, unrelated to the job but in what might be considered company time and with company resources, let's say the employee did something that bothered the accuser.

The accuser, did not like to be screwed upon, thus informing the employer about the employee activities, which were not necessary the weapon used to screw the accuser. This accusation was most likely done ... well dunno it seems in spite and I guess this is the conundrum

The employer, that upon receiving the information fired the employee

I personally think the accuser acted very very wrong.

>Now let's see what dramatis personae do we have here:
>
>the employee, who screwed something up, (seemingly?) unrelated to the job, but had a help from a friend who made the matter related and the employee henceforth unrelated
>
>the friend who plays the diplomatic role (qualifies - suck up, tread down) of liaison officer
>
>the employer, who seems eager to display indignation under any pretext, and to help the bottom line by firing people as often as possible
>
>...um, any positive characters?