Old Boss vs New Boss

[Taxing Matters]

You guys are simply not getting what I'm saying. I understand what you are saying, but I seem to be talking past you. So never mind. I give up.

I guess I do not get what you are saying. So perhaps this will help pin it down. For what purpose are you saying it is significant that the former employer support his opinion? A defamation claim? Dealing with the new employer? Or something else?

 

[quincy]

Umm ... isn’t it obvious from cbg’s second “clarifying” post? She said there should be a factual basis for the expressed opinion to avoid legal problems. I agree.

 

[cbg]

An employer who is able to provide support for his opinion will be in a stronger position, should his employee at some point file a defamation claim, than an employer who is not.

That is all I am saying. I am not making any commentary on the specific situation outlined by the OP of this thread.

 

[quincy]

The support for the opinion should be shared at the same time as the opinion to avoid a claim of defamation (or tortious interference). Harm to a reputation can occur otherwise.

 

[cbg]

I do not disagree with that. Boy, you really need to spell out the obvious around here, don't you?

 

[quincy]

I do not disagree with that. Boy, you really need to spell out the obvious around here, don't you?

It apparently has not been all that obvious to some.

 

[Taxing Matters]

An employer who is able to provide support for his opinion will be in a stronger position, should his employee at some point file a defamation claim, than an employer who is not.

That is all I am saying. I am not making any commentary on the specific situation outlined by the OP of this thread.

Ok, I understand that. Neither you nor quincy are getting the distinction I'm making in the use of the word opinion, and at this point I don't think there is anything else I can say that will clarify it. In an actual defamation case it would matter, but it's not significant to press the point here. We all agree, I think, that if the facts that are stated or implied are false the defendant has a potential problem, so I'll leave it at that.

 

[quincy]

Whether a comment is pure opinion, mixed opinion, or fact is just one of many factors that will be analyzed in a defamation suit, albeit an important one.

But I agree with you that we all seem to agree that it will be the publication of false facts that are problematic, if these false facts work to injure an individual’s (or entity’s) reputation. So it is good to leave this thread with this agreement.

It does not sound as if AverageJoeMama has to concern herself with any of this at this point anyway, though, because her current employer does not seem to be concerned with it. Should that change in the future, AverageJoeMama can discuss her legal options with a Tennessee attorney well-versed in defamation law, keeping in mind the very short statute of limitations for filing suit.

 

[cbg]

I understand that opinion cannot be proven. I understand that because opinion cannot be proven, perhaps "honest" is not the best adjective to apply. I am attempting to make a distinction: sometimes an employer will have one opinion up until the point at which the employee gives notice, at which time suddenly the opinion changes. But I also understand that my distinction is never going to be accepted unless I use the exact words that certain posters approve of. Tax is not the only one I am thinking of. So, since I greatly respect Tax, I will simply drop the whole matter and refrain from commenting on this particular topic in future.

 

[quincy]

I understand that opinion cannot be proven. I understand that because opinion cannot be proven, perhaps "honest" is not the best adjective to apply. I am attempting to make a distinction: sometimes an employer will have one opinion up until the point at which the employee gives notice, at which time suddenly the opinion changes. But I also understand that my distinction is never going to be accepted unless I use the exact words that certain posters approve of. Tax is not the only one I am thinking of. So, since I greatly respect Tax, I will simply drop the whole matter and refrain from commenting on this particular topic in future.

You should not refrain from commenting. “Honest” is not a bad adjective as it implies there is no malice, which can be an important factor in defamation cases.

That said, you have made your other point clear and I am sorry you feel that way.

 

[cbg]

I'm not upset, Q. A bit frustrated, that's all. And for the record, I wasn't talking about you in my last post.

You know me; by the next post on the subject I won't be able to keep my mouth shut.

All friends here. No hard feelings in any direction, at least not on my part.

 

[quincy]

I'm not upset, Q. A bit frustrated, that's all. And for the record, I wasn't talking about you in my last post.

You know me; by the next post on the subject I won't be able to keep my mouth shut.

All friends here. No hard feelings in any direction, at least not on my part.

Good.

My aging mind doesn’t let me remember most of these threads once they are over and done with, so I couldn’t have hard feelings over what was said in them even if I were otherwise so inclined. Haha.