Ex-Employer Contacts local PD's

[CdwJava]

One of the thing that makes cops so good at their jobs is that they pay attention to the little details that other people would miss. Once a person gets into a cops memory, the next encounter whether it be something minor like a speeding/parking ticket could be less advantageous to the person in the cops memory vs. a complete stranger.

Unless yours is a really small town, this letter will be handled by a records clerk somewhere with little or no dissemination among the line staff. And few officers are going to care unless they come across you in some other criminal act in which case their local system might come up with a local warning indicating you have been advised not to go to the store. My agency has a trespass notice system like that.

Additionally, if a company sends a letter to a local PD to warn them about me vs. just sending it to me must imply that I'm "extra bad." This won't help me later down the road especially if I want to apply for a job at the police department.

You can think it implies anything, but unless the letter specifically says something untrue I don't see a case. And since the letter has not been given to the general public, and considering businesses and individuals are certainly allowed to give a heads up to the police about people they feel might be a problem, there is nothing improper here from what you have so far written.

Additionally, the letter was forwarded to the various intercompany HR departments. I could suffer some negative publicity within the company itself which harms my ability for a positive job reference when applying for a new position at that company or a new company.

Chances are it can never be revealed to another employer ... depending on the laws in your state. In CA they cannot regularly ask for such things.

Can you articulate the damages? How much has this letter cost you in lost jobs or opportunities? Have you been harassed by the police as a result?

Sorry, but this just is not a lawsuit waiting to happen. Look for another job and move on.

- Carl

 

[gkisystems]

You can think it implies anything, but unless the letter specifically says something untrue I don't see a case.

Is libel only applicable to false explicit statements or can it apply to implied statements as well?

Can you articulate the damages? How much has this letter cost you in lost jobs or opportunities?

Assuming I must abide by the letter, it has cost me:

1. The ability to ever work for the company again (applying for positions that are open) and therefore lose my accrued benefits like unvested retirement balances and vacation time.

2. The ability to ever work for the companies customers/vendors that would require communication with the company's employees and/or access to the property.

3. Priceless friendships of the people that still work for the company.

4. A potentially damaged reputation in the community (due to police officers having access to the information).

5. A potentially damaged reputation in the business world.

 

[TinkerBelleLuvr]

This might not have anything to do with you personally, but may be a reaction by the company to some of the shootings that have taken place in after lay-offs.

I would suspect strongly that this type of letter was sent by the company about all the laid-off employees to all the police departments.

Remember that there were two officers that were killed after a domestic violence call from a fellow who was recently laid-off.

 

[CdwJava]

Is libel only applicable to false explicit statements or can it apply to implied statements as well?

I don't see where it implies anything other than advising the police you are not welcome there. Unless the letter contains language that would make a person believe that you are guilty of some criminal act, I don't see where a suit is even remotely possible. However, if you feel you have a payday opportunity, consult an attorney. if he tells you he wants to be paid up front, it's a dog of a case.

But, you are certainly free to pay an attorney a lot of money to sue your former employer for damages that have not occurred.

Assuming I must abide by the letter, it has cost me:

1. The ability to ever work for the company again (applying for positions that are open) and therefore lose my accrued benefits like unvested retirement balances and vacation time.

Getting let go can do that. You do not generally have a right to go back to work for an employer that has let you go. But, laws in some states vary.

2. The ability to ever work for the companies customers/vendors that would require communication with the company's employees and/or access to the property.

And the odds of your being put into that position are ... 100:1, maybe?

3. Priceless friendships of the people that still work for the company.

Those friendships are not lost. You can go to their homes, call them at home or on their cell phones, just don't call them at their place of work.

4. A potentially damaged reputation in the community (due to police officers having access to the information).

That's a non starter as the police have access to all sorts of information and accusations.

5. A potentially damaged reputation in the business world.

Actual damages will have to be articulated, not what damages might be given a specific set of "what if" scenarios.

Since it is obvious you think this is the golden goose, and you wish to seek legal action, consult an attorney and then come back and let us know what he or she says.

But, you have to know that this sort of letter is NOT uncommon. I strongly suspect that if people could sue over them these letters would end.

- Carl

 

[KJHOOK13]

Seniors are right..

I think Tinkerbelleluvr is correct - I am betting this is normal lay-off/termination protocol for this company and that you were not singled out with letters to the PD, etc. And Cdwjava is correct in pointing out that you have suffered no definitive monetary damages. Unless the medical condition for which you requested FMLA/Short Term Disability is covered under the ADA (Amercans with Disabilities Act) and you feel you can present evidence to support a prima facie case of discrimination for the EEOC, I don't think you have any legal recourse for the termination.

 

[gkisystems]

The following question pertains to how to deal with the lawyer I hired...

The ex-employer offered a severance package of:

A. 6 weeks of pay
B. 1 year of health insurance (I still pay my portion) in lieu of COBRA
C. Job Placement Services

It's a standard package that everybody gets, based on full years of service. However, in exchange for this, the company forces me to release them from all claims. I have two claims against them:

A. FMLA Violation (terminated while protected by FMLA)
B. SOX Section 806 Violation (Whistleblower protection handled by OSHA)

I paid $240 for an initial consultation and then hired a lawyer to represent me on a contingency basis (1/3 of everything above the value of package offered + costs like copying/travel) for:

"all purposes in connection with negotiating a severance package with Client's employer"

The lawyer drafted three letters:

A. FMLA Complaint
B. OSHA Complaint
C. Demand letter to company

The lawyer sent all three items to the company in attempt to negotiate a better severance package. The company refused to respond by the deadline my lawyer provided them. Now, according to the lawyer, the next step is to actually file suit regarding my two claims.

For this, the lawyer wants $5,000 (offset by 1/3 contingency), $300 for filing/service process fees, and $800 for deposition transcript fees.

I believe that filing suit is actually part of the negotiation process, as the employer may not take our negotiations seriously if suit isn't filed. After suit is filed, they would THEN negotiate with us in exchange for dropping suit. I think the attorney is treating the filing of suit as a seperate matter that requires more payment from me.

Based on our fee agreement, it does have a section saying the scope is limited. In that section it says the fee does not include the cost to defend me for counterclaim, setoff, crossclaim, third-party claim, or other claim/claims, legal or equitable, which may be brought against me. However, it does not limit the scope by saying suit will not be filed by us against the employer.

What do you think? Based on my fee agreement with my lawyer, do I need to pay out $5k + the above mentioned costs or should it be included as part of my 1/3 contingency fee agreement?