Obligations to follow a former boss’ orders?

[JDD25]

I’ll use “John Doe” to avoid using real names. But please read this:

The Story: One night while John Doe is home (in New York State), he receives an email that he has just been fired from his job (no advance notice given). The following day, John Doe texts a few former co-workers to say good-bye. They all write back, and some attach pictures taken inside the work facility (which is not a public space). Then, the boss finds out about this, and emails John Doe, ordering him to have no further discussions with his former co-workers, and also delete all the pictures which these former co-workers sent him (the boss’ claim is that pictures taken in this job facility are property of the company). The boss even says the email is a “written warning,” but does not clarify what the warning is of.
Note: These photos just show people with walls in the background - they’re NOT pictures of secret documents, or anything like that.

The Question: Does John Doe have any obligation to follow his former boss‘ orders?

 

[adjusterjack]

John Doe has done nothing illegal or wrong so he's free to tell his former boss to eff off.

On the other hand, his former boss can punish the remaining employees for being in contact with a fired employee. Sucks. But it's "at will" employment for them.

 

[cbg]

John Doe may also regret ignoring the former boss's orders when it comes time for references.

 

[stealth2]

I’ll use “John Doe” to avoid using real names. But please read this:

The Story: One night while John Doe is home (in New York State), he receives an email that he has just been fired from his job (no advance notice given). The following day, John Doe texts a few former co-workers to say good-bye. They all write back, and some attach pictures taken inside the work facility (which is not a public space). Then, the boss finds out about this, and emails John Doe, ordering him to have no further discussions with his former co-workers, and also delete all the pictures which these former co-workers sent him (the boss’ claim is that pictures taken in this job facility are property of the company). The boss even says the email is a “written warning,” but does not clarify what the warning is of.
Note: These photos just show people with walls in the background - they’re NOT pictures of secret documents, or anything like that.

The Question: Does John Doe have any obligation to follow his former boss‘ orders?

Did John Doe work for the US government? Just curious, what with current shenanigans...

 

[AlmostThere]

Did John Doe sign a non-disclosure agreement or did the job require security clearance?

 

[Mark_A]

I once worked for a technology company that had a large data center, which I never visited because it was tightly secured and only people who needed physical access to the computers were allowed inside. It was underground, had an unmarked entrance, and I am not even sure exactly where it was even though it was only a half mile from where I worked in software development. An employee who worked in the data center sent out a cell phone pic of himself in the data center that showed stuff in the background, but nothing recognizable. However, the company had a strict security policy that no photographs of anything inside the data center were allowed to taken, and obviously not sent to anyone, regardless of how little they showed. He was terminated immediately, even though he was an otherwise very good employee. This data center ran a reservation system that processed about 20% of the world's airline reservations, plus some airline flight operations systems for a major airline.

 

[zddoodah]

Does John Doe have any obligation to follow his former boss‘ orders?

Nothing in your post suggests he does, but it's possible that additional facts that you didn't include in your post might change that answer.

 

[JDD25]

1. This was NOT a US government job.

2. John Doe did NOT sign a non-disclosure agreement.

3. Although the space of this facility was not open for the public to physically step into, pictures were taken by the staff (inside the facility) all the time. For example, every so often, the boss would take photos (in the facility) and post them to the business' Instagram. And workers would take pictures (in the facility) almost daily. Occasionally, the staff would send their photos to the boss, and sometime the boss would post the staff's picture to the business' Instagram.

 

[zddoodah]

[additional facts]

None of these additional facts change my prior response.

 

[Zigner]

If John Doe were to reply with "ok," and do nothing else, how would the former boss even know?

 

[quincy]

John Doe’s former boss cannot (legally) prohibit Doe from speaking to former coworkers, at least based on the information provided so far.

If the facility is a “secured” facility, I am surprised that phones/cameras are even allowed.

 

[JDD25]

If John Doe were to reply with "ok," and do nothing else, how would the former boss even know?

I would assume: one worker mentioned to the boss that John Doe texted him or her. The boss got upset about it (why, I still don't know). Then the boss asked all employees if John Doe texted them. And when these workers acknowledged that John Doe did in fact text them, the boss insisted on seeing the text conversations.

 

[JDD25]

John Doe’s former boss cannot (legally) prohibit Doe from speaking to former coworkers, at least based on the information provided so far.

When you say "at least based on the information provided so far," please feel free to ask any questions for further info that might change your answer... I honestly don't understand the boss' concern. Therefore, I'm here to try to figure out if anyone more familiar with the law can make any sense out of the boss' claim. Thanks.

 

[JDD25]

If the facility is a “secured” facility, I am surprised that phones/cameras are even allowed.

I really don't think the space can qualify as a "secured facility" in any sense that you have in mind.

Please let me explain: The front entrance actually is a "public space" that anyone can enter (like an average store). Then, past the front entrance, there is a fence (I'm guessing the fence is about 4 1/2 feet tall). On the other side of the fence is a space that the general public can not physically step on (it's only for staff). But that space is only partially out of sight from the general public.

Again, I really do not understand the boss' concern. Therefore, I'm here to see if people better familiar with the law can understand the boss' claim.

 

[quincy]

When you say "at least based on the information provided so far," please feel free to ask any questions for further info that might change your answer... I honestly don't understand the boss' concern. Therefore, I'm here to try to figure out if anyone more familiar with the law can make any sense out of the boss' claim. Thanks.

If you have nothing more that you can think of to add then my previous statement stands. Your former boss cannot legally prevent you from talking to people (absent a court no-contact order or restraining order).

Prior restraint of speech is frowned upon in this country … or at least it used to be (no telling what presidential whim might change that tomorrow).