Slandered? Libeled?

[jerzeegirl]

What is the name of your state? Louisiana

I filed an ADEA complaint with the EEOC three months after having been laid off, when I found out my job had not been eliminated as stated in my written layoff notice; instead, I was replaced by a younger employee in the same job with a different title in my former department. I had no performance-related issues, but was told my job was eliminated when I later found out it wasn't. After the employer received notice of my complaint, they accused me of destroying a hard drive, stealing files, deleting the entire file base, all of which was untrue. They also lied and said they offered me another job when they had not. They have offered no concrete documentation of any of this, and had not previously contacted me about this. My former supervisor also states that he has no knowledge of any of this, and that it was fabricated by the HR department (he has since left that employer, as well). My file was changed from eligible for rehire to ineligible for rehire, and my name and reputation have been trashed. In the absence of any documented proof of these charges, does this rise to the level of slander and/or libel?

 

[BelizeBreeze]

Nope. Next question?

 

[jerzeegirl]

OK, this time let's make it door # 3 - s'plain to me so I don't pout too much over hearing something I don't want to hear. An education is a terrible thing to waste!

 

[jerzeegirl]

Hey Belize, don't nod out on me, one word answers appear to be SO unlike you! Well, there is the fact that the meter isn't running, so I'm grateful for what I can get. So, why "nope?"

 

[BelizeBreeze]

For several reasons:

1. It is not required by law that the company hire you back.
2. It is also not required for the company tell you the truth.
3. "Your" personnel file is the private property of the company, you have no ownership interest.
4. Even if the accusations and claims in the personnel file did rise to the level of libel, there is no publication, therefore no damage.

Next question?

 

[jerzeegirl]

Is "publication" equal to telling a third party?

You're so checked out on this, I wish you practiced in my state...

 

[BelizeBreeze]

Is "publication" equal to telling a third party?

No, that would be slander. And then it depends on the circumstances. Simply having entries in your personnel file then informing your previous supervisor that you are not qualified for re-hire based on the facts as they are presented in your file does not rise to the level of slander.

You're so checked out on this, I wish you practiced in my state.../QUOTE]
I don't 'practice' anywhere. Only one person on this forum knows my background and the fact that the law bores me.

 

[jerzeegirl]

Too bad, sounds like you would have been great at it...Anyway, thanks for your opinion.

 

[badapple40]

For several reasons:

1. It is not required by law that the company hire you back.
2. It is also not required for the company tell you the truth.
3. "Your" personnel file is the private property of the company, you have no ownership interest.
4. Even if the accusations and claims in the personnel file did rise to the level of libel, there is no publication, therefore no damage.

Next question?

This looks like qualified privilege may apply. I do think she's got an age discrimination case, but she's in the EEOC process now so... she knows that already.

 

[meganproser]

>>After the employer received notice of my complaint, they accused me of destroying a hard drive, stealing files, deleting the entire file base, all of which was untrue. They also lied and said they offered me another job when they had not.

What do you mean they accused you? You no longer worked for them right? Did they contact you? How do you know they made these accusations? It sounds like you are hearing this through the grapevine and you may be misinformed.

>>My former supervisor also states that he has no knowledge of any of this, and that it was fabricated by the HR department (he has since left that employer, as well).

Employer communications are normally privileged, but if the privilege is abused, it cannot be used as a defense to libel. It doesn’t sound like you have any real evidence that your former employer has changed anything in your file, but I wouldn't be surprised if your story is true.

I once saw the in-house counsel of a company pull a similar stunt. Counsel was fired as soon as the situation came to the attention of the CEO. Have you tried contacting the employer directly to ask wtf they are doing?

 

[BelizeBreeze]

This looks like qualified privilege may apply. I do think she's got an age discrimination case, but she's in the EEOC process now so... she knows that already.

That's why I didn't address that part of her post. Besides, there isn't evidence yet of these 'claims' being made during the course of the pending litigation. If that is the case, well, I think we all know that one.