lgEEwu£X (82Ϊ½)
γΊO1-V
oπ KΑͺ―Ά°({Ζ) (Χ) Ϊ½x Ϊ[ρ
69(1): 2018/05/27(ϊ)12:27 ID:wpmRyjNM0(1/3) AAS
OΨέΈ:www.worklawyers.com
And, if the information was given without being requested by the potential employer,
it is strong evidence that the statement is false or made with the intent to prevent the employee from being hired. If that is the case,
the former employer may have broken the law by volunteering the information.
Malicious Statements
If a statement is made by a former employer with malice, the common-interest privilege protecting the employerfs reference does not arise.
The California Supreme Court has defined malice in this context as a state of mind arising from hatred or ill will, which evidences a willingness to injure another person.
70: 2018/05/27(ϊ)12:28 ID:wpmRyjNM0(2/3) AAS
Unsolicited Communications
Imagine the following situation: John used to be employed by ABC Inc.
His supervisor, Bob, disliked John and treated him poorly.
John eventually left ABC Inc. to find another job. After he left, Bob called all of the local businesses to tell them about how terrible an employee John was.
Does Bob still have the common-interest privilege protecting a former employerfs reference?
No. The privilege only kicks in if the former employer is requested by the prospective employer to give the information.
An employer that takes their own initiative to communicate with a prospective employer,
without having first been requested by the prospective employer to do so, does not receive the protections provided by the privilege.
Courts have also noted that the common-interest privilege may be lost
if the former employer excessively communicates or includes statements that are irrelevant to the matters being discussed.
Θ3
71: 2018/05/27(ϊ)12:29 ID:wpmRyjNM0(3/3) AAS
False Statements
Knowingly false statements are generally not protected by the common-interest privilege. In fact,
a former employer who misrepresents facts and prevents (or attempts to prevent) the former employee from obtaining employment can be found """guilty of a crime!"""
The employer must have credible evidence for the assertions it makes about former employees.
Courts have held that an employer cannot report mere rumors or workplace gossip in a reference to prospective employers.
So, even if a former employer believes something is true, they cannot report it to a prospective employer
unless they have reasonable grounds for believing in the truth of the statements they make.
Those reasonable grounds must be evidence-based, rather than mere speculation.
γΊO1-VΦΚΒυέxπ
½Ϊξρ ΤΪ½o ζΪ½o πΜ’Η½Ϊ AA»ΡΘ²Ω
Κ±Μθ Κ±TOP 0.605s*