|
This is an open letter to the legal community from whom I am
soliciting help. My goal is to find the most reputable and effective
agency that deals with matters of defamation of character issues,
wrongful termination, and corporate unethical behavior issues.
I believe that an insurance agency and a hiring manager have committed
an act of defamation of character in terminating my contract with
them.
I am a software development professional who was hired as a
J2EE/Websphere support person for a proof-of-concept project. The
project was redundantly, micro-managed so that a supervisory
individual would monitor progress within a 24-hour workday period.
Despite the intense scrutiny of activity the quality of management
activity and decision-making was and is highly debatable.
On Saturday, October 18, 2003, I received a termination notice from my
contract employment agency.
The letter states, "I asked her [the staffing manager] if she could
provide me with any specifics as to why this decision was made. The
only information she was able to provide was the hiring manager
indicated he felt you [b]oversold youself[/b] in the interview
process.
She did indicate Aetna would consider you for future positions just
not at this level."
First, I am not a fraud and the work I was assigned was largely
menial. However menial, the work was obfuscated by multiple competing
political interests in the project so that faulty specifications and
conflicting technical viewpoints belligerently went uncorrected. I am
guilty of nothing more than attempting to avoid the political fray.
While hiring managers are certainly entitled to their own opinions, at
Aetna, some evidence exists that attacking contractor's has become an
ingrown, cultural phenomenon that might be considered a form of sport
by management. The abuse of contract labor may be going unreported
because contract labor have no due process in contending harmful
claims that corporate employees can then ignore or engage in
invisible' malicious behavior with.
Secondly, at no point during my employment was notified that such an
assertion existed. I was offered no corporate opportunity to remedy
the misunderstanding then nor now.
Third, the Aetna/Volt staffing organization seems to feel that
contractors whose reputations and credentials are being impugned
without their knowledge is acceptable corporate behavior.
Furthermore, they seem to believe that Aetna's right to terminate
contracts for any reason at any time include unethical and/or illegal
reasons.
Fourth, the defamation of character within Aetna was a smear
transmitted to my agency who thankfully reported it to me before it
went uncorrected. In other words, Aetna engaged in a whisper campaign.
It is impossible for me to know if Aetna shares these disparaging
remarks with all their vendors in black-balling fashion' or with just
the immediate employer.
Fifth, Aetna's staffing organization refers to some kind of registry
scheme by which they secretly determine what jobs individuals will be
allowed to interview for thereby abridging their right to
self-improvement and Aetna's ability to allow managers to discover
talent on their own criteria. It also interfers with an individual's
pursuit of happiness in bettering their own life. I don't Aetna's
staffing departments have that right based on innuendo.
Sixth, Aetna is a company who is empowered to deliver caring service
to its constituency yet is perfectly comfortable with releasing
contractors just prior to a holiday season when work is difficult to
come by due to the holiday schedules (my contract was due to expire in
January). And, to add insult to injury, they are willing to release
accused contractors without so much as a hearing or fair notice - an
act that amounts to a death penalty for software professionals whose
industry is already in turmoil. As a contractor, I find this
particularly cruel and unusual.
Isn't this illegal corporate behavior and is any reputable firm in the
legal community willing to explore legal remedies for my misfortune.
Law firms who believe they can help me can send me an email at
krasicki@consultant.com.
|
| |
| |
"krasicki" <krasicki@consultant.com> wrote
Isn't this illegal corporate behavior and is any reputable firm in the
legal community willing to explore legal remedies for my misfortune.
No. It was legal for Aetna to fire you. You have no remedy.
All you can do is to get another job.
|
| |
| |
ost states follow the "employment at will" doctrine. Under this
doctrine, employment can be terminated at any time by the
employer, for any reason or for no reason at all. In the absence
of an agreement to the contrary, there is no legal requirement
that an employee be discharged only for cause and no general
requirement that a discharge be "fair" or even undertaken in good
faith. There are several exceptions to this principle.
First, if the employee has a written employment contract, those
express terms are applied to determine the employee's rights. In
the vast majority of cases, there is no contract. Not all states
will treat an employee handbook as a written contract and those
that do may allow the employer to "opt out" of its terms.
Some states recognize a claim based on estoppel. In a typical
estoppel claim, the employer gives the employee an express
assurance that employment is secure. In reliance on this
assurance, the employee forgoes an offer of employment on better
terms from another employer. Following discharge by the first
employer, some employees have successfully asserted that they
were induced to forgo the second employer's offer by the first
employer's assurances and that the first employer should
therefore be liable for damages. As noted, not all states permit
such claims.
Almost always, to negate the presumption of an at-will
employment, the claimed contract must contain an agreement to
employ the employee for a specific number of months or years, or
to refrain from discharging him or her except on specified
conditions. Normally, an offer of "permanent" employment or
employment at an "annual" salary merely creates an employment at
will.
Second, an employee may not be discharged in violation of his or
her rights under specific statutes which prevent discrimination
on the basis of age, disability, race, religion, gender or
national origin.
Note that not all "discrimination" is unlawful. An employer may
fire an employee because the employee drinks root beer instead of
ginger ale, or because the employee is a Cowboys fan, or because
the employee wears colored underwear, or because he or she simply
doesn't like or get along with the employee. As long as the
discharge is not motivated by a discriminatory motive premised on
one of the particular grounds found in one of the applicable
statutes, it will not be unlawful--even though it may be
"discriminatory." Note that as a result of the application of
this principle, it is perfectly permissible to "discriminate"
against incompetent or difficult-to-get-along-with employees, or
to fire a perfectly qualified employee in order to hire someone
the employer likes better, is related to or is sleeping with.
Third, some states have adopted so-called "legal activities"
laws. In these states, an employee may not be discharged on the
sole ground that he engaged, during non-working hours, in an
activity which is itself lawful (such drinking alcohol, belonging
to Planned Parenthood, etc.)
Fourth, a few states recognize other claims for wrongful
discharge, such as a "bad faith" termination designed to deprive
an employee of accrued sales commissions, etc. Because these
principles are not uniform from state to state, an attorney must
be consulted in your jurisdiction.
Finally, certain states view as unlawful the discharge of an
employee who "blows the whistle" on his or her employer's illegal
activities.
Because the law of wrongful discharge varies from state to state,
a person who may have valuable rights affected by such laws
should consult with an attorney who specializes in such matters.
The statute of limitations for such claims may be short, so if a
claim is to be made, it should be made quickly.
--
Brett
*****************************************************************
* Personal Injury/Malpractice Bankruptcy *
* *
* BRETT WEISS, P.C. *
* Attorneys at Law *
* Maryland, D.C. and Federal Bars *
* lawyer@erols.com *
* http://www.erols.com/lawyer *
* *
* Small Business Estates & Estate Planning *
*****************************************************************
The Small Print: This response is for discussion purposes only.
It isn't meant to be legal advice and you shouldn't treat it as
such. If you want legal advice, speak with a local lawyer
familiar with your state's laws who can review *all* of the facts
and the law applicable to your situation.
*****************************************************************
This is an open letter to the legal community from whom I am
soliciting help. My goal is to find the most reputable and
effective
agency that deals with matters of defamation of character
issues,
wrongful termination, and corporate unethical behavior issues.
I believe that an insurance agency and a hiring manager have
committed
an act of defamation of character in terminating my contract
with
them.
I am a software development professional who was hired as a
J2EE/Websphere support person for a proof-of-concept project.
The
project was redundantly, micro-managed so that a supervisory
individual would monitor progress within a 24-hour workday
period.
Despite the intense scrutiny of activity the quality of
management
activity and decision-making was and is highly debatable.
On Saturday, October 18, 2003, I received a termination notice
from my
contract employment agency.
The letter states, "I asked her [the staffing manager] if she
could
provide me with any specifics as to why this decision was made.
The
only information she was able to provide was the hiring manager
indicated he felt you [b]oversold youself[/b] in the interview
process.
She did indicate Aetna would consider you for future positions
just
not at this level."
First, I am not a fraud and the work I was assigned was largely
menial. However menial, the work was obfuscated by multiple
competing
political interests in the project so that faulty
specifications and
conflicting technical viewpoints belligerently went
uncorrected. I am
guilty of nothing more than attempting to avoid the political
fray.
While hiring managers are certainly entitled to their own
opinions, at
Aetna, some evidence exists that attacking contractor's has
become an
ingrown, cultural phenomenon that might be considered a form of
sport
by management. The abuse of contract
|
| |
| |
"Roger Schlafly" <rogersc@mindspring.com> wrote in message news:<dmrub.5552$%u6.1658584188@twister2.starband.net>...
"krasicki" <krasicki@consultant.com> wrote
No. It was legal for Aetna to fire you.
That is not the assertion.
You have no remedy.
I am not seeking remedy for being fired. I am seeking remedy for
defamation of character issues.
All you can do is to get another job.
I plan to.
|
| |
| |
On 18 Nov 2003 12:28:36 -0800, krasicki <krasicki@consultant.com> wrote:
"Roger Schlafly" <rogersc@mindspring.com> wrote in message news:<dmrub.5552$%u6.1658584188@twister2.starband.net>...
That is not the assertion.
I am not seeking remedy for being fired. I am seeking remedy for
defamation of character issues.
Actually you asked about wrongful termination as well as defamation.
I plan to.
|
| |
| |
Yes. See my response to Brett.
Isaac <isaac@latveria.castledoom.org> wrote in message news:<slrnbrl0vd.7o.isaac@latveria.castledoom.org>...
On 18 Nov 2003 12:28:36 -0800, krasicki <krasicki@consultant.com> wrote:
Actually you asked about wrongful termination as well as defamation.
|
| |
| |
Brett Weiss" <lawyer@erols.com> wrote in message news:<0sydnS1KzeA3_SeiRVn-ig@comcast.com>...
Most states follow the "employment at will" doctrine. Under this
doctrine, employment can be terminated at any time by the
employer, for any reason or for no reason at all. <snip>
There are several exceptions to this principle.
First, if the employee has a written employment contract, those
express terms are applied to determine the employee's rights. <snip>
Some states recognize a claim based on estoppel. In a typical
estoppel claim, the employer gives the employee an express
assurance that employment is secure. In reliance on this
assurance, the employee forgoes an offer of employment on better
terms from another employer. Following discharge by the first
employer, some employees have successfully asserted that they
were induced to forgo the second employer's offer by the first
employer's assurances and that the first employer should
therefore be liable for damages. As noted, not all states permit
such claims.
This may apply in my case. I signed a three month contract. And
although the employer maintains a right to terminate the contract at
any time, the services contracted for (professional software
development) imply that the term will be honored, that a professional
code of coduct and responsibility will be observed in the contractual
implementation details. In other words, the contract assumes
research, prototyping activity, and so on.
And in committing to the three month duration, I, as a contract
employee, defer the availability of my services to at least the end of
that three month period. And, because a termination of the contract
does personal injury, it implies a large degree of trust that due
diligence be applied to any such termination.
Almost always, to negate the presumption of an at-will
employment, the claimed contract must contain an agreement to
employ the employee for a specific number of months or years, or
to refrain from discharging him or her except on specified
conditions. <snip>
Second, an employee may not be discharged in violation of his or
her rights under specific statutes which prevent discrimination
on the basis of age, disability, race, religion, gender or
national origin.
Note that not all "discrimination" is unlawful. <snip>
Note that as a result of the application of
this principle, it is perfectly permissible to "discriminate"
against incompetent or difficult-to-get-along-with employees, or
to fire a perfectly qualified employee in order to hire someone
the employer likes better, is related to or is sleeping with.
Third, some states have adopted so-called "legal activities"
laws. <snip>
Fourth, a few states recognize other claims for wrongful
discharge, such as a "bad faith" termination designed to deprive
an employee of accrued sales commissions, etc. Because these
principles are not uniform from state to state, an attorney must
be consulted in your jurisdiction.
The event occurred in CT. This, too, may be applicable. My work was
monitored on a daily basis. On a daily basis I asked if it was
adequate, sufficient, and "what they wanted". I adjusted the work
accordingly and received no feedback that there was a problem. I, at
all times, operated in good faith that the supervising individuals
were truthful. I compare this to an employee being blindfolded and
led down a hall when, at every step they are being told, "it's
alright", and then suddenly being encouraged oout a sixth story
window.
Finally, certain states view as unlawful the discharge of an
employee who "blows the whistle" on his or her employer's illegal
activities.
My problem is an orthogonal one to 'blowing the whistle'. I call it
'playing the hand you're dealt'. Much of the contract work I do
involves risky, at risk, or troubled projects. Sometimes I succeed at
making something work, sometimes not, but failure is not an option so
you play the cards you're dealt as best you can. Routinely, as a
contractor, I may be used as a scapegoat for an inevitable project
failure (but I've done my best and so on). That's life - no hard
feelings - everyone moves on.
In this case, the project involves huge sums of money, multiple
political motivations by assorted interests, and an in-house
architecture team whose egos have forged a belligerently myopic
methodology that produces a flawed specification and an overly complex
design that glorifies the egos producing it. The trouble is that the
only way for the project to succeed is to correct the flaw and it's
subsequent implementation complications - something no one wants to
see, admit to, or acknowledge.
So, rather than blow a whistle, I try to work within the system (and
assume the risks of course) to make something work and I don't feel I
have to be the one who implements the solution. I can, for example,
take the heat for having a group of individuals try something that I
know will lead to a solution and be happy with their success. In a
crowd of blind people, providing vision is just as useful as groping
for coattails.
Because the law of wrongful discharge varies from state to state,
a person who may have valuable rights affected by such laws
should consult with an attorney who specializes in such matters.
The statute of limitations for such claims may be short, so if a
claim is to be made, it should be made quickly.
--
Brett
Thank you. The reason I'm airing this publically is that I think it
affects lots of companies and contract technical personnel. As
America races to the bottom of employment practices, it is contract
employees who are increasingly being abused thanks in large part to
these contractual ambiguities.
During economic times when professional respect is important to retain
good contract workers, meaness rarely creeps into the employment
equations. But these days, even regular employees feel a job
insecurity that gives them a draconian initiative to blame the other
guy to look good even when there is no threat.
The fact that the person they harm is harmed is of no importance to
them - they've *survived*.
But more cruelly, corporations either wittingly or unwittingly have
created a worker's rights blind spot that goes undetected and is rife
with abuse. It is one thing to have the right to terminate an
employee and quite another to terminate, punish, and propagate harm
with no obligation to either inform the victim nor make provision to
the due process of allowing the victim to defend themselves.
Can you recommend a Connecticut law firm?
*****************************************************************
* Personal Injury/Malpractice Bankruptcy *
*
|
| |
| |
|
