On 16 Feb 2003 at 17:09, Jose J. Ortiz-Carlo wrote: > >On 15 Feb 2003 at 20:25, Jose J. Ortiz-Carlo wrote: > > > > > >He found some old messages from a particular long-time (about 7 > > > >years at the time) list member, copied some parts of those > > > >messages out of context, and forwarded a printout of those > > > >excerpts to the author's employer. > > > > > > Hi, Ronn! This is a very interesting scenario that you are > > > presenting. > > > >I've seen it happen a half-dozen times... > > > > If it's that common, I'm surprised the news channels or the network > news probe shows haven't done major expose's about it. Somebody, get > me Andy Rooney's number.. :)
No, it says a lot about who I have for friends I think. > >You think most employers *CARE* about that? Besides, in at least one > >case I saw the timestamps on the E-mails had been changed to make > >them occur inside the time of employment. > > > > Didn't it occurr to anybody to find the original logs and check their > date vs. the date of the changed timestamps? Yep. Employer ignored his protest outright. > > > And even if my employers *think* it does, and even if they *tell* > > > me they think it does, I don't see why I have to abide by their > > > point of view. > > > >So you get fired. Which was the end result of five of the six cases. > > Then somebody here isn't following due process. It's a really sad > situation when employers are willing to go against the law and see how > far an employee would go to fight for his rights. That IS what amounts to due process in the UK and from what some US friends have said over there as well. I can *understand* why you wouldn't want to hire someone who'd taken legal action against her previous boss as well! It's not "discrimination" either, it's called "qualitifications and employment history" I am..not fond..of the system, FYI. Andy Dawn Falcon _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
