On Sat, 18 Nov 1995, Tom Walker wrote: > John Ernst has an interesting and valid point. The assumption that employees > can say what they want about their employer when they're not on the job was > perhaps a bit of wishful thinking. * * * True to a great extent. You have a clash of doctrines at this point. There are no constitutional rights on the job unless the employer is a public entity. Employers have a right -- in the absence of a law or a contract (e.g., a cba) to the contrary -- to fire at will, for no reason, for a good reason, or for a bad reason. Some laws to the contrary would forbid terminations for making common cause with other employees (the NLRA), or to discriminate on the basis of race or sex. This common law is what would exist if all protective laws were revoked. Employers have the right to manage their businesses, and employees who denigrate their employers may be harming the business. Add to this, however, recent developments providing common law rights for whistleblowers (very limited in most cases) and the role of the courts in enforcing rights (as government entities they cannot abridge constitutional rights), as well as some whistleblower statutes. Put it all together, and you get a complex situation in these sorts of cases -- creating the best of all possible worlds -- more work for lawyers. Ellen Dannin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
