The Chip Board
Custom Search
   


The Chip Board Archive 18

Re: "Personnel" ...
In Response To: "Personnel" ... ()

Archie is right, and the reason such matters are not generally discussed in public is not based on whether a person was paid or a volunteer, but rather on whether an organization wishes to risk making slanderous statements in the heat of the moment. As a result, lawyers typically recommend that an organization or former employer limit itself to confirming dates of employment and refrain from commenting on why a worker and the organization parted company.

Messages In This Thread

The Firings, An Unbiased View
To Clarify .
Re: To Clarify further.
Re: To Clarify further.
grin Very well said, Bob...
Whoa. Do you know something we don't?
Other than the timing of Mike's dismissal ...
Archie, I've reread all events up to ...
Re-read them again John ...
No thank you, Archie; my quote is quite accurate .
Re: Whoa. Do you know something we don't?
Re: Whoa. Do you know something we don't?
Re: Whoa. Do you know something we don't?
Re: Whoa. Do you know something we don't?
Why do so many people have a problem with ...
Dues paying members of a club, that's why
Besides being a club ...
Re: Besides being a club ...
"Personnel" ...
Re: "Personnel" ...
Re: "Personnel" ...
Re: Dues paying members of a club, that's why
Have we even seen an official announcement?
Re: The Firings, An Unbiased View
Re: The Firings, An Unbiased View

Copyright 2022 David Spragg