Workplace ethics question involving boss

rotard wrote: This guy hasn't been convicted of anything. Keep your nose out of it.

This, X 100.

Don't try a man in the court of public opinion, unless you are prepared for being charged with slander, liable, or the ethical burden of having destroyed an innocent man.

BUT, he should be working on his exit plan. That would not exclude a quiet discussion with management about matters of public record.

Those accusations could well have been fabricated by an insane unhappy spouse with mal intent.

Divorce is legal. Son's actions are completely irrelevant.

SVreX wrote: liable

libel

He'd be liable for libel...

gamby wrote:

SVreX wrote: liable

libel He'd be liable for libel...

Yikes!

Duh.

SVreX wrote: Don't try a man in the court of public opinion, unless you are prepared for being charged with slander, liable, or the ethical burden of having destroyed an innocent man.

Hm, you seem to have a few misconceptions here.

You can't be "charged" with slander or libel, those are civil torts, not crimes.

Truth is an absolute defense against slander or libel. Stick with the verifiable facts, avoid rumor and editorializing, and there's no question of this. A statement like "person X sexually assaulted a child" may or may not be true, but a statement like "person X has been charged with sexually assaulting a child" is verifiable.

Indictments and criminal charges filed are a matter of public record, they are not confidential or secret in any way. (This may seem undesirable, but consider the alternative -- secret police, people disappearing in the middle of the night, etc).

While he hasn't been convicted yet, this is a very serious allegation that is likely to result in significant implications for his employer. It sounds like it's affecting his work performance already, and that's something that is a legitimate concern for the employer. Employers do background checks on employees, and this is something that would show up in such a check, so there's no question that it's information the employer wants to have.

So, back to the original question, should the friend tell his employer? I dunno. I guess it depends on the level of loyalty that this friend feels towards boss vs the company as a whole. That said, IMHO the friend is not responsible for any actions the employer may take in response to the friend telling them about matters of public record.

I twnd to agree with SVrex but add there is not enough information to make a full comment

In reply to codrus:

You got way too wound up in technical legal hair splitting that you missed the entire point.

It is ethically wrong to destroy someone based on allegations. The truth or accuracy of the allegations are irrelevant.

Just look at the quantity of negative responses in this thread. Public opinion- in THIS thread, he's been accused of being a sexual predator, a scumbag, touching a kid, just "speeding up the inevitable", unacceptable as a baby sitter, worthy of being fired, an incurable child molester, ready for castration, etc. NONE of which is factual.

My lack of legal technical accuracy is most certainly NOT the point. The point is that it's pretty obvious a LOT of people jump to inappropriate conclusions on this subject with insufficient information ROUTINELY, and some folks REALLY like a lynching.

It was an ethical question, not a legal one.

To which, my answer was keep your nose out at this time, since he's been convicted of NOTHING.

In reply to SVreX: Well said